At the recent D5 conference in Carlsbad, California (yeah, I hadn’t heard of it either), Bill Gates made some very strange, somewhat confusing statements about the future of the Xbox 360.
Similar to Peter Moore’s comments a few months back, Gates seems to be hinting that the Xbox 360 may jump on the motion-controlled bandwagon and offer an experience to compete with the Nintendo Wii. Says Gates:
... imagine a game machine where you're just going to pick up the bat and swing it or the tennis racket and swing it.
Actually, I can do more than imagine it, Mr. Gates. I have something that does just that sitting in my entertainment center as we speak. I must be so ahead of my time!
To add to the confusion, when questioned about why that cryptic statement pretty much described the currently available Wii, Gates replied:
No, that's not it. You can't pick up your tennis racket and swing it.
Oh, Bill – hit your head too hard diving into that giant money bin again, huh?
While these comments (paired up with Moore's) do not prove anything, their existence alone may signify that some kind of motion-sensing control for the Xbox 360 really is on the way.
It also makes you wonder what else Microsoft has up its mysterious sleeve. How about an innovative handheld device with, count 'em, two screens, one above the other? I think it could work.
[Via CVG]
Contest:
2:26 PM on 06.04.2007
| 
Oh... hang on...
Oh yes, I've played that already too Mr. Gates.
Maybe Bill assumes no one who wants a Wii has seen one on a shelf, and is preying on the pedantic moron who didn't know that video games are from Japan, and the only genres that exist are FPS and MMORPGs.
In which case, then why haven't they seen these?
If MS tried this, it would go the way of the Sixaxis. People already CHOSE their motion-sensing system, and it's not the PS3. It won't be the 360 either.
Loser.
totem ball was proof of concept for motion based gaming using the vision cam. no reason you can't make a motion based vision cam tennis game that would let you use your own raquet.
You become senile when you get too rich.
It's not as simple as that, the 360 & PS3 have been designed with certain games in mind, their focal point is HD graphics of something which already exists, a polished version of last gen. Nothing wrong with that, but you can't simply add a motion sensor peripheral and expect things to click, your console has to be designed from the ground up to exploit motion sensor technology.
There is a reason why the Wii is graphically inferior, why it looks the way it looks etc, Nintendo arrived at this point after years of R&D, they understand motion sensor interaction and they know how to exploit it, what people forget is that it's actually just as important what you leave out rather than what you add. Nintendo stripped back the home console to it's fundamental elements of human interaction.
Sony & Microsoft are not natural innovators, they will always be good at producing a very good version of something that already exists, but when (not if) they jump on the motion sensor bandwagon they will find themselves in unfamiliar territory. I can't stress this enough - human interaction is the most important feature of 21st century consoles, it is not an after thought - if at this stage Sony & Microsoft are of the mindset where they want to tack on motion sensor control, then they are missing the point entirely and playing catch up.
Graphics are absolutely no challenge at all, I can 100% confidently say that the next gen consoles will have better graphics, it's an obvious inevitable progression, which is why Nintendo have decided to focus on a much more challenging and neglected area of videogame design, so when a pocket calculator can pump out HD photorealitic graphics the need to develop human interaction will be even more obvious.
zardoz, I prefer to be lazy and motionless while I play games, so I have to disagree with you there. Motion is fun...when you are in the mood for it. It sounds like you really like it, though.
As for motion controls on the 360, I suspect they'd do something similar to Totem Ball (but done right) where optical recognition allows for motion control without an in-hand peripheral device. Think Minority Report.
Motion control... yeah... Nintendo totally came up with that one.
You can be lazy and motionless while you play games, but you still have to move something for input, motion control is simply a way of making that movement organic, no matter how slight or lazy that movement may be. We are only at the early stages right now, so I guess this current energetic stage is similar to the way people first played videogames in the 80's - over the top and overly enthusiastic - I reckon it will calm down after a year or two.
When I was at college, a fellow student created a game which recognised your movement without the need for a peripheral, he used an old apple mac, a light sensitive screen, and a back projector. There was a never ending stream of Lemmings falling down the screen which the player stands in front of, the back projector projected your sillouette onto that screen which meant that the light sensitive screen acknowledged your sillouette movement in real time, a simple program running on the mac allowed your real time movement to interact with the lemmings, you could catch them, crush them, hit them etc, it was one of the most enjoyable games I've ever played.
