Viewing Thread:
"Interaction with games! Does it change?"

There has been one constant throughout gaming's history. Whether you're driving a car, shooting a gun or rollerblading, all the player does is hit plastic coloured buttons! Madness! Turn the corner in Goldeneye and then use all your cunning to pree the big grey lump of plastic at the bottom of the pad!

Clearly something has got to change before real immersion can be achieved in gaming. Although companies like nintendo have revolutionised controllers, they have always remained basically the same. The only real differences are specific controllers- the light gun for house of the dead, the wheels for GT and the brilliant Maracas for Samba de Amigo!

But this can go too far! Like the skateboard controllers that I've juts seen! Not only that, but they're also too expensive!

Surely Shigsy Miyamoto or someone can think of a better system that lumps of plastic??? It reminds me of cars... despite having improved in every way, they still have a tiny motor moving a bar to wipe water off the windscreen!

SonicRav

PseudoSavant wrote:
That was attempted with the Power
> Glove from Nintendo. Didn't work that well, too jittery. I think
> controllers are just infused in our brains by this point; it's like
> typing on a keyboard - after a while, you just become really
> comfortable with it and to the point where you don't even have to
> think about what keys to push.


I was thinking more of the gloves they use, for VR contoll currently... they'll be of a higher quality than the PowerGlove (and therefore cost a litte more to produce), but are generally considered one of the better VR interfaces (since its easier to generate a visual equivelent)

Besides wasnt the PowerGlove a marketing Gimmick from the 80's?

It's not that I'm arguing against the techical
> potential of systems handling VR headsets; I'm just curious whether
> they'd work as well as everyone seems to believe they
> would.

They already do... you can buy a VR kit for about a grand... which is still a lot of cash... and although I dont know how well they work... everybody I know thats ever tired VR is always blown away by it...

Never played that, so I can't really comment
> intelligently regarding it.

You havnt missed anything... it REALLY sucked... but if you read a review it should explain whats going on?

Bots are a far cry from
> realistic behavior though.

Do you want realistice behaviour? ... If I'm playing a game, and I cant multiplay, Bots'll do for me (until they come up with something better :) )

Doubtful. Sociologists and internet researchers
> are already documenting the effects the internet is having on the
> public's interaction with the Real World.

The internet has still to become part of the publics concense... equally its yet to become a settled medium within itself...

The Internet in its current form is, pretty much globally agreed, not be in its current shape for long. Its current model, in the next 5-10 years will be considered as out of date and obsolete as, say DOS 3

Any non-Channel4 documentary sociologist has not yet had enough time to validly identify, and establish any long term result from global internet usage...

>Imagine how much worse it
> would become with the additional immersion of VR. In VR's case,

None... VR is an interface... like a monitor... except I' rather browse using a monitor :)

I do
> agree with what many sci-fi novels and shows exhibit - virtual
> reality's disturbing effects upon real world contact. People already
> spend too much time on their PCs or on their Consoles, and that's
> without the additional power of VR.

But generally there using the time spent watching TV on consoles....

Any culteral trend towards chuldren using games consoles & TV as a primary form of entertainmenrt is mistaking seeing the result and thinking its the cause...

When My friends and I were first getting into computers in 1979/19880 we were 5/6 years old, and spent much of our time playing games... However it despite having a heavy games playsing schedule, I stil managed to go outside to play, get a goodly amount of exercise and not become part of the obese.... the current trend of an overweight Britain is not the fult of console games, rather that of alternate external influences...


Okay.... kinda went off on a tangent there... :) .. Just thought I would try and pre-emt you a touch? :) ... TRY to pre-empt ;)

Personally I like the distance you get from a game by controlling it all with a few buttons, from the comfort of an armchair.

If you were more involved in the games, they'd probably get banned for being too realistic, and inspiring violence (whether they did or not would be a different matter entirely.)

I don't want to have to physically move to move my character! I want my games to be a relaxing hobby, not an exhausting one! If I wanted to run around, I'd rather do it outdoors.

Though it could be interesting once in a while, I wouldn't want it hooked up in my living room (I might ruin the furniture!)

Shanks said, "...if they used the glove infterface, couldnt that replace controllers?"

That was attempted with the Power Glove from Nintendo. Didn't work that well, too jittery. I think controllers are just infused in our brains by this point; it's like typing on a keyboard - after a while, you just become really comfortable with it and to the point where you don't even have to think about what keys to push.

"I rrenkon it could be done pretty easily with todays systems... Quake3 would work well with a VR headset :) ... I'd say the top end machines this time next year would be able to handle the range requirements without breaking a sweat?"

It's not that I'm arguing against the techical potential of systems handling VR headsets; I'm just curious whether they'd work as well as everyone seems to believe they would.

