Gamepad vs Mouse & Keyboard Discussion

[Nifft Batuff]

Probably console release too. (with a new control scheme I guess)

I will never understand why people complain about the control system of SS1, as it was the worst thing happened in gaming history, and then consider OK to play FPS games with a controller.

 

[Bad Sector]

I will never understand why people complain about the control system of SS1, as it was the worst thing happened in gaming history, and then consider OK to play FPS games with a controller.

Because if you know how, it is easier to control an FPS with a gamepad than with the original SS1 controls.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

I will never understand why people complain about the control system of SS1, as it was the worst thing happened in gaming history, and then consider OK to play FPS games with a controller.

Because if you know how, it is easier to control an FPS with a gamepad than with the original SS1 controls.

"if you know how" can be applied to everything so it isn't a really strong argument here. Interestingly, it does not apply to gamepad controlled FPS however. The use of a gamepad is objectively an inferior choice, otherwise how do explain the fact that often the FPS gameplay has to be simplified in order to use a controller (slower enemies, motion and/or aim aided mechanics, etc.)?

In the case of SS1 and SS2 a controller is even worse than for a standard FPS. It is not only the issue of moving and aiming. SS1 (and the contemporary UU1 and UU2), and in a minor way also in SS2, there are very complex interaction mechanics between the player and the environment. You don't just move and shoots. You pick objects and put objects, open containers, and move the contents. You can examine things in the environment's and interact with them in different ways (and more or less everything is interactive).
You can peek around the corners in different ways, crouch bending your knees or just standing flat on your stomach to reach more secluded areas.

The UI also is complex with a lot of way to interact with it and this complexity is also thematic. It is also works in real time, the game does not pause while you interact with it. It is not the same thing if you reduce it to a mere hyper-nested menu that is slower to navigate and thematically not so coherent. As an example, in the original SS1 you can play Pong (or Ultima II in SS2) while moving through the corridors avoiding to be detected by enemies. Imagine how fun it could be doing that with a controller.

 

[Ash]

I recommend checking out the ports for Arx Fatalis, Morrowind, Ultima Underworld as well as to a lesser extent Fallout: New Vegas for examples of legit good immersive sim-like games with complicated UIs on gamepad. Shocker: there is little difference between the versions (and even then I disagree with the few compromises made (namely w/Arx Fatalis), as both a PC and console gamer. Well ex-console gamer at this point because the latest few machines have been thoroughly cucked). Calm your shit. As usual the "objective inferiority" of gamepads is blown out of proportion. There's pros and cons to each form of input. Sure System Shock is more suited to PCs but it can be done with very little compromise, should the developers actually choose (and have the talent to).

 

[Bad Sector]

Interestingly, it does not apply to gamepad controlled FPS however.

Compared to the original SS1 controls that were digital-only with a pointing arrow that for most of the time did nothing useful? Certainly gamepad controls, if for no other reason that having actual dual analog input, can be made better.

The use of a gamepad is objectively an inferior choice, otherwise how do explain the fact that often the FPS gameplay has to be simplified in order to use a controller (slower enemies, motion and/or aim aided mechanics, etc.)?

The main "inferiority" a gamepad has is how you aim compared to aiming with a mouse (because with the mouse you have direct control over the camera's direction whereas with a gamepad you are adjusting the camera's rotation speed). The motion/aim assist however can minimize the difference, especially for someone who is used to playing with a gamepad.

For the rest, i'll echo what Ash wrote that they are overblown. I've played a ton of games with both KBM and gamepad and the difference is minor (on the other hand lying back on my chair is much more comfortable and as i'm playing games to have fun, this is kinda important). You certainly aren't going to win any deathmatch but we're not discussing Quake 3 here :-P.

It is not only the issue of moving and aiming. [...] there are very complex interaction mechanics between the player and the environment. You don't just move and shoots. You pick objects and put objects, open containers, and move the contents. You can examine things in the environment's and interact with them in different ways (and more or less everything is interactive).

Everything you mention here has been done by other games with gamepad support in a variety of ways. It has been a while since i played it but i'm almost certain that Dead Space for example does all of that stuff (i do not remember if you are able to move objects between containers but even if not, it is a design choice and not some controller limitation as it would still be possible with its UI).

As an example, in the original SS1 you can play Pong (or Ultima II in SS2) while moving through the corridors avoiding to be detected by enemies. Imagine how fun it could be doing that with a controller.

It isn't fun doing that on PC either.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

I am not saying that these kind of games are not worth playing with a controller (if you are inclined to accept some compromises). My initial point was that the criticisms toward the original SS1 control system are often just parroted without realizing how some modern control schemes, that we are already conditioned and accustomed to use without noticing anymore, are worse (or at least equivalently bad). This will be highlighted in the moment/if SS1 will be ported to consoles.

