-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
TRUE 1:1 3D Sony Remote Discussion
- Thread starter Wollan
- Start date
Alx
Member
pakkit said:
You don't need the wand to have a decent head-tracking, you can do it by software analysis of the stream coming from the camera... (maybe some of the face detection is even included in the camera, many electronic devices do it now). It may not be precise in depth and rotation estimation, but as long as you're far enough from the screen, it shouldn't matter much.
Zoramon089
Banned
Wollan said:
Not really, because once you reach the box and the camera pans until whatever you're target was is recentered or within the box, you can easily aim towards it. The issue your talking about is negated by the fact that aiming with the remote is extremely fast.
Let's say you're target is to your right, barely on screen. You quickly point in that direction, hit the bonding box and the camera pans, the second the target is visible you can easily point left at it. Most bonding boxes also have variable turning speeds based on how far off from the edge you're aiming so the camera wouldn't just screw up unless you aim way off screen or directly to your side (physically) in which case I don't think it would even be recognized
rollingstart
Banned
freethought said:
The PS3 controller, 360 controller and most dual analog controllers are the same on each side. each wand needs four face buttons, one analog, two triggers and start/select/home. Just map the d-pad movements to the face buttons on the second controller. The idea isn't to make it the best solution for playing "classic/legacy" games, but to at least give you the ability to.
and the idea of using one stick to move, another to turn and the pointer to aim is a bit ridiculous. Play Time Crisis 4; there is a mode where they do just that and it is a huge mess.
All of this FPS talk sounds like finding a solution before the problem. Most people are perfectly fine with dual analog controls for shooters. If you're trying to attract more users with a more intuitive control scheme, I don't think this "two-wand with a bunch of buttons and sticks" solves anything.
The popular Wii games are simple games that have immediate control mappings to the sticks. Swing a bat or club. Throw an object. The more complicated the game, the harder it is to map your movement to action. Waggle this to jump, wiggle that to attack. Those games aren't as successful and they certainly aren't as intuitive.
The popular Wii games are simple games that have immediate control mappings to the sticks. Swing a bat or club. Throw an object. The more complicated the game, the harder it is to map your movement to action. Waggle this to jump, wiggle that to attack. Those games aren't as successful and they certainly aren't as intuitive.
The big flaw with the Wii fps's can be seen in any Wii gameplay video. When you want to turn, there's really nothing realistic OR more precise about having to take your pointer off target so your arm can turn your body. It would be so much more convenient and realistic to use an analog stick to pivot your body; more intuitive than the Wii solution because everyone has used a right stick to turn the camera in first/third person shooters/platformers/etc, and more realistic than the Wii solution because, well, ANYTHING's more realistic than using your arm to turn. But seriously, it'd be more realistic because it would allow you to turn your body and aim your gun independently from one another.
durendal said:
Keyboards provide walk/run.*
Analog sticks provide???*
That's of course ignoring the massive leap in precision, accuracy and sensitivity the mouse provides.
I'd like to see more games on my PS3 support Mouse/KB.
If for some odd reason we just want to doggedly create a new FPS control scheme we need to forget about losing the large flat surface a mouse needs and we need to think about re-creating it. *Divorce X-Y entirely. We don't need analog movement a simple button for forwards and backwards will do just fine. X needs a fast 360º response arc. Give it a touch ring, physical ring or mini-paddle. Y can stick with an analog stick as long as its sensitivity is increased. A lever/slide would probably be easier to handle.
and FFS put buttons at the end of the pinky and ring fingers
All ideas copyright patent pending so no using them without express legal consent from myself and major league baseball.
Throwaway123456789
Member
cakefoo said:
How intuitive is it to use a control stick to control head movement on the same wand that you're waving around to point at the screen whilst using a second wand to move around (and in Wollan's case, also to point at the screen). It's a terrible idea, and I can't see any developers using that in any games. If there are going to be FPS games on the PS3 using the wands you can bet the controls are going to be identical to the Wii ones.
