surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I'm with Levine. I could see the move as being a bad choice. And I think that Kevin Levine was kind of adding the connotation that the controls would be rather tacked on, since the Playstation move is in my opinion, a rather tacked on product. I wish that they had seriously thought of something different, considering that they had such a technological advantage(Instead of copying Nintendo, again.).
I guess not.
Anyway, this game is gonna be Tits, move or not, I just hope that the development time doesn't have to suffer because of this decision.
I guess not.
Anyway, this game is gonna be Tits, move or not, I just hope that the development time doesn't have to suffer because of this decision.
@Skribble
Exactly. Money not going into Move support means money going into the actual game itself, which makes everyone happy.
Exactly. Money not going into Move support means money going into the actual game itself, which makes everyone happy.
If he doesn't think his studio is talented enough to implement it competently he should just say so rather than saying "motion control in this case is bad" when consumer preference has proven otherwise.
It seems that he's saying that without a creative implementation of the Move controller there would be no incentive to putting it in Bioshock Infinite.
So basically, Mr. Levine hasn't played Metroid Prime Trilogy and doesn't want a similar implementation because he's lazy.
Got it.
One less game for me to spend money on, then.. I prefer motion controls in my first person games. Sorry, I can't go back to dual analog in this case, its like living in a cave or life before fire.
Got it.
One less game for me to spend money on, then.. I prefer motion controls in my first person games. Sorry, I can't go back to dual analog in this case, its like living in a cave or life before fire.
Typical American developer pretentiousness, instead of focusing on the potential of the move as a pointer in FPS games, he focuses on the "waggle"... IF you want to be a purist, put your FPS game on the PC only.
I don't understand the why everyone is being so obtuse. The man is not saying "I'M AGAINST OPTIONS"
He can't get much clearer. It's simple.
If people feel compelled to buy either the game or Move itself because of "Move Support" being on the box, and all that they find is token support, they will feel cheated, and rightly so.
He can't get much clearer. It's simple.
If people feel compelled to buy either the game or Move itself because of "Move Support" being on the box, and all that they find is token support, they will feel cheated, and rightly so.
Time spent implementing Move controls is time that could be put to better use.
It already takes more time and money to code PS3 games.
I'd rather see the time spent trying to stabilize the PS3 version's framerate without having to remove stuff like lighting effects or reduce the the resolution.
He simply doesn't want to cheat PS3 gamers out of a game as good as it's 360 counterpart.
It's for the best really.
It already takes more time and money to code PS3 games.
I'd rather see the time spent trying to stabilize the PS3 version's framerate without having to remove stuff like lighting effects or reduce the the resolution.
He simply doesn't want to cheat PS3 gamers out of a game as good as it's 360 counterpart.
It's for the best really.
I can sort of see his point, but he's pretty much stating, "I don't want to use Move unless I do something special with it." That's well and good, but more options is always a better thing. PC has options out the god damned ass, why not consoles?
I love Mr. Levine's work, but this comment is ridiculous.
The implication here is that motion control is inherently shallow, and the best use he can think of is to "waggle" for decisions. That's like saying using a mouse+keyboard over a controller is "cheating" PC gamers.
What is wrong with developers and gamers this past gen? It's like, in their effort to downplay the Wii (and, by extension, motion control), they've made themselves believe their own ridiculous lies.
The implication here is that motion control is inherently shallow, and the best use he can think of is to "waggle" for decisions. That's like saying using a mouse+keyboard over a controller is "cheating" PC gamers.
What is wrong with developers and gamers this past gen? It's like, in their effort to downplay the Wii (and, by extension, motion control), they've made themselves believe their own ridiculous lies.
you just being fooled, he´s a marketing master mind.. he´s saying that because he knows the only one reading that "interview" are core gamers, and core gamers like cliche anti corporation speeches
Sterling: I don't get how an optional control scheme would negatively impact anything. Am I missing something?
Well, look at KZ3: I had to sit through (in my opinion) god awful rail shooting segments every other level because of Move support.
Well, look at KZ3: I had to sit through (in my opinion) god awful rail shooting segments every other level because of Move support.
I gotta say, Levine comes off as pretty douchey with this one. I can totally understand not wanting to shoehorn something crappy into your game, but declaring that any Move support is "cheating" consumers is ridiculous. Also, I'm calling bullshit on his whole position of "3D is the way to go!" while talking down on motion gaming. I thought it was a gimmick at first too, but the Wii kinda proved all us naysayers wrong there. 3D is still a waste of time and, most of all, a massive waste of cash.
It's cheating someone playing the game using the Move, because it's an unoptimized control scheme, using it in only generic ways. That's the way I interpreted it at least.
I think he doesn't want people to use his game to justify the purchase of the expensive Playstation Move game when he doesn't have the confidence he could make it worth it to consumers. People might walk away bitter that there wasn't more done with the Move's potential, and he's probably not prepared to shove some Move centric gaming abilities into his design documents.
