While a controller isn't going to replace my keyboard/mouse combo anytime soon, I did spend about a year or so playing shooters only on a console. In doing so, I got somewhat decent with using a controller playing an FPS. I was able to consistently be in the top 8 in a rainbow six: vegas match. Again, it took a long LONG time to get good with it, but it can be done.
Practice makes perfect:-) Not to mention if you spend a lot of time with a controller and an FPS, when you switch back to a keyboard/mouse combo you will find that your abilities will have drastically improved. If you can aim well with something that kinda works, you can aim REALLY well with something that works great.
If you are in a multiplayer match, and someone has a much higher kill count than you, then (excluding cheaters, griefers, and campers) they are better than you.
You are basically saying that Nolan Ryan isn't better than you at baseball simply because he can throw a baseball faster and with more control. After all, it's just throwing skills.
I don't see the appeal in games being complicated. The way I see it, if you have to use the keyboard to do much more than type, then the game's interface is too convoluted. I think the playstation controller with its 15 buttons is way overboard, let alone over a hundred on a keyboard.
I believe I used the wrong word. I didn't mean complicated in that you use every button on the keyboard...I mean games like Oblivion where instead of struggling with a d-pad to select a spell, you can just press the corrosponding number. Or RTS games...true, some of the RTS games on the 360 have decent interfaces, but you would be hard pressed to be able to beat someone using a controller to play an RTS compared to someone using a keyboard/mouse. By complicated I meant you can have more in-depth interfaces that allow you to do things that you COULDN'T do with a controller.
I never said I didn't want to compete. The problem is that you can't compete as these games are designed to reward fast mousework above anything else. Unless you inject yourself with crack and have a super-accurate mouse with eighty buttons, you may as well not bother logging in.
So what you are complaining about is that there are other people better than you. Have you not played online shooters on a console before? The top people in deathmatches on a PC game tend to get around the same score as the top people playing multiplayer in a console shooter...there will always be people that are far and away better than you at the game you are playing.
It doesn't help that many FPSs have characters that move with no sense of the laws of momentum or physiology. When you can run around at 100mph, stop on a sixpence, turn round and instantly fire off a pixel-perfect shot at someone 500 yards away, then it's not a game it's just a twitch contest.
Again, it seems like you are complaining that there are people capable of doing this whereas you are not. That's fine, just stay away from those games then. Don't stay away from them using excuses, though...just simply say that the control scheme isn't something you can master enough to be able to keep up.
What you are basically saying is "I am unable to do these things, therefore they suck."
I think we can blame the keyboard/mouse setup for encouraging PC FPS designers to make games that rely more on optimal use of the interface than the actual game. If they had to use slow, inaccurate controllers, they might make games that depend more on tactics, style, patience, trickery, decision making etc, rather than just who reacts and moves the mouse the quickest.
And all FPS games benefit from people that are good at all those things. Perfect example, people often describe RTS games as "click fests". Well, it doesn't matter how fast you can build your units if you are going to just march them all in a straight line into my bases defenses.
Controls aren't the only part of being good at a game...they are merely the aluminum siding.
R2: Beep Boop Beep C3P0: He says there are several creatures approaching from the southwest. R2: That's not what I said. I said there ain't a pack of menthols on this planet!
Well...I mean...regardless of your hand size, there is no denying that it was a massive chunk of a controller:-) But nope, my complaint was entirely because of button placement.
my fave thumbstick would definitely have been the one on the Dreamcast...short, with a small travel range. Overall favorite controller for comfort and usability is definitely the 360 controller.
If there's a game where you need split-second, pixel-perfect precision in order to succeed at it, then I've no interest in playing it. Unreal Tournament isn't really a good example as it was designed for stupid twitch play.
These folks are known as "hardcore". I had plenty of fun playing Team Fortress Classic for a very long time on my PC. I didn't have pixel-perfect precision, nor did I have a split-second reaction time. I was simply "decent". I would consistently place in the top 5 (but almost NEVER in the top 2), and for me that was enough. If you don't have a real competitive spirit, then do what I do; don't play to win, play to have fun.