Motion sensor interaction is all about human interface design and innovation, it's nothing new and anyone can do it. But doing it right and knowing how best to implement it is a challenge which only companies like Nintendo will excel in, because if the other companies were genuinely interested in human interface design they would have released the wii not Nintendo. I have no problem with Sony or Microsoft, but their attempt at innovation is so unconvincing.
No Nintendo didn't create motion sensor technology, nor did they invent touch screen technology, they are not inventors they are designers.
All technology is available to anyone, so the question is why is it always Nintendo who exploit it first? Because they are a design company, they figure out how best to implement technology for human interface design. Sony and Microsoft provide a different form of entertainment, they are not design companies at all, they are business companies who hire the required people to produce cutting edge hardware.
No one is suggesting Nintendo inventing anything, we are just saying that they always figure out how to incorporate new technology in an interactive way.
I'm trying to find a link I had to this amazing demonstration of next gen multi touch screen technology, it perfectly demonstrates that interface design is all about how to implement technology with the human user in mind. I'll try and find it.
And now this news combined with the Reverend Anthony's chilling Mario Party 8 video review is making me feel kinda funny, like the time that I was climbing that rope in gym class.
Zardos:
"your console has to be designed from the ground up to exploit motion sensor technology. "
FALSE, the Wii "started" as a gamecube. (Actually if you take the Wiimote off it still plays exactly as one.) THE GAMES have to be made with the motion sensor. NOT the console! Also You can play perfectly with the Wiimote on the PC and definetily it was NOT made with that purpose. Also if you expend a few minutes analyzing it, the Wiimote is just a 3d mouse.
"There is a reason why the Wii is graphically inferior, why it looks the way it looks etc, Nintendo arrived at this point after years of R&D"
WHAT? dude they made the console cheap so more casuals could buy it, thats why they used yesteryear technology, Nintendo has admited that publicly in just about every conference they attended in 2006.
--
Yes I know is ridiculous for MS to simply admit they are trying to mimic the Wii, but the thing is they are doing because they CAN (theres no such thing as a patent for an interfase type only for the method) and probably because they have to since people are so hyped in motion sensing being the "next big thing"
Also Nintendo can still focus on casual and family games with the Wii, meanwhile the xbox 360 could cater for the hardcore gamer, Halo 3, Unreal t 3, Oblivion, Star Wars the force unleashed, are games that could benefit a lot with this sort of tech and are just NOT possible in the Wii.
Anyway we are probably doing a big deal out of nothing, Bill Gates was only referring to their crappy Eye Toy like cam tech which was already used in Raving Rabbids with shitty results.
The Wii doesnt have any of that. they use a single processor and the main memory to run all (in case you were wondering why it eats up CPU cycles) the 360 and specially (as painful as it may sound even to me ) the PS3 could do motion sensing much more effectively.
Until the next, next big thing arrives.
Brain control per example.
You're correct. The missing part of this quote is
Gates responded: “No, that’s not it. You can’t pick up your tennis racket. And swing it... You can’t sit there with your friends and do those natural things. That’s a 3D positional device. This is video recognition.”
Full transcript at D5
Wrong, the Wii did not start off as a gamecube, the Wii has been in development far longer than the Gamecube, Nintendo decided to base the Wii on Gamecube architecture based on it's low production costs and ease of development.
Your points against the Wii perfectly illustrate the difference between the thought process of designers and engineers, you mention lots of technical reasons why the Wii is this or that, but your are missing the point.
The Wii was conceived by designers, their prime objective being human interface, if you want to stress why the Wii is technically bankrupt then it's just as valid to apply this logic in reverse, let's say that the 360 & PS3 are not actually designed to interact with most people, they are only designed to work with specialist. elitetist gamers who have a history and culture of playing games, therefore they are inferior technical machines than the Wii because they are not machines which excel in human interface. Same could be said for the DS in relation to the PSP.
I'm not saying you have to like the Wii but what continues to frusrtate me is that people always make the mistake of dragging Nintendo into Sony or Microsofts's world and then judging Nintendo by Sony/Microsoft's logic. People fail to grasp that Nintendo are a design company that happens to develop interactive entertaiment, interactive design is not dictated by technology it's actually vice versa, so the whole technical debate about what the Wii lacks is just so redundant because this is clearly not the point of the Wii, it's not as if Nintendo don't know how to create a powerful machine, they have taken a deliberate side step away from the technology race and gone back into developing machines based on interface deisgn. It is pointless to criticise the Wii for it's technical limitations, with a mchine like the Wii, criticising the software is much more appropriate because this is where Nintendo have shifted the emphasis and yet their own games haven't explored or completely justified their new direction of their interface.
