State of the Motion Controllers Address

Engadget put together a very nice summary to all 3 console makers ideas regarding motion controllers so I'm simply linking to that in the title.  Now, here's my take on the potential for actual implementation.

The wii is the easiest.  The only controller they have is a motion controller.  Adding additional information to make it more accurate can only help developers program for it, and if they choose to they can ignore it, but they'll still use some form of motion control.  The other big point is that it gets the job done and gives people a tangible enough feel for what they are doing that they feel satisfied with the result.

The Playstation camera approach is novel, but as the tech demo showed, while you can achieve a similar 1:1 movement that other motion control approaches have, it's still missing elements.  Nowhere in the demo did the character move.  The person shot arrows, threw ninja stars, and fought with a sword and shield, but they didn't move.  This is clearly a problem because they can't easily tack on a thumbstick to the controllers like the wii's nunchuck to give that free movement, when it's also supposed to be your shield arm (or they could, but it would feel odd.  I think the Playstation solution serves only as a tech demo that could sell with a minigame collection just as the original eyetoy did, but it can't and won't get widespread appeal, especially considering the number of controllers one would theoretically have to buy in order to get a group of people playing.

And then there was the Xbox solution of a 3D camera with no controllers.  Playstation was right in my opinion when they said sometimes you just need buttons.  That's the fatal flaw in regards to project Natal gaining widespread adoption on the level of the wiimote for playing games.  Sure, some minigames might be created like the breakout game they demonstrated, but the most practical applications will be those like EA is already pondering, which have a workout focus.  I think the reason Peter Molyneux demoed a boy that could react and respond to you was that he realized that this was the most elegant and useful implementation of the technology.  It shouldn't be an extension of the controller, it should be an extension of the experience.  If Microsoft handed out simple instructions for even the most straightforward thing, headtracking where every character would tilt or turn their head towards the direction of the person playing, even that little element could make a game more immersive.  Letting you actually speak to characters in role playing games would also add to this.  These are things that could be implemented without a lot of effort on the 3rd party programmers, but might lead to gamers picking it up, just so they can experience it.  Maybe I'm just the one lacking imagination for this technology.  I wouldn't mind an elebits style tech demo just for fun, but in the end I just want the game to be a little more aware of the player.