Slashdot Mirror
Can New Game Control Schemes Hope To Match the PC Keyboard?
An opinion piece on Gamasutra discusses how, in spite of the fancy new motion control systems that have come to console gaming, the PC's keyboard and mouse setup is still unreplaceable for many titles and genres. Quoting:
"With over 100 keys to choose from (back of the box quotation right there), the possibilities are near endless, if you start to think of shift and control functions altering the purpose of keys. It means that, when the developers start to make their game, they don't have to worry about the limitations of the interface, knowing that, if all else fails, they can always assign the compass to K, even if that's a bit of a stretch to all but the pianists. The keyboard is the friend of ambition, and ArmA 2 is the testament to that, in all its surrealist, broken glory. ... It's the same reason RTS games have found a home on the PC for so long, able to use the skills people accumulate moving around windows and clicking on icons to command troops and manipulate their battle lines. Developers taking advantage of what we already know to teach us something we don't is what gaming is all about."
Control shape is arbitrary, just like the number of possible bindings. Many people use WASD with space for jumping, I use Q and E instead of A and D because it's more comfortable.
What position my hand rests in is entirely up to me, the controls are never too large or too small. And when you consider that the signals are what counts you've got keyboards in all sorts of shapes and sizes, even balls up wierd "gamepads" and the like.
I wouldn't be surprised if pretty soon keyboards start shipping with the CTRL ALT and Shift keys moved to the space between the numbers and the F# keys.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
I just wish it were taken seriously. Nowadays games are developed for console first, then ported to PC after many months, sometimes never. Even then, the ported games often have incredibly poor controls for moving, camera, and other things. PC gaming should be given the respect it deserves across all genres, not just RTS.
I wouldn't be surprised if pretty soon keyboards start shipping with the CTRL ALT and Shift keys moved to the space between the numbers and the F# keys.
Ctrl-C nightmare?
I happen to play that game. It's a really nice simulation. Just like falcon 4 is. But I consider both pieces of software not to be games. A game is, Mario. A game is something with a small learning curve (chess, mario) to get you going. A good game has some depth and will provide you with a challenge along the way (chess, mario) so you can learn new stuf. Neither falcon nor arma 2 have this. Before you'll have any succes in these simulations you'll have to invest considerably. Hence, number 1 complain for Arma is the interface.... Number 2 are the bugs. Having that said, I think good games (read again, games...) 9 out of 10 times need a lot less keys. A controller certainly has it's advantages. Less stress on your fingers/wrisk (i probably spell that wrong), more natural feeling, less buttons: so easier to learn. Take the mouse for example, 2, 3 (maybe 7) buttons... Easy to comprehend, just move it and your set. It's in no way comparible to a keyboard, that at the very least takes a year to be comfortable with it. To type fast... Most people can't type blind after a year... A simple xbox (or playstation or snes) controller on the other hand is something you can actually master in 2 weeks. It's like comparing kung fu with the full contact Sanda. It takes years to master kung fu, and when you do, yes... you will have a good chance against someone doing Sanda. But when you learn Sanda, you can become a serieus problem for anyone not trained in martial arts in a matter of months. After a year, you should be quite good and win in a fight from anyone who has been training wu-shu for 5 years or less. So in the end, it's the applications that matters. And in my oppinion, simulations are fun. But they are not games. If it takes more than 20 keys to steer the software, it probably isn't a game.
that the keyboard is so hard to match is that it has been used and refined by humanity for such a very long time, compared to other interfaces. Think about it, the alphanumeric keyboard even predates the steering wheel by about 20 years!
We seriously need to find a middle ground for this issue. And by middle-ground, of course, I mean improving the keyboard and leaving controllers in the dust!
Touch sensitivity is such a great feature that gaming keyboards should include it.
Is "unreplaceable" even a word? Try "irreplaceable".
There are genres for which the PC keyboard will always be stronger -- those that require a massive variety of command input, such as RTS games.
But for many simple console games, like platformers, will a keyboard ever catch up to the simple elegance of a game controller? I mean, anyone who has played console games on emulators should know that no keyboard mapping is going to feel as comfortable as something like a good old dual-shock controller for quick, repetitive presses of a few buttons. (My knuckle joints kill me after some games on an emulator.)
