Iwata says Nintendo tried and rejected camera-based motion control
By Donald Melanson 
posted June 10th 2009 2:43PM
posted June 10th 2009 2:43PM
It wasn't all that hard to see a bit of a brouhaha erupting now that all three console makers are more or less firmly committed to motion-control technology, but it's still always notable when one of the big three throws a shot across the bow, and Nintendo CEO Satoru Iwata did just that in a recent interview with the Financial Times. According to Iwata, Nintendo actually tried out camera-based motion control technology similar to what both MIcrosoft and Sony have now adopted, but found that it got better results with the accelerometer-based tech that ultimately wound up in the Wii remote. Iwata did also say, however, that "until they say when they're releasing it, how much it costs and what software it comes with, we won't know whether that is the route we should have taken," although he added that he thought "they couldn't choose to release exactly the same thing" that Nintendo did.[Via Joystiq]
Who knows what that vitality monitor will be used for so let's not judge it until they have showed the product in full. Well the motion technology has worked great it just now works better. It's like if you added a new exhaust to a great car. The Car was already great but that exhaust has just made it better. I see no problem with that. 360 has done the same multiple times here's an example there movie download service is great but that Netflix they added is sooo much better. Of course we all thought the same thing after the "new thing" was implemented "Hey this thing should have been on this since day 1".
The key difference between Nintendo's technology and the ones that Sony and Microsoft showed off at E3 is that Nintendo's had to be designed as the main controller for the system, and thus had to be compatible with any kind of game. The ones that Sony and Microsoft have are secondary controllers, and will only support a limited number of low-budget gimmicky games designed for them.
Something like Natal where you're jumping around and doing kicks in the air is way cool for limited applications, but would you really want to play through a Final Fantasy game that way? The Wii Remote has the advantage of being far more versatile for all kinds of games.
Right on the money. Couldn't say it better myself.
@xeydeax
33 comments in this thread and 7 of them are yours.
You earned nintendo's check today.
"...would you really want to play through a Final Fantasy game that way?"
I wouldn't want to play a Final Fantasy game at all. Also, you don't have to jump around. Natal is able to recognize and detect individual limb. You're not required to "jump around" unless the game requires it. I seriously doubt any (decent) game would prevent you from changing the control setup.
I think there's also the fact that the Wii couldn't have implemented these since it just doesn't have the processing power to deal with it. I mean you need enough processing power to take the inputs from the cameras and correctly guess what's going on, without taking forever to do it. It definitely wouldn't be feasible in the Wii.
They have probably tried a million different motion control concepts and will continue to explore every new one. It is just a matter of what makes the most sense for gaming and widespread appeal (has to be cheap). The Motion+ seems to be a wise decision for now. I wouldn't be surprised if they come out with a Natal-type device in the future.
I don't think Microsoft considers their Natal controller "too late" because they're on record as considering Natal "the endgame". That is to say that they have pointed the way to the future, even if it doesn't end up having much of an impact on sales of this generation of consoles. Certainly the next XBox console version will ship with Natal included, and I predict the technology will even make it to PCs once it gets miniaturized enough. Microsoft is looking at making mainstream technologies like voice recognition, face recognition, gesture recognition, etc., which have been around for a long time but have never really caught on. Voice recognition *can* be more efficient than mouse/keyboard for certain common task and would appeal to the average consumer if done right. Face recognition could be used to automatically log you into a computer. Gestures in general would only be useful for a 10-ft. interface (e.g. XBox or Media Center PC), but who knows?
I agree. Natal is def not too late but it's nothing new either. I can see a limited applications this will do great in but in a video game very little. I think in 1 genre it can revive is Graphic Adventure games. Imagine a Myst or Full Throttle type game where you have to move around and explore things. Maybe you can be a Jedi Master and wave your hand and do a Jedi Mind Trick on a specific character. That would be interesting for me to see. I def wouldn't want to play a FPS or a sport's game with this. PC's already of something similar to motion detection but not for gaming yet.
@xeydeax: In FPS's Natal would probably be used as a secondary set of controls. So you can use the controller for most movements/shooting and use gestures/speech for more advanced features(such as giving orders in a squad-based game or throwing a grenade in Halo)
@mark: I would agree with you if you had a controller other than the current x-box 360 but why do gestures when you have a button closer at hand. If you had let's say a Wii Controller in one hand and nothing on your right that would work but think about it your need 2 analog sticks to control a character where would you have a free hand when your in a fire fight. You can't do it. Same with grenade throwing you still need to aim at where you want to threw it why would you take your hand off the controller when the throw grenade button is right there and faster to use and let's not get into Multilayer with this. You see what I mean?
lol i just picturing the "throwing a grenade" movement... and it made me think of the SNL Uncle Jemina sketch... "whatchu swatting at?!"