And let's leave headtracking out of this as we all know that won't happen anyway.
Seriously, try picking up a controller, aim it at the screen, put in some arm movement and use the control stick at the same time. It feels horrible, and you need the eye-hand coordination of a god to throw in a second pointer and movement stick.
Zoramon089
Banned
cakefoo said:
If you're pointer is already on the target WHY would you need to turn the camera? Let's say the pointer is on it and it's at the edge of the screen, it would already be turning and as the target came more into the screen you'd naturally stay on it and move more towards the center of the screen and the reticule would never leave the target. And no FPS up to this point has allowed you to turn your body and aim independently and they've worked well so why is it now an issue?
TheKingsCrown
Banned
People are still listening / responding to cakefoo? Geez. Wtf GAF.
Sony does advertise the low-light capabilities of the PS Eye on their site:pakkit said:
"Engineered to work well in low light conditions."
Conceptually, head-tracking is using similar technology to what contrast-based autofocus systems are using in cameras these days. Cameras like the Panasonic GH1 can even memorize an individual's face, and when the person comes in frame at any time will automatically facially recognize the person and track the focus as the person moves throughout the frame. The technology for all of this already exists and is being implemented in CE devices as well as automotive safety applications that can go beyond head-tracking and do eye-tracking (to identify drowsy drivers and warn them as they go off the lane)
The reason why you haven't seen it used in video games is that the cameras aren't ubiquitous enough for it- and its usage is still very limited. Developers need to see a return on their investment if they are going to put the effort into developing these technologies, at the moment, the people that can utilize this technology is very limited. Camera based games have hitherto been more novelties then real gamer experiences, maybe Sony and MS can change that in the coming years.
Maybe I should never have gotten excited about headtracking. It's complicated to explain, but the jist of it is, without a helmet, you can't get the feeling of the physical and virtual world becoming one. When you use headtracking with a TV, the physical connection between the virtual gun and real remote will suddenly be broken, because the crosshair will no longer be pointing where you're physically pointing. Now, if you had a helmet with the screen surrounding your entire field of view, you could turn 90 degrees right and your gun in the game and the remote in real life would both look and feel like they were 90 degrees LEFT.pakkit said:
Gif again for reference:
Nope, simply diverging slightly from the center of the screen will have you start turning in that direction. The more you diverge the faster you turn, much like analog stick aiming turns you faster the more you tilt the stick. While centering the aim again to stop turning isn't quite as simple as just releasing the stick, it's still easy if you keep your your arm rested (on a couch, a pillow, your lap or whatever) while playing.Wollan said:
If you're actively aiming at something, why would you want to turn for any other reason than strafing? (Which is possible with Wii control.)cakefoo said:
Controlling three different direction controls at once might also be a bit much for some people.cakefoo said:
Not using your thumb.cakefoo said:
This is something you should never do in an actual combat situation though.cakefoo said:
Don't get me wrong, I think there is some potential for improvement in dual analog + pointer control compared to single analog + pointer, I just don't consider it very significant compared to the step from dual analog to single analog + pointer.
Well, then you are fortunate that the ai came back towards the center of the screen- because if he had gone off-screen you would have had to wave your wand to readjust, and that would give him a good chance to shoot back. With an analog stick in a moment like that, you could start and stop on a dime and never take your reticule away from where you anticipate the target will be when you reacquire him.Zoramon089 said:
See there, my remote only would have needed to move a tiny bit to correct my oversteer, whereas with an aim-to-look system I would not have the stop-on-a-dime precision of an analog stick, (due to the airplane momentum effect) plus I would have had to move drastically offscreen to turn fast, and that would have taken my crosshair further offscreen, causing me to have to return the pointer back towards the TV and find my crosshair again, and then I would aim and fire. Of course, this wouldn't have taken as long to do as it took to read, but you get the idea that it requires more thought and is not as direct as it could have been if your remote had an analog stick.
