Kotaku has an opinion piece by Leigh Alexander singing the praises of classic, button-rich controllers for the level of precision and complexity they offer. While the Wii Remote and upcoming motion-control offerings from Microsoft and Sony are generating a lot of interest, there will always be games for which more traditional input devices are better suited. Quoting:
"With all this talk about new audiences — and the tech designed to serve them — it's easy to get excited. It's also easy to feel a little lost in the shuffle. For gamers who've been there since before anyone cared about making games 'for everyone,' having that object in our hands was more than a way to access the game world — it was half the appeal. Anyone who's ever pulled off a chain of combos in a console fighter can tell you about the joy of expertise and control. ... Gamers may suffer some kind of identity crisis as the familiar markers of their beloved niche evolve — or disappear entirely. The solution to that one's easy: Get over it. Like it or not, it's clear that gaming's not a 'niche' anymore, and its shape will change. The more pressing issue is whether or not controller-less gaming will truly make the medium richer. Making something 'more accessible' doesn't necessarily make it better."
I have always maintained that the original SNES controller is the best gaming controller ever developed. It has the right feel, just enough buttons, and great responsiveness. I haven't seen a better pad in 20+ years of gaming.
So this quote doesn't fully address the One True Controller debate, but I think it's important to realize that we were all children when this equipment came out and we may have a bad case of rose-colored glasses.
In the words of Douglas Adams:
everything that's already in the world when you're born is just normal
anything that gets invented between then and before you turn thirty is incredibly exciting and creative and with any luck you can make a career out of it
anything that gets invented after you're thirty is against the natural order of things and the beginning of the end of civilisation as we know it until it's been around for about ten years when it gradually turns out to be alright really.
So this quote doesn't fully address the One True Controller debate, but I think it's important to realize that we were all children when this equipment came out and we may have a bad case of rose-colored glasses.
You raise a good point with the curmudgeon angle. I can't stand playing shooters with a console controller, I need a mouse and keyboard. But this does not discount that there are people very, very good with the console controller. You probably can't argue the inherent superiority of one over the other but you can certainly see how personal preference can enter into it. I grew up on mouse and keyboard control for shooters so it feels more natural.
There's probably still good room for controller innovation and it would also depend on the kind of game you're playing. Digital controls suck for racing. The analog sticks are ok but you really need a wheel for it to feel right. Likewise, flight sims don't feel right with anything other than a proper joystick to control the aircraft.
I think there's a lot of room out there for controller innovation but the downside is that it greatly increases the cost of the game. I was skeptical about the potential for Guitar Hero due to requiring an expensive guitar controller for the full experience. I was extremely skeptical about the equipment cost for Rock Band. Turns out those games were popular enough to support it. The Wii motion controller is great for games designed with it in mind but there are many genres where the motion controller just doesn't cut it, you need a traditional gamepad.
We've traditionally seen more innovation in the arcade game market since the special hardware development is simply part of designing the game and it all comes with the cabinet. As electronics become cheaper, we might end up seeing more customized controllers for specific games.
You raise a good point with the curmudgeon angle. I can't stand playing shooters with a console controller, I need a mouse and keyboard. But this does not discount that there are people very, very good with the console controller. You probably can't argue the inherent superiority of one over the other but you can certainly see how personal preference can enter into it.
Actually, you can. Keyboard and mouse is superior compared to a game pad. Complex moves are easier to do with a keyboard and mouse, and the m
You raise a good point with the curmudgeon angle. I can't stand playing shooters with a console controller, I need a mouse and keyboard. But this does not discount that there are people very, very good with the console controller. You probably can't argue the inherent superiority of one over the other but you can certainly see how personal preference can enter into it.
Actually, you can. Keyboard and mouse is superior compared to a game pad.
Let's be fair. The Mouse is better than a thumbstick for aiming, but a thumbstick is better for movement, especially in games involving stealth or other minor movements.
That said, the keyboard has more buttons and is more configurable, but it's definitely a tradeoff with the analog input on a controller.
I've played keyboard/mouse since inception, but I now prefer the dual-stick controls. Extended play is far more ergonomic and the dual-stick feels more natural for FPS. It's just a matter of getting used to it.
It was the SNES controller that sprang to my mind before seeing your comment. That and I think the Gamecube controller are probably the best ones. I find that the PS/Xbox controllers always make my hands ache after playing for a while and I can never use them as instinctively as the Nintendo pads.
The XBOX 360 controller imo is the best one to ever come out. Could you perform the dozens of different actions/moves in modern games with a snes controller? No. The 360 controller has the sticks offset which is MUCH more natural feel and orders of magnitude better than the Playstation design, the 2 triggers, 2 bumpers, and 4 buttons are also setup in a way that is extremely easy to use and very intuitive.