So why this idea that any one solution is always better? Different games have different control requirements, and different input devices shape different kinds of gameplay. None is "superior" to the other, and you'll never get a keyboard to give you the same kind of game play as a DDR machine or Wii Tennis.
So why the e-penis contest?
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
A long time ago I used to play a lot of SNES games under emulation. Since I frequently played with my brother, I mapped T,F,G,H to the dpad and D,S,A,Z,X,C to the buttons. It sounds really cramped but it was the best way to give my brother space to play too.
Eventually, I put together a spliced SNES pad that would run off the parallel port on my PC. To my surprise, I found that I actually preferred my cramped keyboard mapping over using the real controller!
In the end, I think people will prefer what you learned in the first place. I know lots of console gamers that migrated to the PC that still use their gamepads for FPS games.
...they can always assign the compass to K...
but i'm left-handed you insensitive clods
Not necessarily true. I've come to a point where it doesn't matter that I use a keyboard or a xbox controller. It's all a matter of getting used to the input device I think.
Beeing a passionate gamer i hate controllers/consoles for what they have done to gaming: dumbing games down, resulting in awfully bad user interfaces. especially deep menu trees are a sign of console limitations: unbearable at the pc. e.g.: bethestas fallout 3 pipboy stat / item/ quest management. while the idea is nice, the usability is bothering. for fps there will never be a competitive use for controllers. i really think that gamedevs need to develop multiple user interfaces if they really want to release games for multiple platforms (which i understand for economical reasons). dumbed down interfaces due to consoles are cutting the game experience.
Just open talk to cell phone discussion
I would argue the opposite, that perhaps the NES (or, to stretch it, perhaps the SNES) is the best "control scheme" for MOST games. Any action you want to do is confined to only a few buttons. Compare this to Fable on the Xbox, which in my opinion the controls were a complete mess due to the complexity. Having a hundred functions tied to a hundred keys is useless because only the extremely hard-core will remember them. However, I will agree that for RTS there is no substitute for a mouse and keyboard.
Well, for me Keyboard + Mouse is superior.
I used to play lots of console games - back in the SNES/Genesis/PS1/N64 era. Then I took a hiatus and became a PC gamer, because I discovered I loved RTS's like TA. Now that I've been using my keyboard and mouse for so long, I find the new controllers quite awkward. I'm not bad with them, but I'm way better with my Keyboard and Mouse. Even games where you'd shudder to use a keyboard (ResEvil 4? Most emus?), I do better with my keyboard and mouse.
I've been making a point to try Overlord (since I have that game on PC) with both keyboard + mouse, and controller. It's more work to use the controller, so I must still be building neural circuits. There's also no easy way to spin around instantly to look at something.
Next up is Assassin's Creed. But first I'll finish Overlord, and give my brain time to figure stuff out. Then I'll decide which I like more. (Right now, leaning towards keyboard + mouse)
Yes, keyboard/mouse are far better for some kinds of games... I tried C&C on the xbox and found it virtually unplayable with the control pad, and FPS games really need the immediacy of a mouse rather than the slow gradual (by comparison) movement of a control pad.
But for everything else a console is so much more convenient, you have fixed hardware and a guarantee that a game you purchase will run with no fuss...
All the modern consoles support USB, and most new keyboards and mice are also USB... So why don't more games support this as a possible control method? Most console games also have PC versions, or are direct ports of PC games so adding keyboard/mouse support wouldn't even be much of a burden.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Sorry, in my experience I just don't see these new "Keyboard/Mouse" setups overtaking the established technology like WiiMotes and Light Pens.
Sorry, just don't see it. And I'm a futurist and MIT's Distinguished Inventor of the Year 1998, so I know that of which I speak.
Quite dead on.
There are games that are unplayable with a keyboard. Likewise, there are games that are unplayable without. But it's even less the keyboard, more the mouse, that I miss in console games. Keyboard/mouse input is, at least in my opinion, superior in games where pointing and clicking is a sizable part of the game. Whether you point and click on an interface, as in a RTS, or whether you "point" your crosshair and "click" to fire as in a FPS. I just can't get into controling a FPS game with a console controller.