The Wii scheme is fine for what that controller's limitations are, but the exclusion of an analog on the Wii remote was not a good choice for FPS's in my opinion, and I think a lot of others made that observation on their own too, imagining that FPS's could have avoided the whole deadzone thing altogether.
No console had the controller to do it. And most console FPS's have aim assist, a testimony to their difficulty. And this is coming from someone who's Platinum'd Killzone 2. They've worked well, but they could be better, and I think the addition of an analog stick on a remote might be the next logical console FPS interface.Zoramon089 said:
Couldn't agree more, platforming in Metroid Prime on GC was a pleasant experience with the analog stick, even without the benefit of free mouse look.durendal said:
I wanted to pull my hair out any time I had to jump in the Half Life games.
An analog stick for movement not only provides intuitive speed control, but also full 360 degree movement. It's just much less archaic that being forced to press W and A if you want to go diagonal (I.E. you can either go at a 45 degree angle or totally straight) or holding down the shift button when you want to go slower (again, only 2 different choices of walking speed).Mindlog said:
Zoramon089
Banned
cakefoo said:
The problem with this is that for some reason you assume the player can't physically move...if an enemy is moving off screen you're going to be moving with it to ensure it stays on screen. If something is firing at you off screen, you're more than likely going to physically move the character THEN the reticule, not stand still and rotate
Yeah, that statement was poorly worded.Jokeropia said:
Original:
there's really nothing realistic OR more precise about having to take your pointer off target so your arm can turn your body.
Revised:
there's really nothing realistic OR more precise about having to take your pointer off the screen while a threat remains so your arm can turn your body and get a better view of your surrounding threats so you can better decide which threat is more dangerous or whatever.
You always want to be aware of your surroundings, and it always bothers me to see a video where someone's letting a target get to the very edge of the screen without caring to adjust the framing of the scene.
Throwaway123456789
Member
cakefoo said:
This is just not true. Have you even tried a Wii FPS game with good controls? It's much faster than using a control stick, and if an enemy were to move off the crosshair you'd just need to flick your wrist a tiny amount to find him again.
It's not like it's hard or time consuming to move the pointer back to the bounding box after you've moved. It's not as fast as a mouse, but it's sure is a hell of a lot faster than a stick.
As I said: Two sticks and pointer controls is a terrible idea. You'd have to constantly focus on three movements at the same time, and one of the control sticks (or both in Wollan's example) would be on a controller that you're moving back and forth to aim at the screen. It's not intuitive at all, it's a damn mess.
Starchasing
Member
sykoex said:
So whats missing from Wii FPS??? that you cant turn around fast enough???
use a button as a multipler... if you press it you turn around twice as fast or
a 180 degree button like RE$
Controlling the remote and the right analog at the same time wouldn't be a necessity, though it would improve your game. Controlling them one at a time it would be like a traditional console FPS when using the stick, and a lightgun game with the remote. If someone can play both genres individually, the only difference this would be is that they're not taking a 3 minute break between the two to swap out discs and peripherals, and would instead be alternating controls instantaneously.Jokeropia said:
The way I see it, the remote controls your upper body in general, be it your waist, torso or shoulder. The analog stick controls your feet. And then the headtracker of course would control your neck, but that I think would be hard to get used to, and wouldn't feel completely right unless you had an HMD.Jokeropia said:
NotedJokeropia said:
Starchasing
Member
cakefoo said:Controlling the remote and the right analog at the same time wouldn't be a necessity, though it would improve your game. Controlling them one at a time it would be like a traditional console FPS when using the stick, and a lightgun game with the remote. If someone can play both genres individually, the only difference this would be is that they're not taking a 3 minute break between the two to swap out discs and peripherals, and would instead be alternating controls instantaneously.
The way I see it, the remote controls your upper body in general, be it your waist, torso or shoulder. The analog stick controls your feet. And then the headtracker of course would control your neck, but that I think would be hard to get used to, and wouldn't feel completely right unless you had an HMD.