The XBOX 360 controller imo is the best one to ever come out. Could you perform the dozens of different actions/moves in modern games with a snes controller? No.
Only if you think thumb joysticks were ever a good idea to begin with. Everything that the Xbox 360 controller can do that the SNES controller can't is done better by either a mouse or a real joystick, thankyouverymuch!
Anyone afraid that buttons are going to disappear is just getting upset for no good reason. There's bazillions of hours invested into buttons, programming buttons, and designing game interfaces around buttons. Everyone isn't going to just up and abandon all of that investment and knowledge just because something new has appeared.
You'll just have to live with the fact that your beloved button based games might have to sit next to some motion control games on the store shelves. But that's not really something worth whining about.
Punch Out for the Wii has both motion based and button based control schemes. Very few people use the motion based controls after the first few levels, because, let's face it, we're not real boxers and most of have no desire to be.
Very few people use motion based controls after the first few levels? I'm in the middle of title defense series and am still using motion based controls, and don't see any issues with it (yes I'm familiar that motion recognition can and do suck for other games, but not this one for me at least). How did you determine that very few people were using it after the first few levels? Not doubting you, I just wanted to make sure you reached that conclusion through some polls or some scientific means.
I pretty much agree. The old button controller isn't going anywhere soon. Some games are much better with the standard button controller. Some games are much better with a keyboard. The Wii-mote and other devices are just adding to the gaming experience by offering another input device. I don't see any need to be concerned about the death of an input device just because it is the cool thing d'jour.
I'm not about to try to play Starcraft 2 using only motion controls. I need a keyboard. A *REAL* keyboard (not even a Chat Pad that has all of the right buttons). There are certain cases where the game lends itself to motion control (bowling or tennis, sure -- flight sim, no). As long as game designers use the right controller for the job, I'll be happy. I don't mind playing a game that makes me expend some energy manipulating a motion controller -- it's very immersive. I also don't mind playing a game that required 40 different buttons and three keyboard overlays to give the right feel. As long as they stick to that, they can be successful.
But there are a lot of games released on Wii that use motion controls for no apparent reason. In fact, I'd say that about 85% of the Wii's games use motion control for no real reason and the gameplay suffers because of it.
I agree - 2-D Platformers and most classic games -> d-pad, joystick, or keyboard (my preference is joystick, but I'm an old-timer) 3-D Platformers -> modern console (except Wii) First person shooter -> mouse and keyboard Real time strategy -> mouse and keyboard Flight simulator -> joystick and keyboard (unless you spring for a more involved setup) Driving -> steering wheel and pedals. Rhythm -> unique controllers - here the controller basically is the game, and
Still one of my favorite games. And you are right that it isn't intuituve because of how many commands there are.....but I'm willing to invest the time if the game is worth the investment. Which goes back to my comment about the right tool for the job....in this case a keyboard (I couldn't imagine all of the "macros" that would be needed to play nethack with a Wii-mote). FYI, a decent Nethack-like game that can be played entirely with a stylus is Powder (http://www.zincland.com/powder/index.php?pagename=
For most non-simulator games, I'd stick with mouse and keyboard any day! Try to sniping someone in the head in a fast-paced game with a traditional controller without any auto aims, and then talk about "precision".
Pretty well, actually. Its easier, in my experience, to input those long chains of commands for special moves with a keyboard, 2D platformers like Megaman work just as well with an "old-school" keyboard setup (read: arrow keys instead of WASD), and if you want to see how incredible playing a vertical shooter is with a mouse you should go and play Chromium B.S.U., available at your nearest Ubuntu repository.
About the only genre I can think of where a controller is noticeably superior to a keyboard and/or mou
Console games are not dumbing down your PC games. The things you talk about are hybrids. They are also awfull from the point of view of old console gamers - they might just as well call them "PC games", because their awfullness stems directly from the fact that they are targeted for the simultaneus release on a PC. But you wouldn't agree that's an accurate description of reality, right?
Just so it will be more clear, let me rephrase what you wrote from the point of view of c
Why? Go play some SNES/Cube games. I'm not sure which guys in Nintendo are developing the controllers, but they used to do a very, very good job. Too bad they kind of screwed up the Classic Controller for the Wii. They should have gone with the SNES controller, without editing too much, just new start and select buttons.
To this day, I think of the buttons on my PlayStation or XBOX in terms of the SNES layout. "Hit the Y button! I mean the Square one!"
Some of my friends have played games on PlayStation, Xbox, GameCube, and Super NES. The X button is in a different place on every controller. In fact, it has shown up in all four positions [pineight.com]. So when I tell them what button to hit, and it's not the one on the bottom, I tend to say triangle, square, or O because they're less ambiguous than A, B, and Y.