More like his is not intelligent enough to properly harness the power of the Move in his game. It's not a Wii waggle controller you big moron!
I have a lot of respective and admiration for Ken Levine, especially after hearing him talk at PAX recently.
In my opinion it seemed very obvious what he was saying, and I think most of the people here get the general gist of it - that he doesn't think Move will enhance or contribute to the gameplay experience enough to justify using it.
He knows gamers and fans will recognize this (gimmick in the context of his game), and has too much respect for them along with his craft to just throw it in there for shits and giggles.
In my opinion it seemed very obvious what he was saying, and I think most of the people here get the general gist of it - that he doesn't think Move will enhance or contribute to the gameplay experience enough to justify using it.
He knows gamers and fans will recognize this (gimmick in the context of his game), and has too much respect for them along with his craft to just throw it in there for shits and giggles.
So Move wouldn't add anything to the experience, and he feels like it'd more be a cheap marketing ploy more than a meaningful addition. Seems self explanatory to me.
I think it would still be nice to have an option, and I don't see how it cheats gamers, unless it takes a considerable effort that could be put to better use elsewhere.
I think it would still be nice to have an option, and I don't see how it cheats gamers, unless it takes a considerable effort that could be put to better use elsewhere.
Awwww. Move is pretty great for shooters, which is why I bought it in the first place, and I wish every one on the PS3 supported it. It's almost as good as keyboard/mouse.
@Zaxxon "It's almost as good as keyboard/mouse"
Exactly. So why don't PS3 and XBox360 support keyboard and mouse already?
The only reason I can see is that if they did, they wouldn't be making as much money off of accessories the way they currently do, which is a shitty mercenary excuse, but is probably the right one.
Exactly. So why don't PS3 and XBox360 support keyboard and mouse already?
The only reason I can see is that if they did, they wouldn't be making as much money off of accessories the way they currently do, which is a shitty mercenary excuse, but is probably the right one.
Then they shouldn't include xbox controller support in the pc version. Who wants another something on the box?
Seriously though, if you can get one to one movement with the move like a mouse, why not put it in? I don't have a move, but if most games like this include it it'll be a no brainer right?
Seriously though, if you can get one to one movement with the move like a mouse, why not put it in? I don't have a move, but if most games like this include it it'll be a no brainer right?
It's cheating because Ken Levine doesn't throw things in just for some extra justification for someone's unwise purchasing decision. He throws it in if it serves his vision. If it doesn't, then he sees it as a bit of a cynical insult.
Note that this is why he didn't work on BioShock 2.
Note that this is why he didn't work on BioShock 2.
@Byronic Man
Oh yes, consumer opinion has showed otherwise. You can't keep the Move on shelves!!!!
*cough*
Oh yes, consumer opinion has showed otherwise. You can't keep the Move on shelves!!!!
*cough*
To be honest though, Sony just need to incentivise developers to add Move support and advertise the fucking thing.
It's what MS did to get Kinnect games and the thing sold.
I hate Kinnect too and wish that was doomed to fail before devs get on the bandwagon, but no such luck.
It's what MS did to get Kinnect games and the thing sold.
I hate Kinnect too and wish that was doomed to fail before devs get on the bandwagon, but no such luck.
I have no interest in playing FPS games that don't use the Move. After spending large amounts of time with MAG and Killzone 3, the Move just feels like a natural progression of play-control for me.
Too bad, I was looking forward to playing Bioshock 3, but I really don't want to return to thumbstick control. I don't see why they just couldn't have built in Move support - I don't doubt for a minute that Sony would offer some kind of assistance, technically, just to have their product supported in another game.
Too bad, I was looking forward to playing Bioshock 3, but I really don't want to return to thumbstick control. I don't see why they just couldn't have built in Move support - I don't doubt for a minute that Sony would offer some kind of assistance, technically, just to have their product supported in another game.
I have no interest in playing FPS games that don't use the Move. After spending large amounts of time with MAG and Killzone 3, the Move just feels like a natural progression of play-control for me.
Too bad, I was looking forward to playing Bioshock 3, but I really don't want to return to thumbstick control. I don't see why they just couldn't have built in Move support - I don't doubt for a minute that Sony would offer some kind of assistance, technically, just to have their product supported in another game.
Too bad, I was looking forward to playing Bioshock 3, but I really don't want to return to thumbstick control. I don't see why they just couldn't have built in Move support - I don't doubt for a minute that Sony would offer some kind of assistance, technically, just to have their product supported in another game.
So in Levine's opinion totally useless 3D effects are more important than giving gamers multiple control options and implementing innovative controls? Yeah, now I'm seeing why Bioshock 2 happened the way it did, Levine has apparently forgotten about substance.