 

[JDR13]

I've also played a ton of games with both gamepad and KB&M, and the difference is definitely not minor.

It depends on the genre and the game of course. Sure, there isn't much difference between those schemes if we're talking about TES or Fallout.

If we're talking about shooters with any real degree of difficulty though, the difference is night and day. Anyone who claims otherwise is in some serious denial.

 

[Ash]

I've also played a ton of games with both gamepad and KB&M, and the difference is definitely not minor.

It depends on the genre and the game of course. Sure, there isn't much difference between those schemes if we're talking about TES or Fallout.

If we're talking about shooters with any real degree of difficulty though, the difference is night and day. Anyone who claims otherwise is in some serious denial.

It also depends on the skill level of the pad user, and the software implementation per game (deadzone, aim acceleration, sensitivity etc).

In my experience it is pretty minor. Noticeable always (I always disable aim assist in console games), but still minor. Only makes a real design-impacting difference at the competitive PvP level, where there for sure should be no aim assist.

I don't know why some people always make a big deal out of it. Remember PC FPS used to be played with keyboard aiming, which is far inferior to gamepad aiming. Don't be dumb.

 

[LudensCogitet]

I've also played a ton of games with both gamepad and KB&M, and the difference is definitely not minor.

It depends on the genre and the game of course. Sure, there isn't much difference between those schemes if we're talking about TES or Fallout.

If we're talking about shooters with any real degree of difficulty though, the difference is night and day. Anyone who claims otherwise is in some serious denial.

It also depends on the skill level of the pad user, and the software implementation per game (deadzone, aim acceleration, sensitivity etc).

In my experience it is pretty minor. Noticeable always (I always disable aim assist in console games), but still minor. Only makes a real design-impacting difference at the competitive PvP level, where there for sure should be no aim assist.

I don't know why some people always make a big deal out of it. Remember PC FPS used to be played with keyboard aiming, which is far inferior to gamepad aiming. Don't be dumb.

If you design a first person shooter where it doesn't matter if you can precisely place your crosshair or you have to slide it into position as though you were flying a plane, you didn't design carefully.

 

[Bad Sector]

My initial point was that the criticisms toward the original SS1 control system are often just parroted without realizing how some modern control schemes, that we are already conditioned and accustomed to use without noticing anymore, are worse (or at least equivalently bad).

My original point was that SS1's control scheme, being all keyboard (ie. digital) based for its movement and orientation and using the mouse as a pointing device to do things that over the years we've found better and faster ways to do (e.g. instead of picking up an item by moving the cursor on it and drag+dropping it at the bottom of the screen, you just orient the camera to see the item near the center -perhaps with some highlighting- and use a context-sensitive action button to automatically pick it up and put it in the inventory), regardless of being done with KBM or gamepad, is actually worse the control scheme you find in shooters when you're playing them with a gamepad. I mean, that was your original comparison after all - original SS1 control scheme vs generic gamepad FPS scheme - unless i misunderstood it.

SS1 was made during a time when developers were still fumbling around when it came to first person controls - it is a great and very influential game, but not every element it has was flawless.

This will be highlighted in the moment/if SS1 will be ported to consoles.

Not sure what you expect to happen there.

I've also played a ton of games with both gamepad and KB&M, and the difference is definitely not minor.

It depends on the genre and the game of course. Sure, there isn't much difference between those schemes if we're talking about TES or Fallout.

If we're talking about shooters with any real degree of difficulty though, the difference is night and day. Anyone who claims otherwise is in some serious denial.

It also depends on the skill level of the pad user, and the software implementation per game (deadzone, aim acceleration, sensitivity etc).

In my experience it is pretty minor. Noticeable always (I always disable aim assist in console games), but still minor. Only makes a real design-impacting difference at the competitive PvP level, where there for sure should be no aim assist

Yes that has been my exact experience as well - including the part where at the past i sucked at aiming with a controller. The first i tried to play an FPS with one was when i visited my father who had a 360 and tried to play FEAR (a game i had already finished on PC with KBM at the time) and couldn't even align the camera straight - i gave up before even finishing the first level.

So i understand how people who aren't used to it thinking it is far inferior - it even took me years to get used to gamepads enough to be able to play comfortably (and i still play better with a mouse, it just doesn't matter for the overwhelmingly vast majority of games - regardless of their release date).