I wonder if I am the only one in here that thinks the 360 controller is great. It fits comfortably to where I never have had a cramp or pain after extended play, it has analog sticks in the right place, and plenty of buttons that are all intuitive and easy to reach. Plus, I like that it is wireless and has the ability to shut down itself and the console. Really, they did a fantastic job with it. If there was a standard controller for all consoles, I'd much rather it be the 360's than any previous gen consoles or a Wii-mote.
The stick is in the upper left and not in the odd uncomfortable position of the dual shock stick.
The right button placement is great. Large A button in the middle. Small B button to the left. X is above the A and Y is to the right of the A. The buttons all have different shapes so you can feel what button your thumb is on without having to look.
And of course, the *epic* analog shoulder buttons. The buttons have a huge range of motion; I'm pretty sure they depress over half an inch, and they 'lock' at the bottom. I've never seen another controller with such awesome analog buttons.
which is why Sony put the stick in the opposite place, I suppose
No, Sony put the stick there because when they made the Dual Shock for the PSX it was an add-on for a console that had already been out two years and had a huge library of games that assumed only a D-Pad. They didn't know if analog controls would take off, both from the standpoint of popularity and from the standpoint of developers supporting it. So they deliberately placed it in a sub-optimal position, leaving the D-Pad where it is so that i
Gamers may suffer some kind of identity crisis as the familiar markers of their beloved niche evolve or disappear entirely. The solution to that one's easy: Get over it.
You know, I always think it's great when people say this, but they always forget the alternative... I don't have to play video games if I don't think they are fun. There are tons of other things to do in this world. In fact, I'm actually not going to play video games if I don't think they are fun. I have something called a job for when
"Making something 'more accessible' doesn't necessarily make it better."
Well... it does make it better for people who previously found it less accessible.
It's interesting, though, what you can acclimate yourself to. Back in the day, when I was a young buck, I had no trouble memorizing the completely keyboard-driven controls for PC games like the Ultimas I-V, and I found the simplified, mouse friendly interface of Ultima VI maddening. That said, despite my familiarity with not necessarily user-accessible con
If there is one thing I wish all consoles would adopt from the Wii it's not the motion controlls but the ability to hold your hands independently.
Playing Zelda on the Wii was the most relaxing way to play a game I've experienced to date. I could just sit back, put one hand behind my head while the other rests comfortably on the couch. I want to do that on the other consoles, too.
The alleged "greater precision" of button-mashers is imaginary; a side effect of someone afraid to learn a new skill. People said exactly the same thing about analog sticks, and D-pads before them, and both times they were wrong. They are wrong again.
As for gratuitous complexity, which the author (like many others) have mistaken for "depth," this is a harmful thing. It has driven far more people away from gaming than it ever attracted, creating shallow and unrewarding experiences for most with very little actual gain in game quality: a childish domination fantasy, nothing more. This is just someone who wants to keep people out of gaming, and like other kinesophobes he deserves exactly two options: take the plunge or don't play. His attitude is harmful to the industry and ultimately, it's unhealthy to himself. He doesn't need more games; he needs professional help.
Button-mashing mechanics will only be missed by those who had an over-reliance on it for winning.
I don't know what you envision your victory over, here. Button mashers are people who CAN'T complete combos or DON'T know the moves, so they simply mash the buttons and try to beat you that way... like a chimp would. Do you think motion controls make that any different? Instead, they'll be flinging their arms this way and that, rapid-punching and still "button mashing" as far as the input is concerned.
If you were referring to leveling the playing field so a skilled player is just as bad off as a terrib
I've enjoyed Wii Sports, Warioware Smooth Moves and the likes. They are a lot of fun and burn calories. However, I find I spend more time on the couch playing games like Metroid Prime 3 or Resident Evil 4 which make great use of the Wii Remote, but don't require to turn a game session into aerobics. This is why I don't see classic controllers being replaced by the likes of Natal anytime soon.
There will be a lot of impressive tech demos with Natal and probably a couple of fun games with the Sony controller, but I'm of the opinion that Nintendo achieved the best balance of motion vs classic controller.
The original Atari 2600 joystick. Which, I believe, was also the de facto default joystick of the Commodore 64. One button. One stick.
And did anyone else take it apart to press the "left" and "right" contact points simultaneously? Jiggling the joystick back and forth in the track events of Summer Games was for suckers.
Gamepads, or the "classic" controllers he's whining about, actually suck quite a lot. They have terrible precision when compared to a mouse, don't work that well for things like Flight Sims when compared to a flightstick, and don't offer accessability over motion controls.
I've never understood the appeal. Playing console shooters is like steering a drunk camel compared to on the PC. Good RTS with large numbers of units is pretty much a joke. Trying to explain to a non gamer how to play is an exercise in futility compared to the thirty seconds it takes to understand the Wiimote.
The only real upside to the things is that they're generic. You can shoehorn a lot of game types to work on the thing, no matter how badly it works for most of them.