Jemima*
@jon
I don't know what's worse my many post's or you actually taking the time to count them. LOL!
Your right a little excessive but I'm bored at work especially when my vacation starts today.
Also to add the number one console is def not the PS2 it's the Gameboy. Just goes to prove that it's not about graphics it's about gameplay.
Probably at the time Nintendo was developing the Wii, the hardware is not there yet to support a truly seamless motion capture experience. I mean come on, regardless of how cool you think Sony's and Microsoft's natal are, they're still in prototype and NOT shipping. Meanwhile, Nintendo is ready to ship the Wii motion plus. By the time MS and Sony ready to ship their projects to retail, maybe Nintendo will do the same/something else.
Wii Mote is a standard controller, while both Natal and PS3 Motion Plus are secondary controllers. If you want to play RPG, use Natal for example, you can still use the regular controller but also adding your own motion and facial recognition to map out your face in 3D which PS3 camera cannot do. For first person shooter, you can now use your body to take cover or melee attack such as using your leg to kick or use your head to throw head punches while holding your xbox 360 controller. You cannot really do that with Wii nor Motion Plus
Natal uses infrared camera to map out images in 3D at 100 images/sec. Neither the Playstation Eye nor Nintendo's previous attempts could do it. What Nintendo tried to do before was probably something similar with Eye Toy of course you can't have that as the primary controller. Web Cam is limited to work only in good lighting condition but Natal uses infrared which works in almost any lighting conditions. So Motion Plus may be just like wiimote with better software while Natal is a completely different approach.
Of course if I want to sit down on the couch and do simple hand gesture under a pillow such as shaking the controller M$ does not have that solution, you must need to have a line of site between you and sensor.
When the Wii has been said to be maxed out doing 4 player sidescrolling Mario Bros. by the Wii's creator, I just don't think it could process the camera information.
@Mark Leach You don't need the Wii to do the processing for the camera the actual camera device can have a separate processor to do all that. That's how computers work different processors that do different instructions so the main processor can just do core instructions. PC's have 2 main processors these day's the CPU and GPU. Same idea would go into this if Nintendo wanted to or Sony or PC.
Your $0.65 is in the mail.
MIcrosoft already said that the camera has it's own processor so not even the Mighty xbox360 could pull that off without RROD.
what happened to the good ole days when you could play a video game from your couch? some people don't need to exercise while playing a video game.
Totally disagree.
RPG Turn based yes. FPS no you need both hands on the controller no matter what you think because of you need to point to your target with both analog sticks there is no point to free up your hand to do gestures lets say your playing deathmatch online your using Natal and a Controller and the other guy your against is just Controller. You will lose that battle because of the time it will take you to move your hand to lets say throw a grenade versus the opposing player already having the button near his finger. Hands down you will not be able to use Natal in FPS and be as fast as the computer (unless it's dumbed down) and especially online.
Natal does not map out images in 3D @ 100 images/sec. It maps out 30 FPS which is a huge difference thus why you see a lag in Natal. Like you said Neither Eye Toy nor Nintendo could do so can't Microsoft as of yet. These camera's they are using are nothing new this technology is nothing new. Remember what everyone has said already at the time the other companies where trying it, at there time the technology wasn't there yet. Believe me when I say this any of the big three can do Natal this is nothing new all you need is the software and specific hardware on the same device to do it on, not the hardware it's being used for.
Yes you do have to be in the line of sight to do things with Natal just like the Sensor Bar. What do you think Natal is? All it is, is a sensor bar with a camera and infrared. The wii sensor bar uses Infrared like Natal. If you put a something in front of you on the Sensor Bar between you and your Wii Remote it won't work same thing with Natal if you have something standing in front of you only the webcam can pick you up but you need both the Camera and Infared for Natal to work correct otherwise it can't be used properly.
You're thinking too here and now, I believe. You're applying Natal to a game that you can play right now using a controller that does everything that you can do. What would happen if you could do more? A lot more. A modern controller already has 2 analog sticks and 16 buttons (and that's if you only count the dpad as 4). You can't really add much more to that. One could argue that the modern controller is "maxed out". I played Madden (circa 2005) and was always bummed that I only had five audibles that I could call. Maybe they've improved on this by now but my point is, there wouldn't be any limits anymore. Theoretically, you could have an audible for every play in your playbook if you wanted to take the time to memorize them all. Same thing goes with the hand signals to your squad if they were being controlled by AI (and even if they weren't). There is an almost infinite number gestures you could come up with. The right analog could easily be replaced with just turning your head a little or pointing a gun at the tv. If you're playing a RPG, instead of picking through long lists of spells or having a limited number readied, you could actually simulate the motions (and possibly even the verbal components) to cast a spell. If you need to run a mile through the woods, just tell your avatar that you want to start walking ro running. Don't think about the limitations of current games and try to remap controls to Natal. Think about how Natal could possibly break all of the current limitations to the point where a controller just couldn't possibly give you enough options.