Of course nobody is claiming (i hope) that aiming with a gamepad is the same like aiming with a mouse (sliding with the gamepad is better than the keyboard though due to analog input). The claim, or at least my claim, is that unless a game shits the bed about its UX, the difference isn't as great as some people think.

 

[Ash]

Yeah I grew up obsessively playing and collecting everything I could get my hands on on every platform so I imagine I am in the minority in how adaptive I am. Not to mention how pads have evolved over the years - quite a bit more refined these days though still far from perfect. Kind of going in the wrong direction with dedicated social media buttons and other gimmicks too, but that's the decline for you.

If you design a first person shooter where it doesn't matter if you can precisely place your crosshair or you have to slide it into position as though you were flying a plane, you didn't design carefully.

Interesting. Show me one such professionally-made FPS to the contrary where extreme nanosecond precision advantage is required? Singleplayer FPS games are not and have never been demanding at all. The most hardcore singleplayer FPS is probably Turok, a console game (though not for its precision demanded but rather ulterior game rules and big mazey levels). The only exception is classic multiplayer arena shooters, a mouse is simply needed to compete because other mouse users soaring through the sky at 100mph. I think the only enemy that ever came close to demanding a high degree of precision is Shadow Warrior's (1997) bees, but they're a minor enemy (deal low damage), rarely appear, and are grouped together begging to be blown up which of course doesn't require precision. and this is of course if you have disabled aim assist in the config, since SW comes with that enabled by default most likely for keyboard aimers.

 

[JDR13]

It also depends on the skill level of the pad user, and the software implementation per game (deadzone, aim acceleration, sensitivity etc).

In my experience it is pretty minor. Noticeable always (I always disable aim assist in console games), but still minor. Only makes a real design-impacting difference at the competitive PvP level, where there for sure should be no aim assist.

I don't know why some people always make a big deal out of it. Remember PC FPS used to be played with keyboard aiming, which is far inferior to gamepad aiming. Don't be dumb.

Skill level being equal with both, KB&M is going to be superior every time in a game that uses first-person aiming. That's just a simple fact no matter how hard you try to rationalize otherwise. No one is saying that you can't be good with a gamepad.. just that KB&M has obvious advantages that aren't even debatable.

The only exception might be someone who can't fully utilize KB&M due to a disability, etc.

 

[Ash]

I know you're a bit special but fuck learn to read dumbass. Nobody is trying to claim the mouse is not objectively superior for precision.

 

[JDR13]

I know you're a bit special but fuck learn to read dumbass. Nobody is trying to claim the mouse is not objectively superior for precision.

No, you're just doing your bit of exaggerating and projecting as usual because you can't handle when people don't agree with exactly what you say.

And of course, like the sad little boy that you are, you've already switched to insults because you realize you don't actually have an argument.

 

[Ash]

dumb. So very dumb.

the points being made are:

1. The inferior precision of modern pads are not as bad as some like to make out. It's noticable yes, but should not influence enemy design and the like aside from the addition of an (optional) aim assist.
2. Pads are not objectively inferior to M&K in every way. There are pros and cons to both forms of input. This is not debatable.

 

[JDR13]

Case in point...

If you design a first person shooter where it doesn't matter if you can precisely place your crosshair or you have to slide it into position as though you were flying a plane, you didn't design carefully.

Interesting. Show me one such professionally-made FPS to the contrary where extreme nanosecond precision advantage is required? Singleplayer FPS games are not and have never been demanding at all. The most hardcore singleplayer FPS is probably Turok, a console game (though not for its precision demanded but rather ulterior game rules and big mazey levels). The only exception is classic multiplayer arena shooters, a mouse is simply needed to compete because other mouse users soaring through the sky at 100mph. I think the only enemy that ever came close to demanding a high degree of precision is Shadow Warrior's (1997) bees, but they're a minor enemy (deal low damage), rarely appear, and are grouped together begging to be blown up which of course doesn't require precision. and this is of course if you have disabled aim assist in the config, since SW comes with that enabled by default most likely for keyboard aimers.

Where the fuck did he say anything about "extreme nanosecond precision"? He didn't say anything even remotely close to that. Instead, you decided to just insert your own words into his mouth and then ramble off a bunch of shit. Most of which just shows how full of shit (and stuck in the past) you are. Turok... Lol

 

[Ash]

Please go back to sucking casual dick in the Halo thread.

 

[kangaxx]

Speaking as an ex-1.6 hardcore gaymer (my clan played in CSGN, various clanbase cups among other leagues) I can do a hell of a lot more damage with a M+K than a gamepad.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

Not sure what you expect to happen there.

When people will have a choice: to play SS1 with the antiquated KB&M control scheme or with a modern gamepad. What will they choose? None of them are perfect, obviously. SS1 KB&M implementation can be improved and modern gamepads have inherent limits when compared to KB&M too.

