That should be the title of a text-based game. It'll use a camera to track the movements of your eyes to make sure you don't stop reading, or the game over screen pops up.

Please, oh please do not give game makers such an idea on how to utilize those camera interfaces. It sounds like a winning formula to creating migraines.

But it'll teach stupid kids to put down their texting for more than 5 seconds to do something else, or face the consequences. XP

Have we not learned the lesson of how abusive new interfaces can be from the Wii?

The Kinect says no.

Considering that I currently (as of this writing) have a PS3 controller with it's dual thumbsticks resting on my chest...

...means I prefere the traditional interface that I grew up with since the Atari 2600/Commodore 64 days.

I think motion controls are neat so long as they're subtle. Things like a quick shake of the remote for example can be a nice way to make the game feel slightly more engaging while at the same time effectively giving the controller an additional button to use. But when a game is all motion controls, and usually shoddy ones at that, then it can be a headache to play.

Exactly. Having motion control can add to the game...when done right.

One example of things done wrong that I've heard about is from Zelda. It had this game that crossed over between the GameCube and the Wii. I opted for GC very easily after hearing what they did to the Wii version. (Think it was named Twilight Princess.) The act of swinging the sword. GC: Press button. Wii: Raise remote and physically swipe downwards. You swing a lot of swordplay in Zelda. I most certainly didn't want to be physically building up my arm muscles by tiring myself out to play a game. I've heard other games also do some whacky, tiring stuff with that interface. Simply put, they probably didn't know what to do with the interface. Probably were just told to use it, simply because it was the system's gimick that set it apart. Now, that free floating wheel interface for Mario Kart was fantastic. Amazing how well it worked, too. Or, Link's Crossbow training is another shining example. I'll even do some Wii Bowling. But, I'm not interested in swinging the controller about to do a thousand repeats of the same action.

In fact, I used to have an RPG for the PS3 that did that. It actively used every button on the controller, plus also had a function for shaking the controller real quick.

Yea...the SixAxis Controller is kind of an under rated function. I know this one artistic game simply called Flower REALLY made great use of it. And, the interface was fantastic and so simple. I also remember this dragon flight game that sort of was OK with it. But, for the greater part, most games use the standard thumbsticks and press of buttons approach. Some use the pressure sensitivity, like driving games. And, I think that's great.

Deal is, I've heard (and agree with) that most game makers just don't know how to program for these newer kinds of interface options. It's golden when it works right. And, ruins the whole thing when done wrong.

Hence why almost all of the great games on the Wii were first-party. Having designed and come up with the functions themselves, they already knew what they were doing before the system ever released. Third-party companies had to figure it out as they went, which severely hurt the system in the long run because it meant the system had almost no solid third-party games. They all felt like they were made by children, because in essence the developers were virgins with the new technology.

The interface bit was just one of the issues. They also went with an underpowered system, which scared off many developers from even trying to port their main titles. Somewhere along the line, the Wii became a dumping ground for mini game/party game/shovelware titles. Maybe the WiiU can redeam in the long run. But, it still seems to be that first party development that's pulling the weight. Granted, I did play that Batman game for WiiU and that found some real use for the pad, including it's independant speaker.

The thing though is that Nintendo owns pretty much 90% of the world's top-selling franchises, so they can live on first party alone if need be. I once saw a top 20 list of the highest selling franchises of all time in a magazine a few years back. I think about four out of the top five were Nintendo owned, and pretty much every Nintendo franchise that's had more than just two or three games appeared somewhere on the whole list.

As for the motion controls I things like Zelda, my main problem is that they lack precision. Had the same problem when I tried both Twilight Princess, and Okami, on that system. I'd flick the remote to attack, and then the character would attack twice because the motion needed was so subtle and quick that half the time the character would also attack on the remote's return to its initial position, even if just flicking my wrist to do it.

And yet, the only game I tend to see get played for the Big N consoles at cons is Smash Bros.

But, quite honestly, I do believe that Nintendo could release a retro NES set as of tomorrow that came with all the big hits and still make a fortune off of it...even after striking deals with all the third party makers for all that code.

I tend to wonder if precision is more a fault in the controller or the software or just the programming.

Since I've never studied any information on how these controllers work, I'm not too certain how they register where they are in relationship to the TV. I do know the 'sensor bar' is nothing more then two UV LED's. The remote has this window in front that can look for those two spots to judge where the remote's being aimed and how close it is to the TV. But, like with the wheel attachment, it can't always see those LED's. So, it uses something else, just like the SixAxis does. I'm guessing some kind of internal gyro. But, that's only a guess. As, to me, it's a wonder either unique interface works as well as they seem to.

The sensor bar really only seems to be relevant for games that use a pointer, so where you're pointing at the screen can register. Which in my opinion feels like a bit much considering light guns have existed for so long, and they never needed anything like that.

