Tag: Mobile controller

Chrome: Super Sync Sports

Google has recently released their latest Chrome Experiment called “Super Sync Sports” which allows players to convert their mobile phones and tablets into a remote control for their desktop browser.

To give it a spin visit www.chrome.com/supersyncsports/, choose a game i.e. running, swimming or cycling and then follow the instructions to sync your mobile phone. Once the sync is complete you can then play your way to victory, while the game plays out on your desktop.

What “super sync” really means in practice

The core mechanic is simple. Your desktop browser becomes the shared “big screen” for the race, while each phone or tablet becomes a personal input surface. Instead of mirroring the desktop, the mobile device acts like a controller and streams gestures to the browser in real time.

This is a classic second-screen pattern. A shared display for feedback, plus personal devices for control. It is a small idea with a lot of leverage when the onboarding is frictionless.

In digital marketing and product teams, multi-device web interactions are a repeatable way to turn passive screens into participatory experiences.

Why it lands (even when it is “just a game”)

It also makes a quiet point about distribution. The browser is the platform, so the “controller” is something people already have in-hand. That matters if you are designing for living rooms, events, retail floors, or any moment where downloads and logins kill momentum.

Extractable takeaway: When you want participation, put the rich visual feedback on a shared screen and keep input on personal devices. This lowers setup friction, supports groups naturally, and makes interaction feel immediate without specialized hardware.

The tech stack is the message

What will be interesting to see is how this type of interaction and technology is finally leveraged. The experience is described as being built on HTML5-era capabilities such as WebSockets for live synchronization, plus Canvas and CSS3 for rendering and motion. For brands, the value here is the interaction model, not the sports theme. The real lesson is not the specific APIs. It is the end-to-end pattern of low-latency input, shared feedback, and lightweight pairing.

The real question is whether you are building a one-off demo or a repeatable interaction model that people can join with the device already in their hand.

What to steal for brand experiences

  • Pairing flow: Use a short, forgiving pairing step (code on the big screen, quick join on the phone) and get to interaction fast.
  • Shared spectacle, private control: Keep the crowd watching one shared output, while each participant has a private “control lane” on their device.
  • Competition as UI: A leaderboard (even a lightweight one) can turn a demo into a repeatable loop.
  • Design for latency: Prefer simple, discrete gestures that still “feel” athletic even with imperfect connectivity.
  • Make it modular: The same controller concept can drive product configurators, quizzes, sampling stations, or event installations.

A few fast answers before you act

What is Super Sync Sports?

It is a Chrome Experiment that lets you run a sports game on a desktop browser while using a phone or tablet as the controller.

Why use a phone as the controller instead of the desktop keyboard?

It reduces the learning curve, supports multiplayer easily, and makes the interaction feel more physical. Touch gestures can map naturally to “run”, “swim”, and “cycle” without extra hardware.

What makes this pattern useful beyond games?

The same multi-device approach can turn any shared screen into a participatory surface. Think demos, audience voting, retail activations, guided experiences, or interactive storytelling where people control outcomes from their own device.

Which technologies are doing the heavy lifting?

The experience is described as using WebSockets for real-time synchronization, and Canvas and CSS3 for visuals and animation, all running in the browser.

What is the biggest risk if a brand tries this pattern?

Onboarding and latency. If pairing takes too long or input feels delayed, the magic disappears. The best executions keep the join flow short and the interaction vocabulary simple.

Parrot AR.Drone: The Flying Banner

The Parrot AR.Drone is a quadrotor you can control with an iPhone or iPad. Instead of explaining that in copy, Beacon Communications Tokyo built an interactive web banner that lets people experience the idea.

The banner displays a QR code. Scan it and your phone becomes the controller for a virtual AR.Drone that appears inside the banner. You pilot it around the screen using your smartphone, effectively turning the ad into a small playable product demo.

Why this banner stands out

Most banners talk about what a product can do. This one makes the product behaviour the message. If the AR.Drone is “controlled by your phone,” the ad is controlled by your phone. That direct mapping makes the idea instantly believable. For interface-led products, this is the right pattern: let people try the interface, not read about it.

Extractable takeaway: If your product is an interface, let the audience use that interface inside the ad unit, even in a simplified form.

The mechanic: QR to second screen control

The QR code is not decoration. It is the bridge that turns a passive placement into a two-device experience. Here, “second-screen control” means the desktop shows the scene while the phone acts as the controller. The banner stays on the desktop screen. Control moves to the phone. That split makes the interaction feel closer to the real product, and it also creates a small sense of “this is special” because the ad is no longer self-contained.

In consumer electronics launches, the most persuasive interactive advertising is a playable demo that mirrors the product experience in seconds.

The real question is whether the viewer can feel the core control loop before they decide to care.

How it creates attention without shouting

As described in industry coverage, users could fly the drone around the page and even “blast” parts of the site to reveal the full-screen message. That gives the interaction a purpose and a payoff. It is not just movement. It is progression.