Even with the completed quote, its still false. What Gates is saying is that you can't play a multiplayer game on the Wii. Which the falseness in that statement I can attest too. I'd even be willing to bet that video recognition for that kind of thing would be an even bigger hassle.
Gates was not referring to the 360 at all when talking about these things. In fact that interview was the most broad-generalized interview I've listened to in a looong while. Blah I can't believe somebody made an entire blog post about just one little response to a question about future control systems, they were talking like 10 years ahead of the present.
Yeah, I read the transcript from the interview and see where everyone is coming from. Do I fail? Yes. Does that mean this technology couldn't show up on the 360? Not necessarily. Gates is talking about implementing future technology in gameplay and, besides, his comments were more funny than anything (attaching them to the 360 was my assumption, though).
Good call, everyone. I just punched myself in the face. :) :)
*Zardoz: "The Wii was conceived by designers, their prime objective being human interface"
Then why aren't the games better? I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that the minigames have worn out their welcome.
The problem is if they had done the right thing, and implemented motion sensing as an option to traditional controls, people would have overlooked the feature entirely. There would be no buzz at all. Forcing motion sensing to be the primary control at the expense of traditional gaming was a smart marketing move, but makes the system far less versatile.
Everything looks good until you see something better. The Wii remote could have been done much better -- hopefully so people wouldn't have to buy so many other controllers, too.
seriously. this is a good thing. the logic some of you ninty kids have seems to be "NO! NONONONO! NINTENDO DID IT! COPYCATS! FAKES!" until you're drug away, sweaty and covered in piss. when at the same time, none of you want to acknowledge that this is exactly how motion controls (and to a larger and more important extent, interaction as a whole) will become better and advance: competition.
i read JimSterling's post and couldn't help but think: well, i bought a 360 largely for online play, communication, and content... but would i have a problem if ninty were to man up and the wii were to open up to online stuff? absolutely not.
and i guarangoddamntee that if ninty announced an online infrastructure, a service, that aimed to compete with live none of you nintendo fanboys would screa,"OH! THEY'RE COPYING MICROSOFT! I FEEL CHEATED AND WRONGED!"
you can't have it both ways, boys.
The Wii's remote is emergent tech. It seems like it's not because we've had game controllers with motion sensors before, but it is. Previous controllers used accelerometers to approximate an analog joystick and the functionality currently existing in gamepads at the time. The wii is designed to work on it's own paradigm, rather than emulate an existing controller. It's going to take some time for all the kinks to be worked out and for everyone's remote handling routines to start pushing the limits of the controller. We saw similar (though much less pronounced) difficulties when analog joysticks were announced on the PS1. Some games did very well, some games, not so much. Now that everyone has been working with analog sticks, they all have their own controller handling routines, and analog sticks work pretty well on every console. As more and more third party developers get experience with the remote, it's going to start working better and better.
@Burnt - "Then why aren't the games better? I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that the minigames have worn out their welcome. "
Because the 3rd party devs haven't had enough time with the controller, and the big first party non-ported titles have yet to hit. And no one is forcing you to use motion sensitive controllers. There are two systems tailored to the hardcore non-waggle gamer. Buy one of those, and STFUJPG. It has yet to be seen that the remote vs. controller decision was made "at the expense" of traditional gaming or that it limits the systems versatility at all.
@Azreal - If the Wii "started" as a gamecube, every single game console on the planet started as an Atari 2600.
@Dr. Rockso and the other "Adding motion sensing tech to the 360 crowd" If you saw the interview, the WHOLE interview, it wasn't really a discussion about gaming at all, it was a discussion about Microsoft Surface, and one of the moderators asked about gaming applications. That's when Gates made the argument that technology used in Surface could be used to create games WITHOUT a controller. You grab your tennis racket and play tennis because the cameras in the console or display can see you and the racket and create a virtual avatar within the game to strike the digital ball when you swing the real-life racket.
All of the wii-haters need to recognize that we're still in the launch year. I mean, all the other consoles saw the best games of their existence in the launch year, right? Oh wait, no that's not accurate at all. All the other consoles saw their best games near the END of their life-cycles. Hmm. Maybe we should actually shut the fuck up until we can play big first party titles on the Wii.
I'm also glad that someone noticed it'd technically be Sony they're 'copying', as the EyeToy is an extremely primitive version of what Gates is talking about. Kind of.
Really bad show, Destructoid. :|