Try playing a fighting game with a keyboard and mouse. As much as I like that combo for shooters, I cannot imagine playing a game like Devil May Cry 4 or even Prototype without a gamepad. The xbox360 one is rather clumsy and doesn't fit my hands, so maybe try some other ones if that's the only one you tried? My Thrustmaster Dual Trigger 3-in-1 is stunning compared to how the xbox one feels.
Motion control is useful in and of itself but more importantly, it has the potential to be a universal control system. Ideally any sort of control scheme could be emulated through a sufficiently sophisticated motion control system. Analog controllers, steering wheels, fishing poles, even d-pads and buttons. Are we there yet. Hell no. It's even still easier to use an old-fashioned controller than it is to use the steering wheel option in Mario Kart. But it's not exactly an impossible dream. Right now, there are several forms of control that can be successfully emulated by the Wiimote. I don't think the Wiimote will carry us to the end game of motion controls but it's not like the PS3 uses a one-button digital joystick made for left-handed people.
It's the interface. A controller is only half the story, and usually a lot less than that.
I'm not suggesting we go back to the Atari 2600/C64 era joystick, but it does have some lessons we should learn from. Some of the best interface design comes from embracing the limitations in the format. There were many C64 era games that, if they didn't use the keyboard at all, had to be somewhat creative on the control side. Four directions, one button, make it happen. Now, the trend seems to be that we need a discrete, separate button for every function a game has, and button combinations that are completely unobvious and arbitrary are a good thing.
As the Atari 2600 was my last console, after which I got on the 8-bit computer bandwagon, I say the following without any platform bias: The Sega Genesis system had it right in the first generation: stick and three buttons. http://www.thosewerethedays.de/items/joysticks/sega_genesis/fighter_stick_md-6_asciiware.JPG is similar, but is the 6 button version. I used this on the Amiga (which only supported one button, but very few games were programmed to use three, since the Atari and Sega joysticks had compatible connectors and pin layouts). It had heft, it was accurate, it was solid. With three buttons, you had to create a control mechanism, but you couldn't go down the road of arbitrary button hell. That's what the modern console controller feels like to me: hell, and inaccurate to boot.
It's a legitimate worry. People keep assuring gamers that the two control systems will exist side-by side. They have a right to be skeptical.
Once upon a time, all movies were silent, and then someone invented the talkie. Great, now we can have silent movies AND talking movies! No, the reality is we only have talking movies. Eventually nobody makes silent movies anymore.
Same thing with black and white. Someone invents color film, and people thing WOW, great more options! Now we will have black and white and color movies! But the reality is we only have color movies after all. If you want to see a black and white movie you have to watch on old one or an independently produced one. Nobody makes them because nobody thinks they will sell, and only weird hardcore artsy people would value such an obsolete aesthetic on purpose.
Same thing with 2D sprite-based games. 3D comes along, and people at first thing Great! This 3D stuff is neat, now we can have 3D and 2D games. And good thing, because entire genres of games and styles of art are built around 2D graphics. There's no way people will just stop making 2D games. But the reality is that they do. After a while we only have 3D games after all, and 2D games are not taken seriously anymore.
I think that gamers are entirely justified in worrying about losing button-based gameplay when they see the hoards of casual gamers and advertising hype around motion-based control. In technology as soon as something is viewed as old-fashioned the perception is that it won't sell, whether it's black-and-white film or 2D graphics or button-based gameplay.
Same thing with 2D sprite-based games. 3D comes along, and people at first thing Great! This 3D stuff is neat, now we can have 3D and 2D games. And good thing, because entire genres of games and styles of art are built around 2D graphics. There's no way people will just stop making 2D games. But the reality is that they do. After a while we only have 3D games after all, and 2D games are not taken seriously anymore.
Gotta disagree with you on the point of 2D vs. 3D games. Just off the top of my head...
I could go on and on, but the point is that there are still plenty of great 2D games being made in recent years. 2D games most certainly are "taken seriously" (whatever that means—I mean, we are talking about games here).
I think GP was referring to the period when 3D console games first reared their blocky heads (circa Playstation 1, IIRC). 2D graphics still hadn't reached their peak, but ugly, gimmicky 3D junk flooded the market and (a paltry few exceptions notwithstanding) 2D was relatively done.
And it wasn't as though it was just a graphical shift. Compare Street Fighter EX Plus alpha to contemporary 2D versions, for example. Whereas it took stunning graphics and tight gameplay to make a standout 2D game at the time,
The system you grew up with has a life span which will end at some point and you will be left feeling either bitter or so old you just don't care. --Either that, or evolution will reach a plateau of suitable perfect-ness in bio-feedback device and stay there for 20 million years. I doubt even the Mouse, Screen & Keyboard will manage this, though as of yet, nothing seems to match it for getting yourself from one end of an Operating System to the other.