Secondly, you're downplaying the software side of Natal which is the real meat and potatoes. Yeah, the hardware isn't any kind of new state of the art equipment but that's good. It needs to be that way to make it affordable. The software is probably well beyond the capacity of both Nintendo and Sony. Microsoft is probably the only one with the resources to even attempt to pull this off. It's not as simple as you make it out to be. If it were, they would all have a Natal-like system out right now.
I read all these potential uses for Natal, and I try to imagine myself doing any of these for more than 5 minutes in a game. It's hard for me to wrap my head around needing to gesture/move/kick regularly, or even semi-regularly, in a typical 10+hours of play to finish game, be it a FPS, RPG, or whatever. As I see it, motion control in most forms will remain gimmicky because it will require non-optimal gaming circumstances, i.e. standing, flailing, diving behind the sofa instead of sitting/lying, semi comatose, controller in hand, barely moving for hours on end.
All this tech will have useful and fun applications, I'm sure, but to claim that any are the future of their respective platforms seems quite the stretch.
Power Glove was the best, everything since is just a cheap knockoff.
Of course. The Wii was in R&D from probably 2001 to 2005. They weren't going to pull off that kind of stuff then especially considering how software intensive accurately detecting and capturing the movements of your body has got to be. Considering that Nintendo doesn't even seem to have online gaming up yet, I doubt that they would've even bothered trying something like Natal. Microsoft, however, has the resources and software engineers to give it a good shot. Sony is probably inbetween the two, hense the solution that seems to fall in between as well.
Got to hand it to Nintendo for innovation in the gaming industry, though. Now it's time for everyone else to copy and improve upon their ideas. Now if only they could get someone to make games for their system...
Well all have to agree on 1 thing. Nintendo has given all the other companies great ideas and they still continue to try to raise the bar no matter if you love Nintendo or Hate it alot of the technologies you see now and what you will see in the future is because of Nintendo's great (and sometimes not so great) accomplishments. Do you thing we would be talking about this if Nintendo didn't go the Motion Control route? I don't think so.
That's a good point--but do you think Nintendo will be going HD with their next console? Because, as of now, their graphics capabilities aren't even where the last generation XBox was. And, if they do go HD, do you think they would have done so if Microsoft and Sony hadn't come up with their own motion control solutions?
Actually this article proves Wii took inspiration from the eyetoy, meaning they got the idea from Sony
@ Extinction: No, you are wrong. Let's look at time frames and consider R&D. Eye toy comes out near the end of life of PS2 generation. Wii comes out with wiimote at the beginning of this generation. Given that companies begin working on their next console as soon as one is released, yes they are working on the ps4, xbox 720 and wii 2 and have been for 2-3 years, that would not leave enough time for Nintendo to get inspiration from eyetoy for motion control. Why would they take something that was as unpopular as the eyetoy and make it their sole controller? If they copied it that would mean they had time to see how it faired in the gaming market, and the eyetoy did not do well enough to be granted sole controller of a console. Nintendo was working on it long before eye toy came out, and it is a hell of a lot different form of control.
cameras of all type suck without proper lighting. This is why there are reports Natal has struggled to pick up movements when darker skinned individuals use it. Photogs can give a more technical explanation, but lighting will be important.
Couple of things. From what i have seen natal described as the 3d depth sensor is just an IR sensor. Which thats whats on every wii mote.
Also for all you people saying that the wii doesnt have the power for natal .Microsoft stated that Natal has its own processor to do all the calculations.
I trust nintendo. If you read the iawata asks about how they tested the wii motion plus and all the things they looked into(even looked into the case of the wii motion plus and how water would get through it and things like that) you would see nintendo is very thourough and looks at everything.
Remember last year before microsoft bought up the company the heads of nintendo were looking at the tech too .
If microsoft really felt they had a hit on their hands they wouldnt havevbashed nintendo in their presentation . They would have let it stand on its own merrits.
So far all the people who have played tiger woods with the wii motion plus have said its very good control wise .
I thin kthe wii mote with motion plus is the perfect balance between getting active but not too active. It allows people like seniors who cant move too much to play without complicated buttons but not have to move too much.
Natal, Sony motion controllers
Pros
1. use camera base, therefore no need to worry about sensitivity of your sensor. What you move, they capture it.
