Slashdot Mirror
Controller Comparison - PlayStation 3 vs. Wii
ZiakII writes "Engadet has an article comparing the PS3 Controller to the Wii's Controller. From the article: 'The motion control, however, was another story entirely. Whereas the Wiimote seemed to produce different experiences in different games and scenarios, the only title being shown with motion on the PS3 produced one experience: laggy control.'"
I guess this is why some companies go overboard with the whole patenting thing. Nintendo tries something risky, and somewhat innovative, and its competition tries to copy it as soon as it can. Kinda sad really.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
Multiple experiences with a controller after reviewing multiple games..... one experience with a controller after reviewing one game...... It's this kind of insightful reporting that keeps me coming back... Considering there is only one game on the PS3 that uses the feature (because Sony only told developers about it 2 or 3 WEEKS AGO), it seems to be a good early preview of the capabilities.
I think that's one place where the Wii's oddly-shaped controller will actually help -- to the average consumer, even if both have motion sensitivity, they're clearly completely different objects. Even if people are turned off motion sensitivity by the PS3, there's still a fair chance that they'll look at the Wii and think "Hey, that looks like fun!" rather than "Oh, I tried one of those before and it sucked."
I've heard a lot of people complaining that they can't swing the sword in Zelda like they dreamed about, but I don't think it was a technical limitation or because people would "get tired too easily." I think it was a gameplay choice, pure and simple. Zelda combat could've gotten a lot more complex a long time ago if Miyamoto had wanted to take it that way, but I think he chose to keep it simple for the same reason Zelda doesn't have a "jump" button although some sections require jumps: When you want a jump it's controlled automatically, the rest of the time, why worry about it?
Zelda's never been about combat, always about puzzles. Even the combat is mostly puzzle based.
Secondly, I don't think people will get hugely tired with most games. I think you'll be able to just put it your lap and just use small twitches, same as a mouse, just sans the need for a flat surface.
I think the definition of 'ripping off' is up for debate. Innovating: "Hey, what about motion-sensing control? I think Atari may have done something like that a long time ago, but it didn't work that well... what if we built off of that and added spatial sensors as well?" Rip-off: "Our main competitor just dropped their trump card! We need to get a similar feature ASAP to show that we're still in the game!" In my opinion, just because a musical composition uses counterpoint doesn't mean it's ripping off Bach. The argument that Nintendo is ripping off a 20-year-old controller from Atari that had a single similar feature is is like saying that Nintendo ripped off Atari by developing a console... they're both devices that hook up to your TV and play games.
Of course sony didn't rip off Nintendo. Nintendo's controller features true position detection, as well as relative motion. Nintendo's controller is something that has never been done before in a consumer video game system.
Sony threw some components from a generic gyroscopic mouse in an old controller. That's not ripping off nintendo's genuinely innovative design. Comparing the MS, logitech, atari, or sony controllers to the nintendo one is pure idiocy - they have nowhere near the functionality of the Wii.
The real issue, of course, is Sony attempting to steal Nintendo's thunder, not their idea. So far all it's done is make them look like jackasses.
I won't be totally satisfied until the controller can sense all my body gestures -- including
WII's not perfect; but there's a reason fantasy writers settled on magic wands for wimpy wizards -- it's a good pointing interface; and a flick of a wand is about as expressive and simple a UI tool you can make. Too bad I'm so weak from all these years with a convential controller that WII will feel more like a broadsword than a wand - but it's getting there.
Harry Potter's Magic Wand will be the UI of the metaverse once technology catches up.
The didn't rip off the design or how it works - but I bet they wouldn't be doing any motion sensing if Nintendo wasn't making a big impression with it. They knew Nintendo were on to a good thing and they've copied it for this generation of consoles. In saying that, is this is really a bad thing? Who gives a toss "who rips off who"? Why should we worry?
"Who says nothing is impossible? Some people do it every day!" - Alfred E. Neuman
As for the "Dual Shock copy" that is the Classic Controller it's been said that it will only be used for Virtual Console games, and it really looks more like an SNES controller with two analog stick than it does a Dual Shock.
That's probably because that's all the Dual Shock is -- an SNES controller with an extra shoulder button, and two analog sticks (+ rumble).
Remember from where the PS1 came -- a failed collaboration with Nintendo for an SNES CD-ROM unit.
The Wii's control scheme has a significant advantage over that of its rivals' with regard to ergonomics. Holding the Wii-mote and the nunchaku device in the opposing hand (doesn't seem to make a difference if you're a righty or a lefty, either) at an adequate distance can reduce the strain on the wrists, elbows, and shoulders of the player's arms, allowing for a much more relaxed, more natural positioning of limbs. The human hands weren't meant to be held so close together for extended periods of time, which is why gaming with a keyboard and mouse has always been more comfortable (though not completely) than gaming with just the keyboard or with a controller.
And I'm guessing many of the functions with the Wii-mote and the nunchaku won't have to be motion-centric per se, at least not on the level of play that is shown in demonstrations--I think this is more of a basic human reaction amidst adaptation to the control scheme. i.e. The brain thinks, "Hey, I'm moving!" and the body gradually reacts more naturally to the movement on the screen and its interface through the controller. For many veterans (and some newcomers), I'm sure great sweeping movements in repetition won't be necessary, which would further reinforce its ergonomic benefits.