Likewise, playing a platformer or a racing game with mouse/keyboard is a nightmare to say the least. Use the right input device for the right game, why bother asking what input is superior? None is in every aspect and for every game.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
There is nothing that even begins to come close to mouse/keyboard for First-Person Shooters. Back when I gamed a lot, Counter-Strike essentially ruined N64 classics like Goldeneye and Perfect Dark for me. It's one of those genres quick to point out how utterly inferior and clumsy console controllers can be.
"anyone who has played console games on emulators should know that no keyboard mapping is going to feel as comfortable as something like a good old dual-shock controller for quick"
I beg to differ, most console games are so simple it doesn't matter if you use a controller or the keyboard, the only games I use gamepads for are fighting games, almost every other game can be played just as well with a keyboard. The secret is in the mappings.
Most people don't spend much time figuring out how to setup their keybindings and due to lazyness go back to the controller.
I've been playing street fighter 4 online with only a keyboard, there's pluses to using the keyboard, for instance in Street fighter 4, I can do moves that other people can't with ease due to the accuracy of the keyboard, I can also get away with not doing moves the correct way and still have them fire all because of keyboard use.
Truth is most people who don't use keyboard are lazy, whenever I hear someone whine about PC keyboards I think about how crappy they are at games.
Real gamers game everywhere, PC, console, whatever they don't go "oh the controller is x times better!", for most games it doesn't matter whether you use keyboard or controller, especially when you are doing emulation of old retro console games.
If the keyboard is better than a controller because it has a hundred keys, then would a new device with 200 keys be even better? Of course not.
The keyboard and controller serve two different, but related purposes. The keyboard is an immobile device that is placed on a surface. It is worked on. A controller is held. Both have different optimal configurations, a reflection of their different purposes. Certainly, some games benefit from keyboard control, just as some games benefit from controller control. Comparing the two, as if they were competing entries for the same role, is silly.
Nethack is a much better example of a game built around keyboard control than America's Army.
Especially for flight sims... thinking back to X-Wing and TIE Fighter, I don't think I could have survived all those dogfights with either a keyboard/mouse or a console controller...
So how well do PC RTSs sell? Except for Starcraft and Warcraft not really well. People nowadays can play on a big screen TV with surround sound from a sofa or a recliner and keyboard and especially mouse don't fit into this setup. So unless you are Blizzard your keyboard controlled game is to be found in bargain bins or bundled with add-on cards.
but why couldn't game consoles support the regular keyboard and mouse in addition to the controller?
For two reasons:
Modern controllers can now have 20 or more "buttons" if you count each joystick direction as a button (think WASD). While less than 100, it is still a lot. What the controller can't duplicate for me is what I can do with a mouse in a FPS or RTS game. A joystick or WASD takes way to long to move/aim in a First-Person Shooter, and nothing can compare with the ability to select multiple units in a Real-Time Strategy by simply clicking and dragging with a mouse.Sure there are shortcuts to select all on the screen or all units of a particular type, but you can't duplicate the drag & drop of a mouse.
So a controller can't always beat a mouse & keyboard, but that doesn't mean we can't do better. A prefer a light gun (with real aiming like an arcade, not Wii style) over a mouse for shooting games. But Area 51 and modern FPS games aren't exactly the same thing. In Area 51 all you do is shoot and reload. Knifing someone in the back with a light gun isn't really realistic, and what about tools for the "Engineer" class. Custom controllers could be made (a wrench controller just for the engineer that was similar to a Wiimote) where you have to put down the gun and take the wrench out of your belt to make a repair. This is more realistic and could be better, but the cost makes this an unacceptable solution. Besides, someone third party would make a combined gun/wrench controller with lots of buttons so that you don't need to put the gun down, giving them an unfair advantage.