Light guns have used a variety of tricks to operate with. Like the NES version. That utilized a strobe effect that had the eye look for a White vs. Black effect. If the eye saw white, it registered a 1 over a 0, meaning hit over miss. If there were more then one object on the screen at once, it also had to 'time' which strobe went to which object. I am not so sure if the Sega Master System's gun worked in the same way or not. More recent guns, like the PSx had, took a sampling of the game's environment by tapping into a secondary feed. However, it's said that these past techniques can't work with today's LCD screens. (My suspicion is that today's televisions desync the incoming signal, creating a tiny amount of lag in what you see and hear. Best way to see this is to walk into a store with a lot of demo TV's pushing out the same feed. Different models will delay, causing this traveling echo effect. It's something that tube TV's were too dumb to experience.) Arcades had the option to use a mirror that bounced the monitor's image up to the player, while the gun produced an invisible lazer beam that could be read behind the mirror, making for a very accurate registry of where the gun was being aimed at.

Today's modern consoles use something similar to the Wii remote for their guns. But, how that works? I'm not all that certain.

Well if there's any sort of lag at all, then I'd say the LCD tvs are the dumb ones, not the tube tvs. More like tube tvs were too awesome for the problem. XP

Well, I actually meant 'dumb' in a good way. Means they didn't have all this computerized stuff in them to translate the signal. The old picture tubes used three guns that shot out beams to a coating on the picture side of the tube. Each gun interacted with the substance, (I want to call it phosphorous. But, it's been so many years since I had TV Tech as a course that I'm forgetting all about that stuff.) which produced the image in a blaze of colored dots. It fed the signal through without analyzing the data of it all. (Oddly enough, there were a few scan lines in the RF signal set aside for future uses. It's just that at that time, they barely had any idea WHAT could go there. After all, computer was a sci-fi techie word. But, they were thinking about 0's and 1's in the feed, way back in the 1900's.)

Flash forward to our modern world. We got high definition. (Again, way back in the day, they had the fore sight to see television's evolution in the 21'st century. Again...they just didn't quite know what it would be.) Something about that extra quality requires processing. Processing that can store data in a buffer. Now, this is the curious bit. That lag time that you can see in my forementioned demo wall can come from two things...that buffer size or the speed of the deciphering. I've heard of both being possible causes. And, it's the price to pay from switching from analog to digital. Old fashion analog fed what it had to share. If the signal was great, the picture was great. A degraded signal meant the leakage of 'snow'. Now, these computerized, digital devices want their 0's and 1's to be perfect. Any tiny bit of signal loss makes them go crazy and/or just reject the data. Analog TV's were dumb and didn't care about what the signal was like. Just like an LP player that vibrated the needle, which vibrated the speaker. Where as a "smarter", digital medium gets too picky. Hince, it has to translate and 'think' (in a manner of speaking) about what the incoming data should be doing.

So, when the modern LCD TV is thinking about making the whole screen flash in black and white, it's already too late for what the console is expecting to see at 1/10'th of a second, ago.

A long time ago, back in my days of TV Tech, the department had just gotten a new set of VCR's that were doing this stuff. And, it was so weird to see the old picture tube literally running a whole second ahead of that new age machine with it's buffering time to produce the image in. Wasn't even HD. So, why it had to think???

I've also noticed lag on HD tvs with some ordinary games as well, not just things involving light guns. When playing things like Phantasy Star Universe, and Brawl, as a couple examples that come to mind. When playing them on some HD tvs, there would be a slight time delay from when the button on the controller was pressed, and when the action would actually happen.

Yea...there's this little HD TV/DVD combo that I quite literally picked up from a parking lot. (The things people toss. A donation to one of those 'clothes & shoes ONLY' drop bins. I've seen people drop off whole sofa & side table sets at those things. These 'direct to Africa' outfits don't want that stuff. Nor do the lot owners.) It has this half-second (or so) delay between the console and the actual picture. Makes playing any action games near impossible.

Sure got lucky with that Vizio. Haven't noticed any game issues. So, I'm guessing it doesn't have much of a buffer in it.

Great job Ivan! it looks marvelous

Jokes on Kree!
Clara is just playing along, slowly savoring this lovely moment until she takes kree on a one way wonder water trip to her stomach.

Milk baths are always nice :3 Have a nice trip Kree! At least it's nice and glowy inside all cozy <3 Awesome work as always!

And to think you could think this up and get involved in being in that bowl right there.

Happy April first to you too. Keep your vigilance up!

love her sleeping hat and the potato lamp ^^

For some reason, I don't think Clara would have objections to just eating Kree...

But Kree has to keep a reputation, ya know?

thats one hell of a potato ... it could solve the energy problem once and for all O_O

Yep. Nothing strange going on here at all

Is that bulb plugged into a muffin?

...oh god damn it, that's not fair. Now you've made me even hungrier for a certain crafty mousie. X3
I love the presentation of this piece, by the way. And, as always, you've done a wonderful job of drawing it.

Oh Kree, you're going to give us hopping rodents such an undeserved reputation at this rate! ... yes... undeserved... >_>

She's bound to noticed when the cereal piece is larger. And furry. And probably moaning.

Depends on how into the book she is.

Funny and sweet :D Kree is such a cutie, and I must say Clara looks amazing here as well, still sexy yet somehow cuter than usual (even without that silly adorbs sleeping hat :D) :3

haha i lol at the potato clock

What clock? Where do you see a clock?

lol i meant light

why is there a note in the book ? did elea and clara made a bet?

Probably.

LED lightbulbs are power efficent, indeed.

Lol that is an amazing light

mm that lean green body