That being said, folks that are that good at FPS games can use their abilities elsewhere in their daily lives...if you have super-fast reaction times, you would make one hell of a goalie, for example.
Maybe if PCs had controllers rather than mice, then PC game designers might have to make games that weren't just mouse-clicking contests.
What? Ever used this thing called a keyboard? See, it allows for more advanced control schemes over what a console is capable of...that's one of the allures of playing games on a PC. You can have a MUCH more complicated game that is easier to play because a mouse and keyboard inherently are easier to be precise with (although, for movement in an FPS, an analogue stick kicks ass).
Not to mention if Consoles had mice and keyboards then console game designers might have to make games that weren't just button-pressing contests.
Every PC FPS I've played seems like it was designed for people who's bloodstreams were 60% caffeine, and who had 25" monitors and specialised 'gaming' mice.
Then you must have only played a couple. Half Life, the entire Doom series, Deus Ex, System Shock, etc...these are games that are much slower paced and don't have the frantic action that some others do. If you don't like fast-paced shooters, stop playing Serious Sam and Eradicator.
Seriously, there are people who turn down all the graphics just so they can see a single pixel of someone's head a hundred yards away, then click on that exact pixel within a fraction of a second. I prefer games that you don't need to be some sort of freak to play.
And who says you have to play that way? They choose to play that way, you choose to play your way. Remember what I said earlier, if you don't have the competitive spirit, then don't play to be competitive; play to have fun. Or do you try to have a triple-double every time you play a pick-up game of basketball with a few friends?
PC gamers will spend more on a video card that you could get a PS2 or Xbox for, so I wouldn't consider their opinions worth much.
And console gamers will spend more on an HDTV than my whole computer will cost. Your point?
Again, it is NOT a problem with physically getting to the thumbstick; it's having to move my thumb out of it's natural resting position that I don't like.
I was referring more to having the white and black buttons near the top of the controller as opposed to the bottom on the S-Controller, coupled with where the A, B, X, Y buttons were relative to each other...I had no issue with the size of the controller itself, just button placement.
Seriously, compare the joystick on an N64 controller with the DualShock sticks, there's just no comparison.
That would be like comparing the drivability of a Ford Model-T to a '99 Honda Accord, don't you think? Keep in mind that the N64 controller had THE ABSOLUTE FIRST analog thumbstick on a console game controller...almost no one gets it right the first time.
It's not that I have a problem reaching the left stick. The problem is that I have to reach at all. Like I said, with a gamecube/xbox/360 controller, the way your hand naturally rests on the controller places your thumb directly on the left thumbstick. On the DualShock, your have to keep your thumb at an angle in order to operate the left thumbstick, thus not keeping your hand in a more neutral position.
To me, it's a simple and stupid design flaw that they will never fix because people are used to it. Being used to a bad design doesn't suddenly transform it; it's still a bad design.
I rather like the N64 controller...you can hold it in different ways for different games, so that was a plus. In addition, the buttons were big and seperated enough to make them easy to find, however close enough to not have to really reach for them.
If you hold your right hand over the A, B, and C buttons in such a way that you are holding the side of the controller like an NES pad, it makes things MUCH easier.
Are you referring to the 360 controller? If so, I have a solution for you. Keep your middle fingers on the triggers and your pointer fingers on the shoulders. It will take a little bit to get used to, but once you have it down you will have an advantage over your opposition. I know it sounds a little far-fetched, but not having to move you finger from the trigger to the shoulder makes a HUGE difference, and the way it makes your hand sit on the controller you can reach all the buttons very easily.
It comes down to the placement of the left thumbstick...you have to "reach" your thumb in order to use it effectively, whereas with a gamecube/xbox/360 controller, the way your hand naturally cradles the controller places your thumb EXACTLY where the the thunbstick is, no movement necessary. This enables better precision, more comfort, and less fatigue.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course...and mine is I don't understand how someone can enjoy using a DualShock. There are many games that I have that I haven't played through all the way on my PS2 ONLY because of the controller.