I think up until now, cost has been the biggest obstacle to making game customized controllers that can outperform a mouse & keyboard. Nintendo with the balance board and other gadgets has shown that maybe people would be willing to buy extra controllers. Mad Catz offered a special Street Fighter IV controller for $150 and wasn't able to keep them in stock for months. Would people pay for a custom Warcraft controller? What would it look like and how could it be better? I don't know, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be better than a mouse & keyboard.
Since I frequently played with my brother, I mapped T,F,G,H to the dpad and D,S,A,Z,X,C to the buttons. It sounds really cramped but it was the best way to give my brother space to play too.
Unlike a PC keyboard, a gamepad doesn't have limitations on how many buttons can be pressed simultaneously between the two players or (with a USB hub) among the four players.
Even games where you'd shudder to use a keyboard (ResEvil 4? Most emus?), I do better with my keyboard and mouse.
If you use a keyboard, what does player 2 use? A whole another computer?
Most people don't spend much time figuring out how to setup their keybindings
How much time do you expect people to spend? Say I have two keyboards plugged into a PC, one for player 1 and one for player 2. I've looked for PC games and never found any that support mapping player 1 fire to Left Control of the first keyboard and player 2 fire to Left Control of the second keyboard. Did I just not look hard enough?
Why the guys at id or wherever chose WASD over ESDF is something I will never understand.
With ESDF your hand remain on the typing home row all the time which makes chatting and finding the keys in case your hand left for the F or Escape keys much faster and easier. Also you have more keys available to your left free to bind to whatever gun you like.
FPS games really need the immediacy of a mouse rather than the slow gradual (by comparison) movement of a control pad.
Casual shooters like Wii Play take advantage of the immediacy of a Wii Remote's pointer. They also take advantage of the multiplayer capability of the Wii Remote rather than the lonely (by comparison) connection of a mouse. If you have two USB mice connected to a PC, and players 1 and 2 move them in opposite directions, what does a game see?
you have fixed hardware and a guarantee that a game you purchase will run with no fuss...
You also have no way to mod console games, except possibly through a built-in map editor (e.g. Tony Hawk series, Super Smash Bros. Brawl).
All the modern consoles support USB, and most new keyboards and mice are also USB... So why don't more games support this as a possible control method?
Someone else asked the same question, and I answered it in this comment.
No console is developed with mouse and keyboard support in mind first. It's developed with a controller (gamepad or whatever you want to call it). All consoles usually come with at least one of these controllers.
So now imagine you're developing a game for the console. What control scheme will you develop for primarily? One that's standard with that console, or one that usable, but not everyone will have? In the end, it does boil down to trying to cater to the larger market share. Yes, some people do have a keyboard for their console, but they are probably the large minority. I'm not even sure if any consoles actually support mice for normal console use (this does not include turning your PS3 into a home PC).
I understand that consoles these days have USB inputs so that you can just nab your keyboard from your PC and plug it in, but most people will not do that. It's just inconvenient.
Also, those are both 'social' type games, which isnt PC's strength. Its called 'personal' for a reason.
Your comment implies the existence of a "social computer". What kind of "social computer" were you thinking about, and how can indie developers make games for it?
Touch like multi-touch on a screen that's placed to be most ergonomic (I'm thinking slanted at a 30-50 degree angle, a bit in front and above my lap would be great for me), would be FANTASTIC for an RTS - I can very easily imagine how the interface would work and be very powerful.
Motion - as in "motion at the level of the almost certainly fake Natal promo videos" where it captures and maps your body with great fidelity to movement and minimal lag - would be great for lots of current kinds of games (sports, dancing, silly mini-games, certain platformers, etc.) and could certainly lead to quite a bit of new and interesting stuff.
Speech - if it were good (MUCH better than today's consumer-grade efforts) not as an integral control scheme, but as an addition to the already extant controls, could be very interesting. I'd get a kick out of RPGs where, when I call someone over a phone or through some kind of communicator device, I have to actually talk to them, or if we're in combat I can yell "Watch out!" or some other warning to get the attention of someone I'm allied with.