For games. . . Any controller which has a limit to its usefulness in moving stuff around on screen, and all controllers seem to, will irritate some engineer/designer somewhere enough to spawn some new brand of tool. The kids new to video games will be more than willing to train themselves on whatever cool new system is offered so long as it activates all their happy circuits, and whatever solution you were content (ecstatic) with while growing up will have to shuffle over to make room, and will eventually find itself relegated to a niche market. And you won't understand what your kids are talking about half the time. Welcome to parenthood. You're not cool anymore. Laugh at it. The other option is to wear leather pants and buy a sports car and look really sad and desperate.
Best to age with a little grace. Let the Nintendo button thingy go. You don't want to be the old guy saying, "When I was young, we had to play our games with a STICK! In 8 bits! And we LIKED it!"
Hm. Actually, it might be kind of fun to be that guy.
Combo-memorization is the antithesis of my ideal gaming experience. To me, the ideal game is one where I never have to think about the control system, only about the content. The Myst games are probably the best example--they'd be wonderful if I could actually spend time solving puzzles, instead of rastering the mouse across the screen, checking for cursor changes, trying to find puzzles.
That's not a chain of combos, it's a cheat code, and if putting it in takes any effort on your part (enough effort for you to "not miss it") then you've got no business talking about classic controllers.
Classic Controllers (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Classic Controllers (Score:5, Insightful)
In the words of Douglas Adams:
Parent
Re:Classic Controllers (Score:5, Insightful)
So this quote doesn't fully address the One True Controller debate, but I think it's important to realize that we were all children when this equipment came out and we may have a bad case of rose-colored glasses.
You raise a good point with the curmudgeon angle. I can't stand playing shooters with a console controller, I need a mouse and keyboard. But this does not discount that there are people very, very good with the console controller. You probably can't argue the inherent superiority of one over the other but you can certainly see how personal preference can enter into it. I grew up on mouse and keyboard control for shooters so it feels more natural.
There's probably still good room for controller innovation and it would also depend on the kind of game you're playing. Digital controls suck for racing. The analog sticks are ok but you really need a wheel for it to feel right. Likewise, flight sims don't feel right with anything other than a proper joystick to control the aircraft.
I think there's a lot of room out there for controller innovation but the downside is that it greatly increases the cost of the game. I was skeptical about the potential for Guitar Hero due to requiring an expensive guitar controller for the full experience. I was extremely skeptical about the equipment cost for Rock Band. Turns out those games were popular enough to support it. The Wii motion controller is great for games designed with it in mind but there are many genres where the motion controller just doesn't cut it, you need a traditional gamepad.
We've traditionally seen more innovation in the arcade game market since the special hardware development is simply part of designing the game and it all comes with the cabinet. As electronics become cheaper, we might end up seeing more customized controllers for specific games.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, you can. Keyboard and mouse is superior compared to a game pad. Complex moves are easier to do with a keyboard and mouse, and the m
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, you can. Keyboard and mouse is superior compared to a game pad.
Let's be fair. The Mouse is better than a thumbstick for aiming, but a thumbstick is better for movement, especially in games involving stealth or other minor movements.
That said, the keyboard has more buttons and is more configurable, but it's definitely a tradeoff with the analog input on a controller.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've played keyboard/mouse since inception, but I now prefer the dual-stick controls. Extended play is far more ergonomic and the dual-stick feels more natural for FPS. It's just a matter of getting used to it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Hokey religions and arcade sticks are no match for a good keyoard and a mouse at your side, kid.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apparently you never played Barbarian or Obliterator (classic games for the Commodore Amiga and certain other 8-bit systems).
They used a joystick for movement, the mouse for targeting long distance weapons and the keyboard for all other functions.
Very well done and most importantly a lot of fun and incredibly immersive.
William
Re: (Score:2)
It was the SNES controller that sprang to my mind before seeing your comment. That and I think the Gamecube controller are probably the best ones. I find that the PS/Xbox controllers always make my hands ache after playing for a while and I can never use them as instinctively as the Nintendo pads.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Only if you think thumb joysticks were ever a good idea to begin with. Everything that the Xbox 360 controller can do that the SNES controller can't is done better by either a mouse or a real joystick, thankyouverymuch!
sigh (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone afraid that buttons are going to disappear is just getting upset for no good reason. There's bazillions of hours invested into buttons, programming buttons, and designing game interfaces around buttons. Everyone isn't going to just up and abandon all of that investment and knowledge just because something new has appeared.
You'll just have to live with the fact that your beloved button based games might have to sit next to some motion control games on the store shelves. But that's not really something worth whining about.