2. built specifically to capture motion.. so could be more effective than the Wiimote.
Cons
1. camera base is subjected to light/heat ..sensitivity. I means it can perform differently at various light condition.
2. 3D image capturing with natal technology is prone to many factors. Software to capture 3D motion of human won't be easy at all for MS. natal is likely more successful with 2D games IMO. Distance is also problem wit Natal.
3. Sony is better with their controller that captures balls movements but what if I accidently block the balls while i'm playing.
Wii
Pros
1. Using accelerometer/gyro.. and the like makes it robust to other visual influences. So it is more robust in a way.
2. Developers are supporting the Wii.
Cons:
1. Accelerometer and the like are subjected to calibration. Different people will have different motion so in order for it to perform it has to be calibrated individually or people have to learn how it works with predefined calibrated values.
2. Small movement may not be picked up by the sensor. The Wii M+ is to amplify that as my understanding. however amplifying signal generally gives you noise. Some people have already disappointed by the M+. Some like it so much though.
my conclusion;
Wii is good for now. Price/availibiility/robustness.. etc etc..
Future is unclear but I would think Sony is coming string on the motion controlling performance. light motion capturing with the accelerometer will make the motion controlled games a lot more real than ever.
Haven't read that depth is a problem. Natal has a depth sensor.
"1. camera base is subjected to light/heat ..sensitivity. I means it can perform differently at various light condition.
2. 3D image capturing with natal technology is prone to many factors. Software to capture 3D motion of human won't be easy at all for MS. natal is likely more successful with 2D games IMO. Distance is also problem wit Natal."
1: Natal has an IR camera and a video camera so unless you're playing in a crazy hot room in pitch blackness I doubt you'll have much of a problem.
2: Seemed to work from all the demos(including the live ones). Since it has an IR depth sensor I doubt depth would be too much of a problem.
@Mark: Sony's Eye Toy also seemed to work in demos. In practice it didn't work well at all unless you had just the right background for it, something which I, for one, never seemed to be able to achieve. I guess if I were to have hung up a solid colored sheet behind me it might have worked. Note the entirely white room in the Natal demo engadget got. I tend to doubt that is coincidence.
The IR sensor that Natal uses shoots out modulated IR signal to calculate the distance between the target area similar to cop's ladar gun shoots out IR lasers to one vehicle at a time. But Natal is able to scan the entire area with 30 frames / seconds, thus able to capture the entire 3D body including your face.
The Wii mote is just a camera to detect the motion of the two IR dots. It does not have a sensor to calculate the distance between the IR bar and the controller's camera. It does not provide any distance information hence it cannot be used as proximity sensor nor 3D mapping device.
They rejected it because the Wii can't handle that level of input manipulation. It requires quite a bit of processing power.
The WiiMote requires little more than the standard controller (gestures are the biggest problem). The body control can vary from a little more than that to a lot more.
This either confirms that Nintendo is lying or that Nintendo made up their minds about the Wii's tech specs long before they showed it to anyone. (basically, "you didn't buy our gamecube... so lets sell it to you again")
then why did the PS2 managed with EYE toy?
Actually, the PS2 didn't manage to do the EyeToy. I certainly could never get it to work even remotely well. It couldn't tell the difference between me and a bookshelf.
Note the entirely white room in the video of the special demo Engadget got of Natal. Does Natal have the same problem?
my main problem with sony is summed up with playsation home.
how long did it take to get home up and running?
sony is doing motion controllers?
ya, maybe 4 years from now.
it was nothing more than a tech demo for vapourware.
Mmmm... I see. I guess you never picked up a PS3 controller since it came out in 2006. That's a motion controller in case you wonder (and half of the new motion control's setup). Also, there is another Sony controller called the Eyetoy/PSEye that doesn't even require a physical controller. That sounds just like Microsoft's Natal, except that it came out back in 2002.
I'd say differently: Natal "was nothing more than a tech demo for vaporware", specially the kid demo (which we now know was plenty of smoke and mirrors). Sony's controller is the marriage of both of their current control technologies and just requires a finished plastic casing and a firmware upgrade to work.
The Eye Toy was a real useful product...
"To continue reading this article, please register – it’s quick, free and without obligation..."
---------
It's 2009 and we still get websites thinking they are important.
f@ck 360&3ps
if only wii was a half-assed xbox 360?
A correction to the article: Sony "didn't just adopt" camera- based motion control technology. It has had it with the Eyetoy since 2002 (before there was even mention of Nintendo's Revolution console). The only newcomer to motion control technology is Microsoft. Sony's solution is an expansion of the EyeToy's capabilities combined with those from a Sixaxis, another motion control solution Sony has had for a while and that comes standard with every PS3.