Personally, I think that if we can find GOOD new control schemes (and I'm cautiously excited about some of the motion stuff coming up) there can be a lot of new avenues opened up in gaming. Keyboard + mouse is pretty simple and easy to use - but there are lots of interesting game ideas that cannot be done on it (or done well on it), or gamepads, or any currently existing interface.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
Personally, I prefer the simplicity and elegance of the MacBook Wheel. No keyboard, just a scroll wheel and a mouse.
"it's not about aptitude, it's the way you're viewed" - Galinda
Well, let's think about this.
The unique point-and-click abilities of the Wii are as simple as the point-and-click of the mouse.
The waggle of the Wiimote could be emulated by waggling your mouse, but who the hell would want to.
Those newfangled camera input systems that the 360 and PS3 were using at E3 would basically amount to dance or sports games; i.e. games I don't play and would less likely be caught playing by dancing around in my living room.
Mouse and keyboard has always been intuitive and comfortable. In my opinion, part of the reason that consoles are trying out new control schemes (other than to copy Nintendo) is to break away from depending on the analog stick for precise control, which could never match the precision of a computer mouse anyway.
/* No Comment */
I'm a Dvorak typist, you insensitive clod!
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
from the day i realized that i needed to learn to play doom1 via a keyboard... that was it. Now with my super high-rez mouse, xtra large teflon gaming mouse pad will pwn ANY colsole player. ANY.
All the talk aside, there is no way for a controller you use with your thumb can compare to the length of my arm when it goes to precise movments. Any real gamer understands all this,... it's only the console wankerz who because they never learned, do not understand. I do not want a better replacement.. i have refinded my keyboard skills over the last 20 years.. nothing can substitute.
Kill your TV
If I buy a gaming PC, it will come with a gaming keyboard.
A gaming PC is much more expensive than a game console, especially when you have to buy four of them, one for each of the four gamers in your household. I'm starting to think a lot of PC gaming fanboys live alone.
Each keyboard device can be enumerated as a game controller
I'd like to see your reference for this. I tried looking it up myself and got irrelevant results. More worrying is the prevailing mindset shown in the first result from such a search: "The only important thing to consider in a Visual Basic game is that a joystick exists. If there are additional game controllers in a system, they are simply ignored."
I tried replacing "DirectX" with "XNA" in this query under the impression that Microsoft wants new development to be managed. This query led to this page, which claims that XNA supports multiple "Chatpad" keyboards. But do standard USB keyboards show up as Chatpads, or do they show up mixed into "the current keyboard state"? The XNA Input Overview states "Mouse: Number Allowed on System: 1" and "Keyboard: Number Allowed on System: 1".
Going even further, it would also be possible run completely under 3D accelerated VMs and have each OS use specific input devices on a single PC.
But then you'd still have to buy four operating system licenses and four copies of each game, and it still wouldn't be as efficient as a game that can split its own screen.
I don't do split-screen gaming.
Super Smash Bros. series allows four players; it does not split the screen. Bomberman series allows four players; it does not split the screen. Mario Party series' real-time phases allow four players; most of them do not split the screen.
It's just so ghetto.
Since roughly March of last year when Bear Stearns failed, the global economy has been in recession, a lot of people's incomes have become ghetto. So gamers on a ghetto income have to make do with ghetto gaming.
The true strength of PC gaming, to me at least, is the combination of speed and precision that a mouse brings, which to my experience no joystick or thumbstick can match, and the range of motion no touch screen can cover (after all, you don't have to stop moving the mouse when the cursor is at the edge of the screen) However, I am not satisfied with a keyboard, simply because of the digital input. I primarily play platformers and FPS, I'm sure I would say differently if I were an RTS gamer- but when I use a controller I love the ability to move faster and slower just by tilting my thumb several degrees, and being able to pick any angle of motion rather than one of 8 directions is fantastic. Unfortunately, the thumbstick I use to aim or look around tends to fall short for a task that often requires the ability to turn upwards of 180 degrees and hit a target that's often around 20 pixels tall, before the target does the same to me. My ideal control setup would be a mouse in one hand, and a keyboard set on a 2-dimensional slider in the other- to move forward I would push the entire keyboard forward, and so on. As long as your hand remained on the keyboard the relative position of keys would remain the same so there'd be no added need to look at the keyboard to find a key after moving it. Potentially if the slider didn't have a spring one could leave it in a position while keying in commands, somewhat like an autorun, but finding the center again could then be an issue.