[End of Line]
All I can say is that it's sad that the Katamari series is dead (for now at least). That's probably the one game where I can really see using the PS3's tilt-controller. Well, that and Monkey Ball.
This guy's the limit!
"Every PS fanboy states that the dual-shock is the best controller out there, but when it comes to analog stick placement, it's only because it's what they're used to."
There are things about the PS2 controller that I like, it is fairly comfortable, but I agree with everything you've said. Only I want to add a couple of complaints:
1.) The L3 and R3 buttons. Oh, thanks a lot for that. I understand where they're coming from on them. It's great that you can just press 'down' and get another click there. On paper, this sounds great. San Andreas, for example, used this to honk the horn. Very intuitive. Except... I didn't know about it at first! My first clue to it came from making extreme turns in the game. Every time I whipped around the corner, HOOOOOOONNNNNNNKKKKKKKKKKK. WTF? Worse, the game would give me clues to it. "Press the R3 button.." I looked all over the damn controller, couldn't find anything labeled R3. Eventually I figured it out. But.. yeesh. It took me a long time to get to where I could use the controller without accidently hitting that button. Even then, I'm not perfect at it. In my humble opinion, it's not good UI design when you tie features to buttons that could be hit easily. At least in San Andreas's case, it wasn't a big deal.
2.) This isn't really the fault of the Dual Shock controller, but Sony's choice in particular. Why on Earth did they think it was a good idea to use heiroglyphics for the symbols of the buttons? Nintendo (and every other console company out there...) had the right idea. A, B, X, Y, L, R. Easy enough to commit to memory. Sony, argh. Normally, this isn't a big issue. Typically with Playstation games, the buttons are fairly intuitively laid out. San Andreas, though, used these shapes to play a DDR'esque game. They'd show you the symbols you need to hit, and you've got to press the correct button at the right time to get the score. This means you have to memorize the button for each symbol. This is attainable, but thoroughly unnecessary. If this were on the Game Cube, this wouldn't have been a problem.
Yeesh. Sad thing is, they have a legacy to follow. They're not going to address either of my complaints, now. Thanks to backwards compatibility, the symbols are here to stay, and they cannot remove the 3 buttons. I can imagine my complaints wouldn't ever be Sony's #1 concern, but I still find it pretty pathetic. I cannot believe they didn't address the whole "analog sticks suck for FPS games" problem. A built in 'light zapper' sensor on the controller would have been better than nothing, cheap too. I'm honestly shocked that niether MS nor Sony tried this. I think Phil Harrison and Peter Moore should be locked in a room and forced to play a version of San Andreas without the auto-targetting feature.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Well, I tried both Wii and PS3/Warhawk at E3, and while I was predisposed to like the Wii and skeptical of Sony's 'last minute' addition, I was disappointed with the Wii and impressed with the PS3 controller.
First off, I really like the PS2/Dual-Analog style controller, so that wasn't going to be a problem for me. I don't like the non-symmetrical layout of the Gamecube and I hated the first-party XBox controllers. The 360 controller is perhaps the best, with the 'bumpers' instead of the white/black buttons that are in different places on different controllers, and the triggers that actually allow for varying degrees of input (which is hard to get with Sony's buttons).
My friends and I were all excited to swordfight with the Wii controller. Problem was, it didn't actually let you control the sword in 3D space, it only let you determine when to swing. Not to say that the controller couldn't do it right, but it hasn't yet. Also, I really didn't like using the Wii controller for the FPS sections of the game, although I was told that Metroid worked much better.
The Wii controller was very sensitive and responsive, but the games just weren't using it to its potential yet. I'm hoping that if they're just afraid 'real' 3D control is too complicated, they'll have some 'advanced'/'arcade' options in there like you often see on console flight simulators. The best game I played in Nintendo's booth was the driving game, which could have been done just as well on PS3, and would have looked better. (Note that they said that 'something came up' and kicked everyone out of the booth before I got to try Zelda, Mario, or Metroid -- probably Paris Hilton showed up or something...)
Meanwhile, after seeing what appeared to be a laggy demo at the press conference, I was pleasantly surprised by how well Warhawk worked. I'm sorry, but anyone who says it's laggy was probably wearing their Nintendo-colored glasses. I found it very easy and natural to pilot my Warhawk, which is very promising given that they had apparently only added this control mode a few weeks before E3! Meanwhile, Nintendo's betting the whole farm on this gimmick, and they still don't have it down.
As a side note, we put in the original Warhawk when we got back, and we were amazed at how craptacular it looked. It must have been displaying like 100 polygons on screen! And at the time we thought it was awesome -- though even then we weren't fooled by the fmv...
The Dual Shock was originally seen as a competitor to the N64's analog control. Originally Sony was going to just tack one joystick onto the controller (the left one), but tests with prototypes showed this arrangement was terribly unbalanced, so they added another stick to balance it out. Wah. That's why it looks the way it does today.
You seem to be forgetting about the fact that during the PS2's lifetime an increaing number of titles depended on the symmetical positioning of the sticks, Katamari Damachi comes to mind. I suspect you'll see more of these games on the PS3.
But basically, you're right. I prefer the Xbox Controller S for this reason, and I like the 360 controller with is extremely similar.
However, if this really pisses you off I'm sure 3rd parties will happily meet your needs with alternative controllers or adapters.