surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
He's saying his fans doesn't want motion controls just because some corporation wants him to.
He's the Cobain of gaming.
He's the Cobain of gaming.
Every little thing he does is magic. So there's that...
Maybe he'd rather not buy in to trend, or follow the pack, or some other "this isn't a costume, it's a way of life" type ideal of individualism.
Maybe he'd rather not buy in to trend, or follow the pack, or some other "this isn't a costume, it's a way of life" type ideal of individualism.
Ah, I think he's saying that he doesn't want to require any motion control (like Killzone 3 does when you're arming bombs.... ugh), and putting it in as an option would just seem like a cash grab.
I agree with him.
I agree with him.
While I normally think options are a good thing, I actually agree with him here. If you're not going to do something right, don't do it at all.
I think he means that putting in move compatibility and a add on the box is at this point more it a gimmick and marketing technique rather than a full blown new style of game play for an already established game. Like it would be limited to flailing around to activate an object in the environment rather than press a button on the controller, which is about what motion controllers have done so far. The idea is that some people may see the inclusion of move and think "hey this'll be NEAT." When in reality, the actual control scheme may not be that individual shot of booze.
And the they get kick to the specials by a big daddy because it wasn't what they were expecting.
And the they get kick to the specials by a big daddy because it wasn't what they were expecting.
"I’d never want to throw in Move support just because it’s going to make some first party happy or because some marketing department wants it on the box because, at the end of the day, gamers know."
Sounds damn good to me. He doesn't want to go half assed on motion controls just because higher-ups want it in their next big release. He's not saying that he thinks motion controls IN GENERAL cheat the user.
I'd much prefer time, energy and money spent on the GAME and on a gimmick to be thrown in on the side.
Sounds damn good to me. He doesn't want to go half assed on motion controls just because higher-ups want it in their next big release. He's not saying that he thinks motion controls IN GENERAL cheat the user.
I'd much prefer time, energy and money spent on the GAME and on a gimmick to be thrown in on the side.
Nice to see he's not bandwagoning by putting in gimmicks for the sake of it. Plus there's nothing to say if there's a high demand for it after launch they couldn't just patch it in either.
And I still love the new artstyle, fucking gorgeous.
And I still love the new artstyle, fucking gorgeous.
That doesn't make any sense. I don't understand what he's saying. It's an alternative control scheme that some people prefer in FPS games. How is an option someone doesn't have to use end up as "cheating"?
Hes basically saying he doesn't want to have it tacked on the box as another marketing bullet-point the same way multiplayer got tacked onto Bioshock 2.
@Sama
Killzone 3's use of the sixaxis controller to make you turn cranks and arm charges is different than using the move. In Killzone 3 (and 2) it's a rather nice touch, that doesn't really do anything special, but still aids in immersion through gimmickry, which is fine.. Fully incorporating move into Bioshoc infinite seems like a bit more of a vault.
Killzone 3's use of the sixaxis controller to make you turn cranks and arm charges is different than using the move. In Killzone 3 (and 2) it's a rather nice touch, that doesn't really do anything special, but still aids in immersion through gimmickry, which is fine.. Fully incorporating move into Bioshoc infinite seems like a bit more of a vault.
What is he talking about? He kept saying gamers know and being cheated. How are they being cheated? I think the only way they'd be cheated was if it was bad last minute implementation and it was mandatory. If it's optional and it's well done I don't see what the problem is. I would have liked it.
I think he doesn't want Move support for the sake of having Move support. Like Little Big Planet 2 had move support, but if you went and spent €50 on Move to use it on LBP2, you would feel cheated by the lack of support.
Well, it does take development resources to implement a feature. Those resources could go to refine or implement something other than waggle crap. If Move support was implemented, not only would it take those resources away from something else in the PS3 version, they would be taken off the 360 and PC versions as well. I get what he's saying.
Levine makes it sound like non-tacked on gameplay CAN'T be made for the Move. More like the guy just cbf doing anything with it.