Yeah... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAN
Truth is most people who don't use keyboard are lazy, whenever I hear someone whine about PC keyboards I think about how crappy they are at games.
Or, you know, we're on the verge of RSI from all the use of a keyboard we use at our jobs, and tapping between two keys repeatedly for "A" & "B" on a controller hurts a lot compared to using a more ergonomic gamepad. It doesn't matter what you set something to if you have to keep jamming it over and over again (and can't just map the button to repeat fire).
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
If you use a keyboard, what does player 2 use? A whole another computer?
Sure. Or another keyboard + mouse. :P
Or are controller. ;)
Overlord supports split-screen with one person having a controller, and the other a keyboard + mouse. I personally prefer LAN parties, though.
If you really got comfortable playing RE4 with a keyboard you must be the only person to do so :).
Everyone bitched forever that the game was unplayable with a keyboard...I've never tried but it must not be easy. Luckyly I played with a PS2 controller and I actually found no fault with the PC port (other than the not in engine cutscenes).
OTOH I played console emulators with the keyboard for years and found that most games played well with the keyb. What I can't deny is that usually for console games the gamepad is more confortable and better for your hands
I use the number pad, a nicely laid out grid with a couple double-sized buttons to give you position context.. I don't understand how you guys can use WSAD and not hit the wrong thing occasionally. I guess you just get used to it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_working_age
A gaming PC costs much more than a console controller, and the children I babysit usually can't buy a gaming PC with just allowance and birthday money.
Playing Half-Life 2 Deathmatch, I have a highly customized control scheme, using EASD instead of WASD (it is WASD shifted one to the right), with various weapon bindings surrounding my movement keys.
Not possible on a console.
I happen to own Left 4 Dead on Xbox 360. The game blows massive chunks. All my friends, who happen to own the PC version of the game, keep telling me how much it rocks.
The only advantage consoles have for control is that an analog joypad is superior for movement, but even so a mouse + keyboard comes in close, and blows the hell out of consoles for accuracy in shots.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
The best replacement for the keyboard would be a keyboard without key lock. I hate it when key lock happens. It makes me wonder why my MSX computer could have no key lock whatsoever and current PC keyboards still have trouble getting this done. I don't have the desk space nor the money to buy a keypad specifically for games, but I would happily pay 10$ extra for a keyboard without key lock.
I agree with the principle that you need the right tool for the right job but a Platformer can be played using the arrow keys just as well as if you were using a controller. The original platformers were on PC, Duke Nukem before the 3D era. 1990-1993 was a golden era of platforming on DOS (I think this is what old feels like).
Racing games are neither here nor there, it depends on the game as the control scheme can be adapted to the KB as well as it can be used by a console controller. Mario Kart on the N64 (haven't played the Wii version) is great but driving in GTA Vice City is better on PC then PS2 IMO, shooting doubly so. Flight simulators definitely require a joystick however, with ARMA/ARMA2 you can use the KB with the most of the directional controls remapped to the numpad to fly a helicopter but its a bitch to land safely, this gets a lot easier if you use a joystick. Fighting games don't make the transition to PC very well as the KB is terrible for button mashing, same as FPS and RTS don't make the transition to console very well (yes Halo fanboys, FPS on consoles are terrible).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Two great platformers I played through 100% on the PC that are perfectly controllable with the keyboard:
Pandemonium I and Pandemonium II
Two great platformers on the Mac (originally the Mac Plus) that make awesome use of the mouse as well:
Dark Castle, Beyond Dark Castle
Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Castle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemonium_(video_game)
for FPS games on the computer. There is nothing realistic at all about slightly dragging your mouse to a corner and firing. Yes it is way more accurate than the controller from a console, and you can spin around a lot faster. But it takes no skill to aim, as long as you can navigate a desktop you can aim in a PC FPS. The hardcore fanatic FPS players on the PC will always whine and moan about dual joysticks but its not as if their solution is furthering the gameplay experience either. The only controller setup that better mimics real life is the Wii for FPSs. The speed and ease of it is still difficult, but thats probably a good thing. Aiming in real life is not nearly as easy as moving your mouse. And moving and aiming is certainly much more difficult. Every time I hear PC gamers complain about console gamers they refuse to acknowledge that while their control setup may be superior its certainly not the best option for the "realism" they always claim to crave.
