On Integrating Voice Commands Into Videogames

Thanks to GameSpot for its 'GameSpotting' editorial discussing ways future videogames can use the player's voice more creatively. The writer notes of Rainbow Six 3 on Xbox: "It's the headset that really roped me into this one. While it's often easier to key in your commands from the controller, that's just a lot less fun", and goes on to suggest: "I'd like to be able to have my own macros of my own entry patterns. Heck, it might be cool if they laughed at a joke I cracked. I want a game where I can get in a shouting match with a character in the game - real Gene Hackman or Al Pacino business is what I'm talking about here." How would you like to see voice control in videogames evolve, going forward?

Comments

LifeLine

[Akai]

Don't forget Konami's Lifeline which is coming in march in the US. It's a game where you "control" another person by having conversations with them.

Looks really interesting.

Commanding other characters

[droid_rage]

I played a demo of this game for the Xbox the other day, but damned if I can remember what it was called. The premise is that you're a commander of a rebel squad in alternate future US.
You command your team alternately to guard, follow, attack, etc. I found it difficult to switch to the correct screen to call my group while in the middle of a firefight. It would have been a lot easier if I could've Just issued voice commands.

Spellcasting...

[neostorm]

I would love to see a game based around magic and spellcraft where you speak the words. It would be very simple, and with the addition of a peripheral like the eye-cam on the PS2, using hand gestures in addition to vocal commands would be quite engaging.

Re:Being too complicated?

[Anonymous Coward]

On the other hand, a game with a voice command interface could simplify complex things. The best example I can come up with is a game where you're in command of a squad of soldiers. Try to come up with a better way to do the following commands without voice control:

"Private, take point."
"Hold your fire!"
"Take cover!"
"Be quiet."
"Retreat!"
"Fall back to checkpoint Bravo."
"Call for an airstrike."
"Delta team, go to point Foxtrot via waypoint Echo."
"Call for reinforcements!"

All of this could be made even more interesting if the enemy could hear you, requiring you to whisper when they're nearby, or if you're squad is far enough away that you have to yell for them to hear you. This could also be combined with specific jobs in such a way that who you give orders to matters. If you want an airstrike, you either have to yell it loud enough for your radio operator to hear you, or walk over to him and whisper it in his ear. Actually, this sounds pretty good! I hope someone makes this game soon. :)

SOCOM

[GeorgeH]

Voice recognition works well in the SOCOM series. For the single player campaign, you can order your 3 squadmates around, telling them to hold fire, escort you to a waypoint or cover an area. It's a gimmick, but it's a fun gimmick and probably provides enough leverage to get people on the mics for the online game.

Karaoke Revolution provides a sort of inverse fun to this. It matches pitch but doesn't bother with voice recognition. This means when you're playing with your friends, you can suddenly in the position of improvising clever lyrics to a cheesy song.

Re:Being too complicated?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Half-Life engine was built with this in mind.

The voice comms in Half-Life are a fairly recent addition, but I get the impression that it's been extremely well integrated. Some friends were talking about how impressive some Xbox Live thing was, and I couldn't help but laugh - I'd been using something similar in Half-Life for ages.

Probably the best use I've seen (heard?) is in Natural Selection, playing as a marine when the commander has a microphone. No silly typing getting in the way of the commanding, he can tell you precisely what to do, and what he's planning. Plus he gets the idea pretty quickly when he's his precious little marines into some hideous Kharaa ambush... :)

What I don't like about the current trend

[pudge_lightyear]

Here's the thing. Voice control is great if it works... and if it's not tied to simply five or even fifty commands. I think if someone's talking to you in your game, you should be able to talk back freely... and I'm sure that's where it's going. Here's my problem however:

I'm playing the game with virtually the same joystick that I played the atari 2600 with. Sure, it has a couple of more buttons, but that's about it (and yes, digital and analog blah blah). In fact, with Kirby and some other new games, one button is all you need.

Voice control is about immersion. And Further Immersion into the game is a good thing... However, the industry is bad this way. The immersive controls (like those where you stand or tilt) don't sell well so they don't invest into them. Joysticks do well by default... there's nothing else. Because there's an immediate payoff with the voice features, we'll have to settle for only partial immersion... and still play with ancient controllers.

This is why I love the eyetoy. It's completely useless, sure... but could lead the way to real complete immersion into video games.

Just a rant... no point really :)

Manhunt

[angle_slam]

The PS2 game Manhunt has an interesting use of the headset. In the game, you play a person on death row who was not really killed, but instead is being hunted by others.

In the game, regular sounds come from the TV, but a tormentor speaks to you through your headset (if you are so equipped). Also, stealth is an important part of the game, and people who are trying to kill you hear your voice in the microphone. You can use the tactic to distract others.