PlayStation Move Uses Just 2MB of System RAM

[adipose]

While I agree that the controllers are somewhat Wii-inspired, I'm not sure it proves Nintendo "got it right." The bottom line is that the Wii sold most of its units when it was priced way below the competition. A lot of games for Wii sell very well and do not use motion control hardly at all.

In my opinion the Wiimote *is* a gimmick, if an occasionally fun gimmick. But the primary success of the Wii was the incremental upgrade to their previous generation, allowing a much cheaper cost of development, and thus cost to the end user (even though that cost was quite inflated). A lot of the uses of the Wiimote in games feel tacked on (Mario party) and can often be more cumbersome than an alternative controller.

The brilliance of the Wiimote may actually be simplistic it is. It goes back to as few buttons as an NES, making it easier for video gaming neophytes to approach. But for people who have been gaming for years, it's quite annoying when you only have one crappy joystick vs. two fully directional ones. Hence the market divide.

I don't think Sony's solution will attract too many customers. Wii customers and PS3 customers are just different markets. Why would you buy a PS3 to play a few motion games when there are so many already out for Wii (and Wii costs less)? On the other hand it allows them to sell peripherals and PS3 owners can now take advantage of the (few, IMO) cases where a motion controller actually improves the experience.

 

[dreamphantom_1977]

%10 to %15 ?! I never would have guessed it's that high. I was thinking natal had it's own chip built in. Thats a huge hit!!

 

[badaxe2]

[citation][nom]manos[/nom]I'll agree with you on the Sony copying part. Sony hasnt just copied the Wiimote to an ugly extend but it copied XBL and everything else that's helped make OS3 interesting this whole gen is Sony copying ideas the past 2-3 years.One thing though. Whats Natal got to do with all this? Natal has nothing similar at all with anything thats been released so far.[/citation]

Everyone copies each other. Sony copied Microsoft's online functionality, Microsoft copied HDMI output and Sony's dual analog controller (only changing the layout). Microsoft gets movie streaming, Sony and Nintendo follow suit. Sony creates DVD format and first DVD based console player, Microsoft gets into console business. Wii has Mii's, Microsoft gets Mii-too's. And so on and so forth. It's a constant race of progress.

 

[nottheking]

[citation][nom]adipose[/nom]While I agree that the controllers are somewhat Wii-inspired, I'm not sure it proves Nintendo "got it right." The bottom line is that the Wii sold most of its units when it was priced way below the competition. A lot of games for Wii sell very well and do not use motion control hardly at all.In my opinion the Wiimote *is* a gimmick, if an occasionally fun gimmick.[/citation]
I will agree; for the most part, the motion controls are a gimmick. The only place where it doesn't really serve as a gimmick is when the pointer is used for crosshair-aiming in FPS-style gaming modes. In that case, it's most certainly not a gimmick, albeit many complaints could be made that it makes things TOO easy. It's just a shame that there are hardly any games that use this; you've got Metroid Prime 3, The Conduit, Resident Evil 4: Wii Edition, and not much else. After all, basically combining that with an analog stick allows a gamer to have the best of both input worlds; the stick's high-precision control of movement, and the real-time looking-around to rival the PC mouse.

So while perhaps it wasn't so much that the Sony admittance is that "Nintendo got it right," rather that "Nintendo was right to cash in on this."

[citation][nom]dreamphantom_1977[/nom]%10 to %15 ?! I never would have guessed it's that high. I was thinking natal had it's own chip built in. Thats a huge hit!![/citation]
Giving it a separate processor to handle everything would've made programming it an utter pain; unlike a GPU or even, say, a physics processor, you can't just call up a routine and offload it; that kind of hardware are "co-processors;" there is no specific sort of process that'd be exclusive to using something like Natal, as many of its functions are tied so tightly into the main functioning of a game that it literally HAS to be handled in the same process as the main game. That means using the main CPU.

[citation][nom]badaxe2[/nom]Everyone copies each other. Sony copied Microsoft's online functionality, Microsoft copied HDMI output and Sony's dual analog controller (only changing the layout). Microsoft gets movie streaming, Sony and Nintendo follow suit. Sony creates DVD format and first DVD based console player, Microsoft gets into console business. Wii has Mii's, Microsoft gets Mii-too's. And so on and so forth. It's a constant race of progress.[/citation]
It's a bit more than that; movie streaming is really something consoles stole from the PC. As for controllers... Sony stole off of Nintendo with their playstation controllers, Nintendo stole back for the Game Cube, and Microsoft perfected the design for the 360. (at least, in my opinion perfected)

And I would point out that the Xbox is, in fact, not Microsoft's first foray into the console business; some might remember the old "MSX" they developed back in the 1980s; it didn't fare well, but was rather capable, sporting better graphics than the NES, but worse audio. More importantly, it was actually the console that gave rise to three very famous series, being Dragon Quest, Castlevania, and (most-remembered by fans) Metal Gear.

 

[Guest]

MSX was just a standard O/S platform. MS don't have a hand in designing the consoles. And if i remember correctly, MSX are home computers rather than dedicated consoles. But they are involved in the process with the other console making business partners, mostly japanese.

 

[nottheking]

[citation][nom]tkwong[/nom]MSX was just a standard O/S platform. MS don't have a hand in designing the consoles. And if i remember correctly, MSX are home computers rather than dedicated consoles. But they are involved in the process with the other console making business partners, mostly japanese.[/citation]
Actually, while it is true that the MSX is more a "home computer" than a console, Microsoft DID actually design the whole architecture for them. They simply licensed it out for production/sale by other Japanese companies. Of course, this isn't ENTIRELY unlike what occurs with modern consoles, where in Microsoft's case they contract out the work of actual console assembly.

Of course, the line between "home computer" and "console" isn't always clearly distinct, hence why I personally consider it more a console, since that's where most of its success came as.