Punch Out is a good example (Score:2, Insightful)
Punch Out for the Wii has both motion based and button based control schemes. Very few people use the motion based controls after the first few levels, because, let's face it, we're not real boxers and most of have no desire to be.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:sigh (Score:5, Insightful)
Use the right tool for the job.
I'm not about to try to play Starcraft 2 using only motion controls. I need a keyboard. A *REAL* keyboard (not even a Chat Pad that has all of the right buttons). There are certain cases where the game lends itself to motion control (bowling or tennis, sure -- flight sim, no). As long as game designers use the right controller for the job, I'll be happy. I don't mind playing a game that makes me expend some energy manipulating a motion controller -- it's very immersive. I also don't mind playing a game that required 40 different buttons and three keyboard overlays to give the right feel. As long as they stick to that, they can be successful.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Use the right tool for the job.
I agree -
2-D Platformers and most classic games -> d-pad, joystick, or keyboard (my preference is joystick, but I'm an old-timer)
3-D Platformers -> modern console (except Wii)
First person shooter -> mouse and keyboard
Real time strategy -> mouse and keyboard
Flight simulator -> joystick and keyboard (unless you spring for a more involved setup)
Driving -> steering wheel and pedals.
Rhythm -> unique controllers - here the controller basically is the game, and
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nethack
Still one of my favorite games. And you are right that it isn't intuituve because of how many commands there are.....but I'm willing to invest the time if the game is worth the investment. Which goes back to my comment about the right tool for the job....in this case a keyboard (I couldn't imagine all of the "macros" that would be needed to play nethack with a Wii-mote). FYI, a decent Nethack-like game that can be played entirely with a stylus is Powder (http://www.zincland.com/powder/index.php?pagename=
Mouse and keyboard (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Pretty well, actually. Its easier, in my experience, to input those long chains of commands for special moves with a keyboard, 2D platformers like Megaman work just as well with an "old-school" keyboard setup (read: arrow keys instead of WASD), and if you want to see how incredible playing a vertical shooter is with a mouse you should go and play Chromium B.S.U., available at your nearest Ubuntu repository.
About the only genre I can think of where a controller is noticeably superior to a keyboard and/or mou
STOP THE ELITIST CRAP (Score:3, Interesting)
Have you really read what I wrote?
Console games are not dumbing down your PC games. The things you talk about are hybrids. They are also awfull from the point of view of old console gamers - they might just as well call them "PC games", because their awfullness stems directly from the fact that they are targeted for the simultaneus release on a PC. But you wouldn't agree that's an accurate description of reality, right?
Just so it will be more clear, let me rephrase what you wrote from the point of view of c
Best controller, you ask? (Score:3, Insightful)
D-pad: SNES
Analog: Gamecube.
Why? Go play some SNES/Cube games. I'm not sure which guys in Nintendo are developing the controllers, but they used to do a very, very good job. Too bad they kind of screwed up the Classic Controller for the Wii. They should have gone with the SNES controller, without editing too much, just new start and select buttons.
Re:Best controller, you ask? (Score:4, Insightful)
To this day, I think of the buttons on my PlayStation or XBOX in terms of the SNES layout. "Hit the Y button! I mean the Square one!"
Parent
Press X. Which button is that? They're *all* X. (Score:3, Insightful)
To this day, I think of the buttons on my PlayStation or XBOX in terms of the SNES layout. "Hit the Y button! I mean the Square one!"
Some of my friends have played games on PlayStation, Xbox, GameCube, and Super NES. The X button is in a different place on every controller. In fact, it has shown up in all four positions [pineight.com]. So when I tell them what button to hit, and it's not the one on the bottom, I tend to say triangle, square, or O because they're less ambiguous than A, B, and Y.
Re:Best controller, you ask? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I said that (Score:5, Funny)
Making something 'more accessible' doesn't necessarily make it better.
I said that when they paved over paradise and put up a parking lot.
For short (Score:3, Insightful)
Best controller ever: Gamecube controller (Score:5, Insightful)
The gamecube controller is the best ever, imo.
The stick is in the upper left and not in the odd uncomfortable position of the dual shock stick.
The right button placement is great. Large A button in the middle. Small B button to the left. X is above the A and Y is to the right of the A. The buttons all have different shapes so you can feel what button your thumb is on without having to look.
And of course, the *epic* analog shoulder buttons. The buttons have a huge range of motion; I'm pretty sure they depress over half an inch, and they 'lock' at the bottom. I've never seen another controller with such awesome analog buttons.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
which is why Sony put the stick in the opposite place, I suppose
No, Sony put the stick there because when they made the Dual Shock for the PSX it was an add-on for a console that had already been out two years and had a huge library of games that assumed only a D-Pad. They didn't know if analog controls would take off, both from the standpoint of popularity and from the standpoint of developers supporting it. So they deliberately placed it in a sub-optimal position, leaving the D-Pad where it is so that i
No (Score:2, Insightful)
You know, I always think it's great when people say this, but they always forget the alternative... I don't have to play video games if I don't think they are fun. There are tons of other things to do in this world. In fact, I'm actually not going to play video games if I don't think they are fun. I have something called a job for when
Better is relative (Score:2)
Well... it does make it better for people who previously found it less accessible.