Noted
i dont understand the head tracking part... you move your head while you look at the screen?? as if it were a window?
Pretty sure the current PS Eye is capable of headtracking on its own, as this video from 2006 demonstrates, there's also this demo that Stephen Totillo witnessed. There's also this concept video (not real time) showing possible applications for the PS Eye, one clip shows what coulda been the birth of the EyePet idea. I really do wish the EyePet looked looked more like that tho!
Yeah, I know that the deadzones can be shrunken, but then the effective area of the screen which you can aim at shrinks too. I prefer having some tangible feedback to the turning controls, and would rather have the better responsiveness of an analog stick I can simply let go of when I want to stop turning, instead of drifting around. It's kind of like having a racing wheel that doesn't autocenter. At that point I would just rather use analog sticks to steer because they always return to home on their own.FoxHimself said:
A stick is instantaneous. I press all the way, it turns fullspeed. I let go, it stops on a dime. And since the finer aiming would be handled by the pointer, I could crank the analog stick's turnspeed to its max, and have something more comparable to a mouse.FoxHimself said:
See my post just above about switching between lightgun mode and dual analog mode. You're essentially playing a traditional fps, but with a free crosshair. You'd only need to use one at a time, and since we're all familiar with both genres it shouldn't be too hard to master. The main hurdle the Wii games have is that it takes a while to get used to the Wii remote's completely new way of turning. On the PS3 fps it would be 2 control modes you're already very familiar with.FoxHimself said:
Yeah, and you look out the corner of your eye, and the relation between the remote in your hand and the virtual gun become disconnected and no longer appear 1:1. If you had an HMD though, the virtual and real world positions of the pointer and gun would overlap 1:1 no matter what angle your head is turned (as long as said head tracking were 1:1 sensitivity, that is)Starchasing said:
AbortedWalrusFetus
Member
What I would personally like is a button that would disable the bounding box. For instance, if you move the controller left the screen will pan left, but if someone runs into your view you can hold the button to move the reticle only to follow whoever runs into your view. Releasing the button would then center your view on the reticle and re-activate the bounding box. This way you get a consistent aim/look or a more precise aim only. In fact, I think bringing up the ironsights should turn off the bounding box, and perhaps THEN you can map view changes to the analog, but by default it should use a bounding box.
So, kind of like a mouse, where you hold a button to set the mouse down, and release to pick the mouse up and aim freely. I know, your press and release were reversed, but I'd rather press to mouselook, since that's how a gyro mouse usually works. It could be a toggle in the options.AbortedWalrusFetus said:
edit: Read it wrong. You're thinking of the Wii fps turning mechanic. Same basic idea, except that the airmouse method would be more like the first person tank mode in the RTS part of the Sony demo.
I thought head tracking was odd since you're turning away from the screen, but people who've used it on PC flight sims and stuff say it's really intuitive and you only have to move your head slightly. I could imagine it being pretty cool for cockpit view in racers.
If you're curious search TrackIR on Youtube for demonstrations. TrackIR seems to be the main one people use on PC.
If you're curious search TrackIR on Youtube for demonstrations. TrackIR seems to be the main one people use on PC.
jump_button
Banned
So do you guys think dev will update they older games to add this in when it come out, just think playing killzone with the Sony wand
Rev Evil 5 playing like Res Evil 4 for wii?
Rev Evil 5 playing like Res Evil 4 for wii?
That's not a big feature in the first place. Firstly, the relationship between the wiimote and the onscreen action is not 1:1, not by a longshot. The "sensorbar" is the same size if you are using a 13 inch screen or a 100 inch projectorscreen. Secondly, 1:1 has never been desirable with any other pointing device. Like the mouse or trackpad. It's just not fun to use for longer periods of time.cakefoo said:
It good to have the ability to set the "transmission" sensitivity to 1:4 or higher or lover. And it's good to be able to pick up and put down the "mouse" when you run out of space, like you do on a touchscreen or trackball.