/agree. I personally have always found the Playstation DualShock design to be one of the most uncomfortable controllers ever conceived...true, the original Xbox controller sucked, but that was rather quickly fixed. For some reason, Sony insists on sticking with a design that causes your hands to hurt after a very short period of time.
Why the hell is this thing such a popular controller? It feels entirely unnatural.
Didn't even know that was there...then I retract the slashdot portion of my statement, but it still stands. You can't sit there and honestly tell me that you only use websites that you have the full code to.
I can understand standing up for what you believe in, but I think you are going a bit overboard here...last time I checked, closed source hasn't stopped some games from developing INSANELY huge communities...or have you already forgotten about user-made stuff for things like doom, quake, etc. The roller coaster tycoon series and the elder scroll series come to mind as well...
Get off your high horse. You don't have the source code to many websites (slashdot included) and yet you don't seem to have a problem "using" them.
That's just the thing though...it's not coming out in the open. Numerous studies have shown that they are in fact BLOCKING some types of traffic, which is backed up by countless consumer complaints both online and in print.
Comcast seems to be hoping that your average everyday joe says "oh, they are just slowing it" and that be the end of it. Well, when downloading one version of Ubuntu was nearly 500k a second and then a few months later the next version downloaded at 2 KB per second from my house and roughly 400 KB from the same torrent at a friend's house that DIDN'T have comcast...yeah. I've seen it first hand. This isn't delaying or throttling...this is damn near blocking.
Besides, injecting their own packets into the communication between my computer and another computer...shit, if I did that to two random people, I would be brought up on criminal charges.
If I am on a site such as purepwnage.com, an internet radio station, or something else that I enjoy a lot (gametrailers.com is another), I will click the ads just to help the people that run the site. Unless the ad is EXTREMELY interesting, or it is for a company that I would have gone to buy something from anyway, I will just close the window once it loads.
The same goes for folks with small websites or blogs... like my own.::wink wink::
Other than so-called Madden Gamers and Halo-fiends, nearly every gamer is looking forward to this. How do I know this?
Because unlike some other developers, when Will Wright says he is implementing some crazy idea into a game, he actually implements it and implements it well. Not to suck the man's pecker, but the possibilities of a game like Spore are quite beyond anything previuosly conceived in the interactive entertainment world. Just read through interviews with him about it, or better yet just read through the Wikipedia article about it. I don't mean skim over it, I mean sit down and truly read it and absorb everything that this game is aspiring to do (and, based on what Will Wright is saying, is doing successfully.)
When you look at what he is hoping to accomplish in this game, and what he is saying is already there and in somewhat playable form... itwould have been impossible even just a decade ago. His early description of it by calling it "Sim Everything" seems like it will be an accurate label.
Lastly, keep in mind that the ONLY thing that we have any sort of details about are when you are still in the cell-sized areas of the game. If they are putting this much detail into what is happening when you are the size of an amoeba, imagine what the rest of it could possbily be like...
I know I sound like some sniviling Will Wright fanboy who wants anything the man releases, but again...go and really read about what this game is trying to accomplish. It's mind boggling.
Slashdot Mirror
While a controller isn't going to replace my keyboard/mouse combo anytime soon, I did spend about a year or so playing shooters only on a console. In doing so, I got somewhat decent with using a controller playing an FPS. I was able to consistently be in the top 8 in a rainbow six: vegas match. Again, it took a long LONG time to get good with it, but it can be done.
Practice makes perfect:-) Not to mention if you spend a lot of time with a controller and an FPS, when you switch back to a keyboard/mouse combo you will find that your abilities will have drastically improved. If you can aim well with something that kinda works, you can aim REALLY well with something that works great.
If you are in a multiplayer match, and someone has a much higher kill count than you, then (excluding cheaters, griefers, and campers) they are better than you.
You are basically saying that Nolan Ryan isn't better than you at baseball simply because he can throw a baseball faster and with more control. After all, it's just throwing skills.
Michael Bay, is that you?
I believe I used the wrong word. I didn't mean complicated in that you use every button on the keyboard...I mean games like Oblivion where instead of struggling with a d-pad to select a spell, you can just press the corrosponding number. Or RTS games...true, some of the RTS games on the 360 have decent interfaces, but you would be hard pressed to be able to beat someone using a controller to play an RTS compared to someone using a keyboard/mouse. By complicated I meant you can have more in-depth interfaces that allow you to do things that you COULDN'T do with a controller.