Waggle to save, waggle to harvest? Why not make them go through the motions of executing one then harvest the body. The problem here is he thinks too simply and he doesn't think it out far enough.
The sad thing about Move is how Sony is marketing it. They really should be playing up how great the thing is for shooters. I know that "hardcore" gamers hate motion controls by default, but in my experience Move actually works better for "hardcore" games than "casual" ones, especially because of the advantage it gives you in shooters. You can aim so quickly and so precisely with it that it almost feels like cheating.
I don't see the big deal. I think trying to add it in now is not such a good idea because it would just feel tacked on. If they did do it, the people bitching now about him not wanting it would most likely be crying foul when it ended up feeling tacked on. Sorry that a developer didn't want to support something from a company who just wanted to jump on a bandwagon.
@BattyAdroit
I think it's too bad that you're not playing a game that you were looking forward to because it doesn't have move support. I think it's petty.
@BattyAdroit
I think it's too bad that you're not playing a game that you were looking forward to because it doesn't have move support. I think it's petty.
Nobody cares about Move, nobody cares about Kinect, nobody cares about Wii remotes except grandmas.
What's with this war on controls that *work*?
What's with this war on controls that *work*?
What's so hard to get about this?
Just like how Naughty Dog isn't putting Move in Uncharted 3, he doesn't want to put Move in Bioshock Infinite because it wouldn't add anything to the game other than an alternative control scheme - one that few people own and one that doesn't enhance anything.
If you're going to put in Move, the game should be built from the ground up with Move in mind. Otherwise it IS cheating gamers because we're getting extra crap tossed into our games which are unnecessary, bloat dev times and force concessions on gameplay because perhaps Move doesn't allow something that a traditional controller does and so the AI has to be tweaked so Move players can actually win.
Also, it really seems to me that consoles are starting to lose what made them attractive to devs and gamers in the first place. The more extra crap they start tossing at consoles - peripherals and control schemes - the more it becomes like the PC where you have to accommodate a bunch of extra stuff just because if you don't someone out there will whine about it (handicapped individuals excluded because it isn't their fault).
Just like how Naughty Dog isn't putting Move in Uncharted 3, he doesn't want to put Move in Bioshock Infinite because it wouldn't add anything to the game other than an alternative control scheme - one that few people own and one that doesn't enhance anything.
If you're going to put in Move, the game should be built from the ground up with Move in mind. Otherwise it IS cheating gamers because we're getting extra crap tossed into our games which are unnecessary, bloat dev times and force concessions on gameplay because perhaps Move doesn't allow something that a traditional controller does and so the AI has to be tweaked so Move players can actually win.
Also, it really seems to me that consoles are starting to lose what made them attractive to devs and gamers in the first place. The more extra crap they start tossing at consoles - peripherals and control schemes - the more it becomes like the PC where you have to accommodate a bunch of extra stuff just because if you don't someone out there will whine about it (handicapped individuals excluded because it isn't their fault).
Maybe he is under the belief that we haven't the will to resist motion controls. Otherwise, how is Sony cheating us? I assume he's talking about money, but it's anyone's guess. Maybe Levine feels that tacking on motion controls would be unnecessary and "cheat" the player out of a once-in-a-lifetime experience (less you hit replay). Actually, I wouldn't mine playing Bioshock 3 with the Move as long as it was optional. However, I can also respect the developer's decision. I mean does anyone know how the Move/Kinnect/Wii Motion Plus is beneficial to a developer, besides promotional? I'm curious.
That is so myopic, Move works like a mouse does for the PC, when implemented correctly, like in KZ3, it is a fantastic controller. Actually, its the best controller on the market for consoles.
If you think about Bioshock's controls for about 30 seconds, you'd realize that it just wouldn't make sense to integrate Move capability. There's not a whole lot of precision aiming going on; it's just point at target, pull the trigger. It's more strategic than twitchy. The focus is on the strategy of using the right weapons and plasmids for each situation, not popping headshots or throwing grenades. What would you do, wave your arm to electrocute someone? It would add absolutely nothing to the experience.
Yeah, missing the extra cost and time it would require to implement some bullshit waggle option that would add nothing to the game.
God I knew "people" would spin it around and try and make it out to be a dig at the move. I guess Ken Levine's a troll now? Fuck off...
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why Mr. Levine is a badass. Fuck the cash-grab, he's out to make a great game, and you have to respect that.
Fuck gimmicks, I like the way this guy thinks.
Fuck gimmicks, I like the way this guy thinks.
So basically he doesn't want to throw in Move controls unless he feels that they could do them right and people are unhappy about that?
@chibi
Exactly! But no, some people just dont get it. I wouldnt want tacked on kinect functionality either if it was half-assed.
Exactly! But no, some people just dont get it. I wouldnt want tacked on kinect functionality either if it was half-assed.
follow