Napoleonthechimp
Member
pakkit said:
Headtrack/facetracking is done by Seeing Machines through their FaceAPI software.
There's a video of it being used in games here and here.
Tretton on the motion controller and game support.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/31204970
On the possibility of patching older games to work with the new controller:
Hmms. I'll believe it when I see it.
Also,
http://www.cnbc.com/id/31204970
On the possibility of patching older games to work with the new controller:
Hmms. I'll believe it when I see it.
Also,
God of War 3 to support motion controller?
Graphics Horse
Member
gofreak said:Hmms. I'll believe it when I see it.
Also,God of War 3 to support motion controller?
Maybe he just means it has all the buttons to support all games? I can't think of another way to interpret that quote literally.
Does anyone remember the break-apart or multiple-configurations controller rumour that was floated around for Sony's PS3 for the past year or so? We've seen the break-apart in the patent and I'm sure there are most elegant (and costlier) designs.
I'm hoping we get a controller that will replace the DS3 by being able to configure into a DS3-like physical formation and also possibly break apart into motion wands.
I'm hoping we get a controller that will replace the DS3 by being able to configure into a DS3-like physical formation and also possibly break apart into motion wands.
I'm sort of surprised Tretton was keenly aware of that though. I mean, I'm not sure if all of the forum members here would know that a pair of these remotes would have full game compatibility. They must have made a bullet point about it internally.
I would say one of the benefits about the Wiimote is that it is split. Even if the game didn't use any of the motion input I would still keep it split if I had the option. It's not that we're aching or anything when playing a gamepad but you definitely feel the relaxation difference when you have an arm on each side resting against the sofa.gantz85 said:
backbreaker65
Banned
Knowing that all the buttons are available on the "True Motion Wand" TMW. Makes a boxing game like Fight Night all the more better. You can move around with the analog stick and actually throw real punches with the wand or even block. Instead of the analog stick punches you can actually throw those punches now.
Not necessarily, because with a minimal dead zone (which has worked best in my experience) you just have keep your reticle on the enemy (actively aiming according to his movements) and the screen will automatically follow. No need to remove the aim from him at any point. Assuming you've already lost sight of him as you say though, you'll wanna aim towards the edge that he disappeared from and make sure to react quickly when he appears in the screen again and fixate your aim on him. How quickly you can react is of course individual so customizable turning speeds and dead zone sizes are desirable. (Maybe you'll want the turning speed to be really quick even a bit away from the edge to give you more room to react between the enemy reappearing in the screen and him passing where your reticle is.)cakefoo said:
Right, but both of these styles by themselves are inferior to single analog + pointer. To actually gain a potential advantage you'd have to master all three direction controls at once.cakefoo said:
Having a pointer does have its advantages, but I'd argue that dual analogs might still be better than single analog+pointer in the long run.Jokeropia said:
And choosing between a 1-stick and a 2-stick scheme boils down to what you use for turning the camera. If I had to choose, I'd gladly choose the analog stick over pointing a remote off-center. As someone else put it, using the remote to turn feels like you're flying a plane. I'd prefer the stick for turning so that I can have independence, letting me aim anywhere on the screen I want while turning whichever direction I want. Also, having turn bound to the analog means that I have the entire screen to point at, whereas with the remote doing the turning, the only way you can have the entire screen for pointing is if you increased the turning deadzone, which would mean you'd sacrifice the ability to aim at all while turning.
I'd call you crazy.cakefoo said:
Direct aiming with a pointer is miles and miles ahead of indirectly pushing a reticle across the screen with a thumbstick. So much faster and more precise.Well you do have the entire screen for aiming at even with a minimal dead zone, you just have to adjust your aim a bit to maintain it at the target when the screen turns.cakefoo said:
Like I said before though, I do see the potential improvement in two sticks + pointer compared to one stick + pointer.
PC World has posted an article about the approach to Motion controls, accuracy and clickedy buttons:
PC World Link
PC World Link