"Well... what was the Star Wars RTS they released last year... I was thnikning of that kinda interface... (but done well) :) ... This would allow standard RTS style gameplay in a 3D environment, without the environment changing the game stlye..."

Never played that, so I can't really comment intelligently regarding it.

"...naa... same as theyve got now with the Bots in UT & Quake3... both games are VR in all but the headset and interface... instead of using the mounse to look around, you'd use the headset..."

Bots are a far cry from realistic behavior though.

"I dont know... after the initially 'shock' impact of 'widespread use' I think VR infterface would settle pretty well into society... and be given the previedged 'invisible' status of telephones, TVs, and consoles..."

Doubtful. Sociologists and internet researchers are already documenting the effects the internet is having on the public's interaction with the Real World. Imagine how much worse it would become with the additional immersion of VR. In VR's case, I do agree with what many sci-fi novels and shows exhibit - virtual reality's disturbing effects upon real world contact. People already spend too much time on their PCs or on their Consoles, and that's without the additional power of VR.

PseudoSavant wrote:

Still, the control
> of such a system would be twitchy, far moreso than a controller.
> Could you imagine tripping and causing your character to suddenly
> lurch off a cliff? True, it may not be a full-body suit, but most
> people generally have more control over their fingers than they do
> the rest of their bodies.

Aye... But if they used the glove infterface, couldnt that replace controllers?

(Although having said that, I still think I would prefer a joystick or gamepad for most releases... but for the sake of the discussion...)

I
> suppose this is true, though the more life-like the in-game
> characters become, the less we'd probably feel like shooting them.
>

Possibly... you can bet Daily Mail readers would have a field day complaining about the reason why DoomVR caused some American children to start killing other students)

Never said there weren't graphical qualities
> that would be phenomenal, but it would be dependent upon how it's
> handled. I think there'd be something uncomfortably eerie about
> talking to a mesh of polygons. It also depends upon the level of AI

I think it would be kinda funky.. even after the novelty had worn off :)

> we're able to program into NPC interaction; after all, with the move
> to such a realistic viewing system, we'd likely expect more than
> just repetition of this line or that.

I rrenkon it could be done pretty easily with todays systems... Quake3 would work well with a VR headset :) ... I'd say the top end machines this time next year would be able to handle the range requirements without breaking a sweat?

This again depends upon how
> it's done; I still doubt it would be as interesting as you depict.
> My reason is this: We don't WANT to see our men dying of wounds up
> close and personal. There's a security in the remote nature of RTSs,
> I feel, wouldn't be supported all that well by VR.

Well... what was the Star Wars RTS they released last year... I was thnikning of that kinda interface... (but done well) :) ... This would allow standard RTS style gameplay in a 3D environment, without the environment changing the game stlye...

Only with other living players, IMO, as the AI for
> computer generated beings would have to be immense to match up with
> our heightened sense of reality. AI is actually, IMO, going to be
> harder than setting up VR games.

naa... same as theyve got now with the Bots in UT & Quake3... both games are VR in all but the headset and interface... instead of using the mounse to look around, you'd use the headset...

> would have on the real world. VR, to me, has its problems and
> they're more socially based than anything else.

I dont know... after the initially 'shock' impact of 'widespread use' I think VR infterface would settle pretty well into society... and be given the previedged 'invisible' status of telephones, TVs, and consoles...

If you want to see some weird Gaming peripherals I suggest you go see Namcos Japanese website...While checking it for info on TimeCrisis:ProjectTitan and PointBlank3 I came across some crazy Japanese stuff like Game Sticks, dont know what they do, but hey worth a laugh!

{{{That was connected with VR headsets huh? ... I can see how it would be applicable in many programs... but once you started to get tired from running on the spot for several hours, things could really start lack... especially if your physically diabled. However, nobody said it had to be a full body suit?}}}

Still, the control of such a system would be twitchy, far moreso than a controller. Could you imagine tripping and causing your character to suddenly lurch off a cliff? True, it may not be a full-body suit, but most people generally have more control over their fingers than they do the rest of their bodies.

{{{The idea isnt that VR interface takes over all forms of game input, and that rather like mice, joypads, etc.. that a controller for a game type is made...}}}

I suppose this is true, though the more life-like the in-game characters become, the less we'd probably feel like shooting them.

{{{Although first person roleplaying games would work wonderfully, walking around the environment, chatting with people, waving your hands around and watching the magic envelop them beore being cast...}}}

Never said there weren't graphical qualities that would be phenomenal, but it would be dependent upon how it's handled. I think there'd be something uncomfortably eerie about talking to a mesh of polygons. It also depends upon the level of AI we're able to program into NPC interaction; after all, with the move to such a realistic viewing system, we'd likely expect more than just repetition of this line or that.