I can't assume to know what he means, but I can take a guess. I think Levine means that adding move controls would not add anything to the gameplay of Bioshock Infinite, and may even detract from the overall experience. That being said, cramming Move into his game would only be as a gimmick to sell product, and he believes gamers are smart enough to realize that. He's trying to make something good, and tacking on whatever fad is out at the time is just going to date and soil the game as a work of art. Not to mention all the time and effort it would take to integrate the Move controls. Overall, I think Levine is saying that incorporating the Move would only be a ploy and he wants to do better things than that. Though it begs the question: how did Bioshock 2 end up with multi-player?
better move which is actually a much better control method in shooters than the shitty dual analog standard than gimmicky 3d support for people with tv's the price that they could better become pc gamers
the only thing cheating about move can be that people using it have a big advantage in multyplayer but even that can be solved by don't giving them n00b aim
We're all trying to translate what he said because no one really knows what really understands what he's talking about
If he's saying he's against unnecessary motion controls that are tacked on and don't add any value to the game then I agree with him
If he's saying that motion controls are bad and that you are being cheated if you don't use a traditional controller than I disagree. Motion controls can be great and add immersion when they're done right, but when they are unresponsive they can ruin a game.
If he's saying he's against unnecessary motion controls that are tacked on and don't add any value to the game then I agree with him
If he's saying that motion controls are bad and that you are being cheated if you don't use a traditional controller than I disagree. Motion controls can be great and add immersion when they're done right, but when they are unresponsive they can ruin a game.
I'm always happy to use the PS Move, since the controller just feels lighter in my opinion, but I was planning on getting the game for Steam anyways so...
@scissors
true but he doesn't have to see move as some revolutionary gimmick just as a more precise/comfortable control scheme I don't need the move to be used in gimmicky ways just as an alternative control scheme nothing more nothing less and not to hard to add
true but he doesn't have to see move as some revolutionary gimmick just as a more precise/comfortable control scheme I don't need the move to be used in gimmicky ways just as an alternative control scheme nothing more nothing less and not to hard to add
@ Jim,
"I don't get how an optional control scheme would negatively impact anything. Am I missing something?"
Think about it. If they put in this optional control scheme and it sucks, although it's optional, it'll still be looked at critically by peers. Why put something in that sucks if you don't have to taint your masterpiece.
Also adding Move support costs $$$. You have to hire devs that know how to write for the controller. If that control scheme doesn't add anything worthwhile then why add it?
Why cheat the consumer
"I don't get how an optional control scheme would negatively impact anything. Am I missing something?"
Think about it. If they put in this optional control scheme and it sucks, although it's optional, it'll still be looked at critically by peers. Why put something in that sucks if you don't have to taint your masterpiece.
Also adding Move support costs $$$. You have to hire devs that know how to write for the controller. If that control scheme doesn't add anything worthwhile then why add it?
Why cheat the consumer
@Qlum Wait.... WHAT!? Bioshock WAS ORIGINALLY FOR PC! How the fuck do you think you are going to have to wait for a Port!? The ports are the Console versions! At least in Bioshock 1, the best version out of the three was the Pc one, mainly thanks to a brilliant control scheme and a lot of support for things like gamepads. WHAT THE FUCK IS UP WITH "even if it takes a year or more to get a port" BULLSHIT XD!?
@BillZoeker Levine didn't develope Bioshock 2. It was 2k Martin that made it and Irrational Games nor Levine worked on it.
I don't see the problem adding an option. If the original dualshock version of the game is left untouched, but they just added Move support as an "option" (which for those stubborn of the ability to soak up other opinions but your own means you don't have to use it), then what the hell is the problem.
@CapnCrunk
"If Move support was implemented, not only would it take those resources away from something else in the PS3 version, they would be taken off the 360 and PC versions as well. I get what he's saying."
If 360 development was implemented, not only would it take those extra resources that the PS3 & PC have (more power, bigger storage) so that so it could be developed on the lowest common denominator, & then sloppily ported to the PS3 & PC leaving crappy frame rates on the PS3, & a half baked PC game.....but that's okay because that's what's been happening with a high portion of multiplatform games this gen.
If they want to shove Kinect & Move functionality into every game, then as long as it doesn't affect the core game, I'm fine with that. Except they can't shove Kinect functionality into most games because no one knows how that would work, or even if it would. Move has proven with KZ3 that it's a good alternative control scheme for shooters. Yes, the opinions are split, some people swearing blind that DS3 is better, & some stating that Move wipes the DS3's backside for accuracy. I've yet to make up my mind, but it's nice to have the option.