It's interesting, though, what you can acclimate yourself to. Back in the day, when I was a young buck, I had no trouble memorizing the completely keyboard-driven controls for PC games like the Ultimas I-V, and I found the simplified, mouse friendly interface of Ultima VI maddening. That said, despite my familiarity with not necessarily user-accessible con
Motion control in portables (Score:3, Funny)
Give me motion control on my portable systems. I want to look like a complete idiot in the waiting room. "Sir, Mental Health is down the hall."
Seperate the hands (Score:2, Interesting)
If there is one thing I wish all consoles would adopt from the Wii it's not the motion controlls but the ability to hold your hands independently.
Playing Zelda on the Wii was the most relaxing way to play a game I've experienced to date. I could just sit back, put one hand behind my head while the other rests comfortably on the couch. I want to do that on the other consoles, too.
Bah; kinesophobia (Score:3, Interesting)
The alleged "greater precision" of button-mashers is imaginary; a side effect of someone afraid to learn a new skill. People said exactly the same thing about analog sticks, and D-pads before them, and both times they were wrong. They are wrong again.
As for gratuitous complexity, which the author (like many others) have mistaken for "depth," this is a harmful thing. It has driven far more people away from gaming than it ever attracted, creating shallow and unrewarding experiences for most with very little actual gain in game quality: a childish domination fantasy, nothing more. This is just someone who wants to keep people out of gaming, and like other kinesophobes he deserves exactly two options: take the plunge or don't play. His attitude is harmful to the industry and ultimately, it's unhealthy to himself. He doesn't need more games; he needs professional help.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Button-mashing mechanics will only be missed by those who had an over-reliance on it for winning.
I don't know what you envision your victory over, here. Button mashers are people who CAN'T complete combos or DON'T know the moves, so they simply mash the buttons and try to beat you that way... like a chimp would. Do you think motion controls make that any different? Instead, they'll be flinging their arms this way and that, rapid-punching and still "button mashing" as far as the input is concerned.
If you were referring to leveling the playing field so a skilled player is just as bad off as a terrib
A Classic, button-rich controller (Score:3, Insightful)
Model M [wikipedia.org].
New controllers opens new doors, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
I've enjoyed Wii Sports, Warioware Smooth Moves and the likes. They are a lot of fun and burn calories. However, I find I spend more time on the couch playing games like Metroid Prime 3 or Resident Evil 4 which make great use of the Wii Remote, but don't require to turn a game session into aerobics. This is why I don't see classic controllers being replaced by the likes of Natal anytime soon.
There will be a lot of impressive tech demos with Natal and probably a couple of fun games with the Sony controller, but I'm of the opinion that Nintendo achieved the best balance of motion vs classic controller.
And a shout out to... (Score:3, Funny)
And did anyone else take it apart to press the "left" and "right" contact points simultaneously? Jiggling the joystick back and forth in the track events of Summer Games was for suckers.
Good times.
No, gamepads suck (Score:3, Insightful)
Gamepads, or the "classic" controllers he's whining about, actually suck quite a lot. They have terrible precision when compared to a mouse, don't work that well for things like Flight Sims when compared to a flightstick, and don't offer accessability over motion controls.
I've never understood the appeal. Playing console shooters is like steering a drunk camel compared to on the PC. Good RTS with large numbers of units is pretty much a joke. Trying to explain to a non gamer how to play is an exercise in futility compared to the thirty seconds it takes to understand the Wiimote.
The only real upside to the things is that they're generic. You can shoehorn a lot of game types to work on the thing, no matter how badly it works for most of them.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I think we're missing the point a bit... (Score:3, Informative)
Motion control is useful in and of itself but more importantly, it has the potential to be a universal control system. Ideally any sort of control scheme could be emulated through a sufficiently sophisticated motion control system. Analog controllers, steering wheels, fishing poles, even d-pads and buttons. Are we there yet. Hell no. It's even still easier to use an old-fashioned controller than it is to use the steering wheel option in Mario Kart. But it's not exactly an impossible dream. Right now, there are several forms of control that can be successfully emulated by the Wiimote. I don't think the Wiimote will carry us to the end game of motion controls but it's not like the PS3 uses a one-button digital joystick made for left-handed people.
The problem isn't the controller. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's the interface. A controller is only half the story, and usually a lot less than that.