{{{RTS would be easy to recreate with a VR system... you would be able to zoom out completly to a distance... fly away from the scene... or when a battle is occuring, you could fly in close and 'invisiably' watch the action take place... you could see how your troops were fairing. You could walk around the enviromnent to decide the bets polace for them to go to to trap/gunfight enemys, etc...}}}

This again depends upon how it's done; I still doubt it would be as interesting as you depict. My reason is this: We don't WANT to see our men dying of wounds up close and personal. There's a security in the remote nature of RTSs, I feel, wouldn't be supported all that well by VR.

{{{TEAM games, wether the other players are computer generated... or other players are using other VR kits over the net would be fanrtastic... and will I have no doubt become on the of formtas biggest selling points...}}}

Only with other living players, IMO, as the AI for computer generated beings would have to be immense to match up with our heightened sense of reality. AI is actually, IMO, going to be harder than setting up VR games.

{{{Just gotta make sure people with dodgy tickers dont get too much of a shock from that creature tapping on his shoulder behind him :)}}}

True, true. Might also be difficult for people who neurologically can't handle sudden shifts in viewpoint. Also, I've a feeling we'd be retiring Hideo Kojima moving to a system like that. Personally, I'd really rather not. I also don't like the implications such a realistic environment would have on the real world. VR, to me, has its problems and they're more socially based than anything else.

PseudoSavant wrote:
I've also heard some
> people talk about hooking up sensors to our own bodies, then having
> our in-game avatar run and jump based on our own movements, but come
> on...would that really work? Would your character be able to do
> flips anymore? And even if the software had them do that
> automatically every time that you jumped, wouldn't the character
> shift slightly (perhaps lethally) upon landing since you weren't in
> the air as long as the character was?

That was connected with VR headsets huh? ... I can see how it would be applicable in many programs... but once you started to get tired from running on the spot for several hours, things could really start lack... especially if your physically diabled. However, nobody said it had to be a full body suit?


As for VR: I sort of
> wonder how much FUN this would actually be. For one thing, there'd
> only be 1st-person games; otherwise what would be the point? The
> only thing that would really work with a VR system is, if you think
> about it, FPSs, FPAs, and maybe games like Myst and Riven.
> Otherwise, RTSs would be practically impossible; RPGs would, well,
> be possible, but the TEAM aspects of it would likely suffer.

The idea isnt that VR interface takes over all forms of game input, and that rather like mice, joypads, etc.. that a controller for a game type is made...

Although first person roleplaying games would work wonderfully, walking around the environment, chatting with people, waving your hands around and watching the magic envelop them beore being cast...

RTS would be easy to recreate with a VR system... you would be able to zoom out completly to a distance... fly away from the scene... or when a battle is occuring, you could fly in close and 'invisiably' watch the action take place... you could see how your troops were fairing. You could walk around the enviromnent to decide the bets polace for them to go to to trap/gunfight enemys, etc...


TEAM games, wether the other players are computer generated... or other players are using other VR kits over the net would be fanrtastic... and will I have no doubt become on the of formtas biggest selling points...

Just gotta make sure people with dodgy tickers dont get too much of a shock from that creature tapping on his shoulder behind him :)

[I give credit to Steven Poole's book
> "Trigger Happy" for some of the basic premises behind such
> arguments.]

For the time being, it just seems as though controllers are more practical, not to mention fairly cheap. I mean, what was that thing Nintendo came out with eons ago? The Power Glove? Personally I felt it was a fairly cool idea - a bit strange with all those poles you had to put on the sides of your television - but it just didn't work all that well: Control wassn't as intuitive or as precise as what we can accomplish using the controllers.

I've also heard some people talk about hooking up sensors to our own bodies, then having our in-game avatar run and jump based on our own movements, but come on...would that really work? Would your character be able to do flips anymore? And even if the software had them do that automatically every time that you jumped, wouldn't the character shift slightly (perhaps lethally) upon landing since you weren't in the air as long as the character was?

As for VR: I sort of wonder how much FUN this would actually be. For one thing, there'd only be 1st-person games; otherwise what would be the point? The only thing that would really work with a VR system is, if you think about it, FPSs, FPAs, and maybe games like Myst and Riven. Otherwise, RTSs would be practically impossible; RPGs would, well, be possible, but the TEAM aspects of it would likely suffer.

I don't know, it just seems as though the controller - though seemingly archaic and outdated - is partly what makes these things GAMES to begin with.

[I give credit to Steven Poole's book "Trigger Happy" for some of the basic premises behind such arguments.]

Out of site and off telly.... maybe not a bad thing then.

SonicRav

But if they didn't have them, what would the bearded men make their Robots with in Robot Wars?