Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft Motion Technology Comparions

Now that all three console makers have revealed their plans for motion control on their respective consoles, you may be wondering how different they all are and what advantages they have over each other.

Wii MotionPlus is adding 1:1 accuracy to the wiimote, a function that gamers have really wanted from the beginning. Sony have developed similar tech to Nintendo with an added camera, however there are still many questions to be answered by Sony, not least a final design, price and release date. Microsoft have decided not to imitate Nintendo like Sony have and rather be innovative themselves with what many see as an advancement over the wiimote.

Thatvideogameblog have dissected all three technologies and given their view on the possible pro’s and con’s for each motion sensing peripheral.

First let’s look at Nintendo’s Wii MotionPlus…

Pros
+ Much like Sony’s technology, MotionPlus provides data directly about the position of the gamer’s hand. There’s no fancy recognition and detection going on here of 2D and 3D data like in Microsoft’s solution, so the potential for errors is far less. It’s proven and reliable.
+ Ironically, because MotionPlus can make use of the Nunchuk’s analogue stick and the IR pointer, it makes it more suited to traditional games than either of its two competitors. Despite its sensitivity to lights and distance, the IR pointer has become a very strong feature in many traditional games. Additionally the Nunchuk provides players with direct control over their character that would be very hard to mimic with just a motion controller. The design is typical Nintendo, in that it has the capability to satisfy all types of gamers, whereas Sony and Microsoft seem to have conceived of their devices primarily for the expanded audience.
+ Software support already looks strong from both Nintendo and 3rd parties.

Cons
- The biggest flaw with MotionPlus is the lack of a webcam. Being able to see yourself inside a game holding different virtual objects has huge potential for both Sony and Microsoft. For the expanded audience in particular it would seem to have enormous appeal. Due to the design of the Wii Remote, simply adding a webcam to the Wii Sensor Bar would not be enough to implement this feature either. Miyamoto must be particularly envious.
- Having seen Microsoft’s Natal, MotionPlus begins to look rather unambitious in comparison. The addition of a gyro, no matter how well implemented, seems like a fix to the original Wii Remote design rather than a real jump in technology after E3. Nintendo are in danger of becoming the laggards in the space where they were once the innovators, and it’s tough to see how a Vitality Sensor can overcome this.

So how does Sony’s tech compare?

Pros
+ Extremely accurate and very reliable if accelerometers and gyros are being used.
+ Due to it sharing many similarities to MotionPlus, the ability to make cross-platform games will mean the peripheral has a better chance of 3rd party support.
+ With the light source and the PlayStation Eye, the system can capture the gamer and put him in the game. MotionPlus cannot do this, and even if the DSi’s camera were used, the Wii Remote has no distinctive light source to make it easy to track.
+ The analogue trigger adds a degree of sophistication over the plain Wii Remote and MotionPlus combination.

Cons
- The controller looks like a Fisher Price designed sex toy – not exactly a match for aesthetics of the PS3 and its peripherals (u: though yes, this is not the final design).
- At this point in time, it doesn’t have access to an analogue stick – a limiting factor when it comes to traditional games.
- The controller seems to have been designed to compete directly with Nintendo’s technology, whereas Microsoft’s solution appears more radical and innovative.
- Another thing that traditional games benefit from is a pointer, something that will be tricky with Sony’s new controller. Essentially Sony have reversed the setup of the Wii – the camera is placed near the tv, and the light source is on the controller. The disadvantage of this is that the camera does not have enough resolution to track the light as a pointer, unless the player makes large movements. This is because when pointing on the Wii, the player pivots the camera which radically alters the position of the sensor bar in its field of view. On the PS3 however, players will be pivoting the light source which will alter its position relative to the Eye very little, meaning the PS3 will have very little spatial resolution for a pointer if used in this way. A good example of this is the famous Johnny Chung Lee head-tracking demo, where he taped the sensor bar to his head and used the Wii Remote as a static camera.

And finally Microsoft with Natal:

Pros
+ In 5 years time, gamers may look back at this gen and laugh at the number of silly looking, plastic peripherals we’ve collected in our living rooms. With Natal, Microsoft could be bringing the age of the peripheral to an end by giving gamers everything they need inside the game rather than forcing it down there throats in real life.
+ With no controller required, Natal has one-upped Nintendo’s intuitive tv remote and set a new standard for accessibility.
+ A genuinely innovative and ambitious design that seems able to recognize what multiple gamers are doing on a far broader level than the competition. Where Sony can be accused of once again copying Nintendo’s controller, Microsoft have chosen to take their own path.

Cons
- Typical time of light cameras are able to measure differences in depth of about 2cm. If the webcam in  Natal has a horizontal resolution 640 pixels, and if everyone on a 6-foot sofa is in the picture, each pixel will represent about 0.3 cm. Double the resolution and this figure becomes 0.15 cm – better, but there is also the webcam’s frame rate to consider. 60fps should be the minimum, but 120fps would be better for games that require fast, complex movements. While Natal is able to capture and track multiple bodies, it will not be able to track a gamer’s hand position with the accuracy an accelerometer and gyro combination can. A lack of precision could prevent the device from being successful in traditional games.
- Just how reliable are the algorithms that the device is using? Apparently the skeleton mapping that Natal employs is able to capture 48 points of interest on the human body, but will it work well when faced with a typical living/bedroom environment? Although Natal’s potential is boundless, there is the worry that its reliance on in interpreting 2D and 3D data will not be as reliable as the competition’s equivalent.
- Some of the demos Microsoft presented with Natal seemed questionable at best. Most of what people were impressed with in the Milo demo could have been accomplished with any webcam and microphone. What stunned was that Milo responded to questions asked with real answers and emotions – but that seems more to do with Lionhead’s AI (maybe not) than Natal. How comfortable is it in reality to hold your hands in midair to steer a car? How much of what was presented was real, and how much was merely smoke and mirrors?
- Natal’s unique technology will mean that it will be very difficult for 3rd parties to make cross-platform games that include the device. Whereas games will likely be made for both Sony and and Nintendo’s controllers, each Natal game will be a forced platform exclusive – something that may hinder 3rd party support.

Thanks to thatvideogameblog