I can totally see the whole shift/ctrl thing coming into play in games eventually, I model 3D in Newtek Lightwave 3D and the interface makes use of "a" "A" and "^a", for instance. A large percentage of the commands are accessible from the keyboard through various means.
As far as games go, I'm a die-hard Keyboard/Mouse user on the computer. There are only two exceptions: Fighting games. For which I use a custom arcade stick I built. And Mecha games, which require uhm...a little 'more'. If the PC version of Mechwarrior 5 doesn't use a gimped console-oriented control scheme, I'm going to build a custom controller setup from military and aviation controls that will put the Steel Battalion controller to SHAME. COUNT ON IT.
Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
I think programmers shoudl not think about unlimited possibilities with the keyboard because most gamers have a LIMITED sets of fingers and making it more complicated by using shift keys + more than 3 buttons, you lower the chance of your game being adopted by a large group.
I remember pc games like ti-fighters where you had more than 3 page of controls, WTF!! had a friend who was barely able to use it, it became a hindrance to waht was suppose to be a fun game., same goes for flying games where they rely on keyboard mappings instead of mouse free-look to stir your machine.
but that's just me, i like games that can be enjoyed without the hassle of 30 different keys and combination.
One killer app for dual analogue controllers is the arena shooter. Geometry Wars.
Robotron and Smash TV had two 8 way joysticks. They were good. Try them in MAME with just a keyboard and you won't have much fun.
Jeff Minter had to find a way to let you control Llamatron with a keyboard or a single joystick. He found a decent compromise (it shoots in the direction you move, unless you hold down a button to lock the firing direction) - but it's not at all as good as having two joysticks.
Geometry Wars is perfect - move with one analogue stick, fire with the other.
If you can find a copy of Grid Wars for the PC (free-as-in-beer, but taken down due to legal challenges from Bizarre Games), there are many control schemes, including keyboard only, keyboard+mouse, analogue joypad, dual analogue joypad. I guarantee, if you have an Xbox 360 controller, you wouldn't go back to the keyboard.
See also: Virtual On.
Because it is annoying when dev's try to cram an RTS or RPG game into a console control scheme and release it on the pc. I usually grab EA sports games and beat em ups for consoles and rts, rpg's, and strat games for the pc. It is annoying to play a game with the 'wrong' control scheme. It would be like trying to play god of war with a mouse and keyboard, it just won't work.
I can't imagine 'getting used to' using a keyboard for a racing simulator (think Forza, not Pole Position). You need analog in steering, throttle, and braking, provided by thumbsticks & triggers or wheel & pedals. On/off switches won't cut it.
Come off a starting grid at full throttle and full left, whipe out half the field, and see how long you're kept around.
I don't do flight sims, but imagine they'd be much the same way
How about advancing Voice recognition in games, so giving commands in RTS is second nature?
Or the Wii controllers for First Person Shooters is very good.
Combine this with Head Tracking peripherals and the keyboard and WASD stops being such a necessity.
The problem in my view is that few publishers are willing to take chances, and neither Microsoft nor Sony are willing to push these head tracking/head mounted displays and alternate controllers as a Standard for their consoles. Therefore there will always be a great financial hump to get over for any third party developer that want to push these types of control schemes forward. Because there is no first party support, refining and advancing these controls becomes difficult.
The Keyboard can't be beat because the cost of innovation and the general inertia on the part of first party developers is too high.
Natal and other body tracking/motion tracking devices aren't going to replace a button press.
-Gel214th
This is an understatement. I do not think most people realize how wide the chasm is between game pads and KBM when it comes to FPS games. We have an entire generation of seasoned gamers who are using auto-aim! In competitions! Auto-aim!