I'm not suggesting we go back to the Atari 2600/C64 era joystick, but it does have some lessons we should learn from. Some of the best interface design comes from embracing the limitations in the format. There were many C64 era games that, if they didn't use the keyboard at all, had to be somewhat creative on the control side. Four directions, one button, make it happen. Now, the trend seems to be that we need a discrete, separate button for every function a game has, and button combinations that are completely unobvious and arbitrary are a good thing.
As the Atari 2600 was my last console, after which I got on the 8-bit computer bandwagon, I say the following without any platform bias: The Sega Genesis system had it right in the first generation: stick and three buttons. http://www.thosewerethedays.de/items/joysticks/sega_genesis/fighter_stick_md-6_asciiware.JPG is similar, but is the 6 button version. I used this on the Amiga (which only supported one button, but very few games were programmed to use three, since the Atari and Sega joysticks had compatible connectors and pin layouts). It had heft, it was accurate, it was solid. With three buttons, you had to create a control mechanism, but you couldn't go down the road of arbitrary button hell. That's what the modern console controller feels like to me: hell, and inaccurate to boot.
Button loss anxiety is justifialble. (Score:5, Insightful)
Once upon a time, all movies were silent, and then someone invented the talkie. Great, now we can have silent movies AND talking movies! No, the reality is we only have talking movies. Eventually nobody makes silent movies anymore.
Same thing with black and white. Someone invents color film, and people thing WOW, great more options! Now we will have black and white and color movies! But the reality is we only have color movies after all. If you want to see a black and white movie you have to watch on old one or an independently produced one. Nobody makes them because nobody thinks they will sell, and only weird hardcore artsy people would value such an obsolete aesthetic on purpose.
Same thing with 2D sprite-based games. 3D comes along, and people at first thing Great! This 3D stuff is neat, now we can have 3D and 2D games. And good thing, because entire genres of games and styles of art are built around 2D graphics. There's no way people will just stop making 2D games. But the reality is that they do. After a while we only have 3D games after all, and 2D games are not taken seriously anymore.
I think that gamers are entirely justified in worrying about losing button-based gameplay when they see the hoards of casual gamers and advertising hype around motion-based control. In technology as soon as something is viewed as old-fashioned the perception is that it won't sell, whether it's black-and-white film or 2D graphics or button-based gameplay.
2D games "not taken seriously"? (Score:3, Informative)
Same thing with 2D sprite-based games. 3D comes along, and people at first thing Great! This 3D stuff is neat, now we can have 3D and 2D games. And good thing, because entire genres of games and styles of art are built around 2D graphics. There's no way people will just stop making 2D games. But the reality is that they do. After a while we only have 3D games after all, and 2D games are not taken seriously anymore.
Gotta disagree with you on the point of 2D vs. 3D games. Just off the top of my head...
I could go on and on, but the point is that there are still plenty of great 2D games being made in recent years. 2D games most certainly are "taken seriously" (whatever that means—I mean, we are talking about games here).
You call that "plenty"!? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think GP was referring to the period when 3D console games first reared their blocky heads (circa Playstation 1, IIRC). 2D graphics still hadn't reached their peak, but ugly, gimmicky 3D junk flooded the market and (a paltry few exceptions notwithstanding) 2D was relatively done.
And it wasn't as though it was just a graphical shift. Compare Street Fighter EX Plus alpha to contemporary 2D versions, for example. Whereas it took stunning graphics and tight gameplay to make a standout 2D game at the time,
In with the New. . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Here's how it works. . .
The system you grew up with has a life span which will end at some point and you will be left feeling either bitter or so old you just don't care. --Either that, or evolution will reach a plateau of suitable perfect-ness in bio-feedback device and stay there for 20 million years. I doubt even the Mouse, Screen & Keyboard will manage this, though as of yet, nothing seems to match it for getting yourself from one end of an Operating System to the other.
For games. . . Any controller which has a limit to its usefulness in moving stuff around on screen, and all controllers seem to, will irritate some engineer/designer somewhere enough to spawn some new brand of tool. The kids new to video games will be more than willing to train themselves on whatever cool new system is offered so long as it activates all their happy circuits, and whatever solution you were content (ecstatic) with while growing up will have to shuffle over to make room, and will eventually find itself relegated to a niche market. And you won't understand what your kids are talking about half the time. Welcome to parenthood. You're not cool anymore. Laugh at it. The other option is to wear leather pants and buy a sports car and look really sad and desperate.
Best to age with a little grace. Let the Nintendo button thingy go. You don't want to be the old guy saying, "When I was young, we had to play our games with a STICK! In 8 bits! And we LIKED it!"
Hm. Actually, it might be kind of fun to be that guy.
-FL
I Play Games, Not Controllers (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Half the appeal? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not a chain of combos, it's a cheat code, and if putting it in takes any effort on your part (enough effort for you to "not miss it") then you've got no business talking about classic controllers.
Now get off my 30-liv^W lawn!
Parent