-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Igcube...you gotta be kidding
- Thread starter Doc Holliday
- Start date
Chittagong
Gold Member
---- said:
For the analog controller and pump action?
TurtleSnatcher
Member
Well...I actually believe that the PS3 Duck's Demo involved more interactivity than Nintendo's remote TV controller. When the guy begins to move the water from glass to glass...it's a nice idea. Stolen from Nintendo ? Quite probably. I've heart one day Iwata just finished the last bottle of water in Nintendo's HQ drinks' machine and he had to share it with Miyamoto.
http://forums.gaming-age.com/showthread.php?t=64687Drensch said:
Ruzbeh said:
No? Why not?
Hell, they could use a special surface for the DS3, which is easily picked up by an eyetoy IR mode; read the button presses as normal but detect your weird wacky movement with the eyetoy, even going backwards and forwards.
Can navigate menus via minority report style hand gestures, use a golf club covered in colored paper to play a golf game, etc, etc.
Fair enough it won't be standard to the PS3, but you're kidding yourself if you think the ninty controller has more potential then the eyetoy 2.0 in terms of a paradigm shift in interfacing with games and technology in general (if you were to argue practically, then I'd agree that the revolution controller has a better chance of sparking that shift, solely on the basis that its the primary control method, where developers will be forced to not develop or develop with that kinda control in mind (as opposed to the eyetoy 2.0).
Eyetoy is limiting. A) You have to be in the camera's view. B) AFAIK, You have to see yourself on the TV and respond to that if you want to work with anything. C) No control in sensitivity, you're forced to flap your arms. and D) The thing can't even tell the difference between your hand or an object, it's basically a reverse light-gun!!Zaptruder said:
You can't use it for FPS or RTS games either. The EyeToy doesn't even have buttons. How can you say it's better than the Nintendo controller?
Zaptruder said:
No way, man. The sensor of eye toy 2 can do some cool stuff, but only 1 or 2 games will utilize this future. Most of Ps3 games will use Dualshock 3 with the same and old gameplay.
Most of NRV games will use the freehand and will try make new and most interactive ways of gameplay.
Other problem - try imagine a 4 players game with eyetoy 2. A tennis game, a hokey game, a golf or a first person shooter.
Do you think that eyetoy 2 will handle this? I think not. And use a stick (or water cup if you prefers) that has NO RUMBLE will not be the same thing like freehand.
In the last, try imagine how can play a important game, like a MGS or other, using the eyetoy 2. Do you think that will be good? Explain-me how the controls will fit with eyetoy2.
The second gun pic is a little better than the first one, but both of them seem to have a flawed understanding of the size of the remote. In the first one, for instance, there's no way you could ever use that trigger--the guard that surrounds it looks to be about a quarter of an inch wide. The second one is slightly larger, but still probably too small to fit your finger in comfortably.
---- said:
This is what I'm saying, people don't seem to get it. That's exactly the point of the new controller, to offer lots of new experiences without the need of buying useless(in this case, specially) attachments. What the hell are we going to see tonight from IGNCUBE, a sword handle?
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
I wish real gun makers would make guns with remotes on them. Just what I need! I can sit by the window and shoot stuff in my yard, change the channel and never have to leave my armchair. :lol
REDNECK-TON!
REDNECK-TON!
While the Eyetoy can be used to mimic some of the options offered by the Revolution controller, the Eyetoy simply doesn't have the same range of functionality. The Eyetoy can do some things the Rev. can't do (mapping players into games, allowing one to interact with items and mapping that interaction into the game), but it can't offer the refine movement control OR the multiplayer capabilities offered via the Revolution controllers.
Why are folks comparing the Eyetoy with the Rev. controller anyway? They are radically different technologies with different purposes.
Why are folks comparing the Eyetoy with the Rev. controller anyway? They are radically different technologies with different purposes.
Ulairi said:
Actually, the 2.0 will be able to pick up depth differences among other things...
including the ability and potential to dramatically drive down the cost of motion capture, instead of having specialised studios set up in order to capture the 3D information data, you can use the 2.0 style camera to capture 3D animation data... of course there're complexities beyond simply been able to pick up depth, but you can see as a technology, it's no gimmick.
As for BDGame, try to understand the difference between the potential for the ET2.0 tech and it's likely application with regards to the PS3. It simply goes beyond a gyro sensing remote control.
DavidDayton said:
Because the much touted functionality of doing things like picking up the controller/a colored bat and swinging it around like you were in a baseball game exists (at least potentially) in both technologies.
Only in the case of eyetoy 2, you'd replace the remote with a cheap, IR friendly mockup of the element you were simulating.
Zaptruder said:
Ok, give me an example of a complex game and explain how this game will work with eyetoy 2 and why this will be only possible, or better, in eyetoy than freehand.
Zaptruder said:
Cheap yes! But better no.
For a golf or baseball game, the rumble future of freehand will make a better filing when you hit the ball.
For shooting games, the B button of freehand will work much better than a plastic gun or something.
For this, I repeat: show me a game style that is better in eyetoy2 and explain me why.
Similar threads
- Poll