So what you are complaining about is that there are other people better than you. Have you not played online shooters on a console before? The top people in deathmatches on a PC game tend to get around the same score as the top people playing multiplayer in a console shooter...there will always be people that are far and away better than you at the game you are playing.
Again, it seems like you are complaining that there are people capable of doing this whereas you are not. That's fine, just stay away from those games then. Don't stay away from them using excuses, though...just simply say that the control scheme isn't something you can master enough to be able to keep up.
What you are basically saying is "I am unable to do these things, therefore they suck."
And all FPS games benefit from people that are good at all those things. Perfect example, people often describe RTS games as "click fests". Well, it doesn't matter how fast you can build your units if you are going to just march them all in a straight line into my bases defenses.
Controls aren't the only part of being good at a game...they are merely the aluminum siding.
R2: Beep Boop Beep
C3P0: He says there are several creatures approaching from the southwest.
R2: That's not what I said. I said there ain't a pack of menthols on this planet!
Well...I mean...regardless of your hand size, there is no denying that it was a massive chunk of a controller :-) But nope, my complaint was entirely because of button placement.
Learn something new every day...had no idea:-)
my fave thumbstick would definitely have been the one on the Dreamcast...short, with a small travel range. Overall favorite controller for comfort and usability is definitely the 360 controller.
That being said, folks that are that good at FPS games can use their abilities elsewhere in their daily lives...if you have super-fast reaction times, you would make one hell of a goalie, for example.
What? Ever used this thing called a keyboard? See, it allows for more advanced control schemes over what a console is capable of...that's one of the allures of playing games on a PC. You can have a MUCH more complicated game that is easier to play because a mouse and keyboard inherently are easier to be precise with (although, for movement in an FPS, an analogue stick kicks ass).
Not to mention if Consoles had mice and keyboards then console game designers might have to make games that weren't just button-pressing contests. Then you must have only played a couple. Half Life, the entire Doom series, Deus Ex, System Shock, etc...these are games that are much slower paced and don't have the frantic action that some others do. If you don't like fast-paced shooters, stop playing Serious Sam and Eradicator.
And who says you have to play that way? They choose to play that way, you choose to play your way. Remember what I said earlier, if you don't have the competitive spirit, then don't play to be competitive; play to have fun. Or do you try to have a triple-double every time you play a pick-up game of basketball with a few friends? And console gamers will spend more on an HDTV than my whole computer will cost. Your point?
Again, it is NOT a problem with physically getting to the thumbstick; it's having to move my thumb out of it's natural resting position that I don't like.
I was referring more to having the white and black buttons near the top of the controller as opposed to the bottom on the S-Controller, coupled with where the A, B, X, Y buttons were relative to each other...I had no issue with the size of the controller itself, just button placement.
That would be like comparing the drivability of a Ford Model-T to a '99 Honda Accord, don't you think? Keep in mind that the N64 controller had THE ABSOLUTE FIRST analog thumbstick on a console game controller...almost no one gets it right the first time.
It's not that I have a problem reaching the left stick. The problem is that I have to reach at all. Like I said, with a gamecube/xbox/360 controller, the way your hand naturally rests on the controller places your thumb directly on the left thumbstick. On the DualShock, your have to keep your thumb at an angle in order to operate the left thumbstick, thus not keeping your hand in a more neutral position.
To me, it's a simple and stupid design flaw that they will never fix because people are used to it. Being used to a bad design doesn't suddenly transform it; it's still a bad design.
I rather like the N64 controller...you can hold it in different ways for different games, so that was a plus. In addition, the buttons were big and seperated enough to make them easy to find, however close enough to not have to really reach for them.
If you hold your right hand over the A, B, and C buttons in such a way that you are holding the side of the controller like an NES pad, it makes things MUCH easier.
I believe the correct term for your user name is "queef".
Just an FYI.