Why are people so against leaving it up to the player to decide.
@CapnCrunk
"If Move support was implemented, not only would it take those resources away from something else in the PS3 version, they would be taken off the 360 and PC versions as well. I get what he's saying."
If 360 development was implemented, not only would it take those extra resources that the PS3 & PC have (more power, bigger storage) so that so it could be developed on the lowest common denominator, & then sloppily ported to the PS3 & PC leaving crappy frame rates on the PS3, & a half baked PC game.....but that's okay because that's what's been happening with a high portion of multiplatform games this gen.
If they want to shove Kinect & Move functionality into every game, then as long as it doesn't affect the core game, I'm fine with that. Except they can't shove Kinect functionality into most games because no one knows how that would work, or even if it would. Move has proven with KZ3 that it's a good alternative control scheme for shooters. Yes, the opinions are split, some people swearing blind that DS3 is better, & some stating that Move wipes the DS3's backside for accuracy. I've yet to make up my mind, but it's nice to have the option.
Why are people so against leaving it up to the player to decide.
More dev and testing resources can now be used on the main game instead of some bullshit control scheme. Good work, I say.
It would be nice to have move support. He concentrates on the "waggle left" "waggle right" part but pointing and shooting in a first person shooter simply makes sense.
it "cheats" them because the people buying expect greatness from a game like bioshock, and shoehorned-on piece of shit wouldn't hold up to that standard! WTF is there to NOT GET?
it "cheats" them because the people buying expect greatness from a game like bioshock, and shoehorned-on piece of shit wouldn't hold up to that standard! WTF is there to NOT GET?
@epic-kxdtoid
true (personally prefer mouse and belkin n52te but still)
but I would choose move over dual analog at any time
true (personally prefer mouse and belkin n52te but still)
but I would choose move over dual analog at any time
@Kaden101
I was talking about development money, which is finite, not platform details. A good portion of gamers out there are going to see a version of the game on the platform they own as a value add, more than the number of gamers who are going to be upset that it's multiplat.
I guess it comes down to whether the cost implementing a feature is worth it based on the percentage of gamers that buy the game who will use it. As he said, 3D is a lot easier (cheaper) than some other input device to implement. In fact, the PC version will automatically support 3D regardless of what they do, though the quality of the experience varies widely when it isn't formally supported.
I was talking about development money, which is finite, not platform details. A good portion of gamers out there are going to see a version of the game on the platform they own as a value add, more than the number of gamers who are going to be upset that it's multiplat.
I guess it comes down to whether the cost implementing a feature is worth it based on the percentage of gamers that buy the game who will use it. As he said, 3D is a lot easier (cheaper) than some other input device to implement. In fact, the PC version will automatically support 3D regardless of what they do, though the quality of the experience varies widely when it isn't formally supported.
@ShotgunDiplom4t:
I disagree, it really breaks the feel of immersion for me. Everytime I get stuck trying to remember what to do, then I have to find the right buttons and stuff... maybe I will get used to it eventually, but I still won't like it.
@Epic-KxDtoid:
Sigh.
I disagree, it really breaks the feel of immersion for me. Everytime I get stuck trying to remember what to do, then I have to find the right buttons and stuff... maybe I will get used to it eventually, but I still won't like it.
@Epic-KxDtoid:
Sigh.
well, i guess I'm not buying bioshlock 3.
it's a FPS isn't it? why wouldn't you let people use move?
it's a FPS isn't it? why wouldn't you let people use move?
What Cryotek said, he doesn't want to include move in a title that isn't a 'move title' per say. As in not designing the game around the peripheral, and instead adding a stupid waggle control just so you can say it's possible to play it with this.
The 'cheating' would be releasing a Move version of a game that would not be any better than the original game. I don't see the problem with adding a patch to the original game allowing use of Move though.
The 'cheating' would be releasing a Move version of a game that would not be any better than the original game. I don't see the problem with adding a patch to the original game allowing use of Move though.
I think he feels it would "cheat" his customers because instead of focusing entirely on the original concept of the game, he would have to devote a lot of time and effort into a first party program he didn't want anything to do with in the first place. I understand where he is coming from if this is the case. I think most devs with PS Move integration in their games still know the standard controller is the bread and butter of this generation's console gaming (At the moment at least).
follow