Beacon also reported unusually strong click-through performance compared to typical expectations for the placement. In this case, that makes sense. People do not click because they were interrupted. They click because they were already playing.

Second-screen demo moves to copy

  • Replicate the product, do not describe it. A short, real interaction beats a long explanation.
  • Use one clear bridge between devices. QR works here because it is immediate and simple.
  • Design an obvious payoff. A reveal, a score, a result. Give the interaction a reason.
  • Keep the controls teachable. If people cannot learn it in seconds, the banner loses them.
  • Make it readable for spectators. Movement on the main screen helps others understand what is happening fast.

A few fast answers before you act

What is “The Flying Banner” for Parrot AR.Drone?

It is an interactive web banner where scanning a QR code turns your smartphone into a controller for a virtual AR.Drone that you can pilot inside the banner.

Why is this a stronger demo than a normal video ad?

Because it lets people feel the core promise. Phone-controlled flight, through direct interaction, not description.

What role does the QR code play in the experience?

It is the handoff mechanism from desktop to phone. The desktop shows the “world.” The phone becomes the controller, matching how the real product is used.

What is the biggest risk with multi-device banner ideas?

Drop-off. If the connection step is slow, confusing, or unreliable, most users abandon before they experience the payoff.

How would you modernize this mechanic today?

Keep the principle of second-screen control, but reduce friction. Use a fast connect flow and ensure the experience is still satisfying even if someone chooses not to connect a phone.

NuFormer: Interactive 3D video mapping test

NuFormer, after executing 3D video mapping projections onto objects and buildings worldwide, adds interactivity to the mix in this test.

Here the spectators become the controller and interact with the building in real time using gesture-based tracking (Kinect). People influence the projected content using an iPad, iPhone, or a web-based application available on both mobile and desktop. For this test, Facebook interactivity is used, but the idea is that other social media signals can also be incorporated.

From mapped surface to live interface

Projection mapping usually works like a film played on architecture. This flips it into a live system. The building is still the canvas, but the audience becomes an input layer. Gesture tracking drives the scene changes, and second-screen control, meaning a phone or browser used as a remote, extends participation beyond the people standing closest to the sensor.

Extractable takeaway: Interactive mapping is most compelling when the control model, the set of simple inputs people can learn instantly (wave, move, tap), is legible at a glance and the projection responds quickly enough that people trust the cause-and-effect.

In large-scale public brand experiences, projection mapping becomes more than spectacle when it gives the crowd meaningful viewer control instead of a one-way show.

Why the “crowd as controller” move matters

Interactivity changes what people remember. A passive crowd remembers visuals. An active crowd remembers ownership. The moment someone realises their movement, phone, or social input changes the facade, the projection stops being “content” and becomes “play.”

The real question is whether your interaction model makes people feel in control within seconds, or confused for minutes.

Because the facade responds immediately to a person’s input, the crowd shifts from watching to experimenting, which keeps people around long enough to teach each other and try again.

That also changes the social dynamics around the installation. People look for rules, teach each other controls, and stick around to try again. The result is longer dwell time and more organic filming, because participation is the story.

What brands can do with this, beyond a tech demo

As described in coverage and in NuFormer’s own positioning, branded content, logos, or product placement can be incorporated into interactive projection applications. The strategic upside is that you can design a brand moment that is co-created by the crowd, rather than merely watched.

When social signals are part of the input (Facebook in this case), the experience can also create a bridge between the physical venue and online participation. That hybrid loop is where campaigns can scale.

Patterns for your next mapping brief

  • Pick one primary control. Gesture, phone, or web. Then add a secondary layer only if it increases participation rather than confusion.
  • Make feedback immediate. The projection must respond fast or people assume it is fake or broken.
  • Design for “spectator comprehension.” Bystanders should understand what changed and why, from a distance.
  • Use social inputs carefully. Keep the mapping between input and output obvious so it feels fair, not random.
  • Plan for crowd flow. Interactive mapping is choreography. Sensors, sightlines, and safe space matter as much as visuals.

A few fast answers before you act

What is “interactive projection mapping” in this NuFormer test?

It is 3D projection mapping where the projected content changes in real time based on audience input. Here that input includes Kinect gesture tracking plus control via iPad, iPhone, and web interfaces.

Why add phones and web control when you already have gesture tracking?

Gesture tracking usually limits control to people near the sensor. Second-screen control expands participation to more people and enables a clearer “turn-taking” interaction model.

How does Facebook interactivity fit into a projection experience?

It acts as an additional input stream, letting social actions influence what appears on the building. The key is to make the mapping from social action to visual change understandable.

What is the biggest failure mode for interactive mapping?

Latency and ambiguity. If the response is slow or the control rules are unclear, crowds disengage quickly because they cannot tell whether their input matters.

What should a brand measure in an interactive mapping activation?

Dwell time, participation rate (people who trigger changes), repeat interaction, crowd size over time, and the volume and quality of user-captured video shared during the event window.