Are you referring to the 360 controller? If so, I have a solution for you. Keep your middle fingers on the triggers and your pointer fingers on the shoulders. It will take a little bit to get used to, but once you have it down you will have an advantage over your opposition. I know it sounds a little far-fetched, but not having to move you finger from the trigger to the shoulder makes a HUGE difference, and the way it makes your hand sit on the controller you can reach all the buttons very easily.
It comes down to the placement of the left thumbstick...you have to "reach" your thumb in order to use it effectively, whereas with a gamecube/xbox/360 controller, the way your hand naturally cradles the controller places your thumb EXACTLY where the the thunbstick is, no movement necessary. This enables better precision, more comfort, and less fatigue.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course...and mine is I don't understand how someone can enjoy using a DualShock. There are many games that I have that I haven't played through all the way on my PS2 ONLY because of the controller.
/agree. I personally have always found the Playstation DualShock design to be one of the most uncomfortable controllers ever conceived...true, the original Xbox controller sucked, but that was rather quickly fixed. For some reason, Sony insists on sticking with a design that causes your hands to hurt after a very short period of time.
Why the hell is this thing such a popular controller? It feels entirely unnatural.
Didn't even know that was there...then I retract the slashdot portion of my statement, but it still stands. You can't sit there and honestly tell me that you only use websites that you have the full code to.
I can understand standing up for what you believe in, but I think you are going a bit overboard here...last time I checked, closed source hasn't stopped some games from developing INSANELY huge communities...or have you already forgotten about user-made stuff for things like doom, quake, etc. The roller coaster tycoon series and the elder scroll series come to mind as well...
Get off your high horse. You don't have the source code to many websites (slashdot included) and yet you don't seem to have a problem "using" them.
That's just the thing though...it's not coming out in the open. Numerous studies have shown that they are in fact BLOCKING some types of traffic, which is backed up by countless consumer complaints both online and in print.
Comcast seems to be hoping that your average everyday joe says "oh, they are just slowing it" and that be the end of it. Well, when downloading one version of Ubuntu was nearly 500k a second and then a few months later the next version downloaded at 2 KB per second from my house and roughly 400 KB from the same torrent at a friend's house that DIDN'T have comcast...yeah. I've seen it first hand. This isn't delaying or throttling...this is damn near blocking.
Besides, injecting their own packets into the communication between my computer and another computer...shit, if I did that to two random people, I would be brought up on criminal charges.
While I agree with you about EA, from what I understood when the purchase was made Maxis is more or less free to do their own thing.
If you are releasing spore through your genitals...well...let's just say you need to get that checked out.
If I am on a site such as purepwnage.com, an internet radio station, or something else that I enjoy a lot (gametrailers.com is another), I will click the ads just to help the people that run the site. Unless the ad is EXTREMELY interesting, or it is for a company that I would have gone to buy something from anyway, I will just close the window once it loads.
::wink wink::
The same goes for folks with small websites or blogs... like my own.
Some of the funniest guys out on the 'net, they are :-)
Other than so-called Madden Gamers and Halo-fiends, nearly every gamer is looking forward to this. How do I know this?
Because unlike some other developers, when Will Wright says he is implementing some crazy idea into a game, he actually implements it and implements it well. Not to suck the man's pecker, but the possibilities of a game like Spore are quite beyond anything previuosly conceived in the interactive entertainment world. Just read through interviews with him about it, or better yet just read through the Wikipedia article about it. I don't mean skim over it, I mean sit down and truly read it and absorb everything that this game is aspiring to do (and, based on what Will Wright is saying, is doing successfully.)
When you look at what he is hoping to accomplish in this game, and what he is saying is already there and in somewhat playable form... itwould have been impossible even just a decade ago. His early description of it by calling it "Sim Everything" seems like it will be an accurate label.
Lastly, keep in mind that the ONLY thing that we have any sort of details about are when you are still in the cell-sized areas of the game. If they are putting this much detail into what is happening when you are the size of an amoeba, imagine what the rest of it could possbily be like...
I know I sound like some sniviling Will Wright fanboy who wants anything the man releases, but again...go and really read about what this game is trying to accomplish. It's mind boggling.