In my case I am pretty sure that the lesser evil will be still KB&M. And probably many people will do that too, if they try to be objective and don't follows memes (and are not scared to try).

Edit: This comparison will be interesting for the following reason: to compare the modern control scheme gamepad to the older SS1 KB&M one, that many judge to be the worst in absolute, In the same SS1 game. Maybe people will realizing the modern one is not so better than the older one that everyone is criticizing. This will put things a bit in perspective for the pervasive usage of gamepads in modern games.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Please tell me how there will be not much difference between k+m and a gamepad in a game that uses things like grid inventory and lots of drag and drop interactions, just as SS2 does.

The "not much difference" always comes from devs forcing objectively retarded design, like "tabs within tabs within tabs" list based inventories that later seep into pc versions, causing massive decline.

 

[Bad Sector]

When people will have a choice: to play SS1 with the antiquated KB&M control scheme or with a modern gamepad. What will they choose?

SS1EE already supports a much improved control scheme (and even that is based on a custom hack that was made in the original SS1 years ago exactly because people didn't like the original controls). One of the most common pros aside of support for modern OSes for SS1EE is exactly the better controls it has.

But besides that, if they buy the game on console there wont be much of a choice because consoles in general only support gamepads. It is on the PC where you could make such a choice, though sadly the current SS1EE doesn't have any form of gamepad support. Even then... i'm not sure what this would prove aside from people preferring one or the other more - popularity wouldn't in/validate anything.

Please tell me how there will be not much difference between k+m and a gamepad in a game that uses things like grid inventory and lots of drag and drop interactions, just as SS2 does.

The "not much difference" i mention is about gamepad controls in general, not any specific implementation. Of course if a game doesn't take gamepad or KBM into consideration when designing their UI, things will be awkward (as an example see how Cyberpunk 2077's UI is clearly designed with a mouse in mind and you end up using a virtual mouse cursor with the gamepad's right analog stick and treats the A button as if it was a left mouse button). Though even that rarely stops the game from being perfectly playable.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

But games taking gamepad into consideration is the entire issue. Nu-Fallouts, for example, would probably be able to have human-designated UIs instead of something that could well be judged as crime against humanity. But you get what you get because "not much difference" lol.

 

[Bad Sector]

But games taking gamepad into consideration is the entire issue. Nu-Fallouts, for example, would probably be able to have human-designated UIs instead of something that could well be judged as crime against humanity.

How is games taking gamepad into consideration an issue? And TBH i'm not sure what you refer to with your example. I've played New Vegas on both KBM and gamepad and i do not remember having an issue with the UI aside from the Pipboy "border" (the 3D model) taking too much screen space when you alter the FOV (though the CRT filter was a neat touch). Is this something introduced in Fallout 4 / 76?

You can find a ton of "crimes against humanity" in terms of UI regardless of control scheme.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

And TBH i'm not sure what you refer to with your example.

Oh, I don't know. Maybe things like using multiple tabs within tabs for something that used to be on one screen while somehow conveying less information, multiple tabs within tabs text- and list-based inventories in a game that's largely built around collecting trash, clunky and bugged af aimbot that breaks the flow of otherwise rt game every 2 minutes, general UI so unwieldy that it needs to stop an otherwise rt game for everyone bar the player every time you use it, completely annihilating any illusion of challenge and difficulty. You know, stuff like that. Are you being facetious right now? I seriously can't tell, but the fact you mentioned being a reviewer and then almost immediately saying you don't see a problem with F3 UI gives me a bad feeling.

How is games taking gamepad into consideration an issue?

Yeah, lets throw every game and genre into a blender so that it can be everywhere and for everyone, "not much difference". What's the worst that could happen.

Said someone around two and a half decades ago.

 

[Ash]

multiple tabs within tabs

That's called categorization. Pretty much a must-have for games with huge ass inventories. Yeah they could have rendered more stuff per screen, used more screen real estate but they wanted their massive vault boy icons for whatever reason.

Some may say you need to design GUI's with larger font and the like for console players, some of whom (decide to) sit some unreasonable distance from the TV, but then how does one explain strategy games on console where devs usually say fuck that noise and just go ahead and keep font small and fill screen real estate, because they have some balls unlike most.

list-based inventories in a game that's largely built around collecting trash

Again, pretty much mandatory since there's so much. Things can be sorted in alphabetical order. You don't need to make unique icons for every little thing so that the player could quickly identify it among a horde of trash.

Don't get me wrong I much prefer grid with icons but it couldn't really fit with Nu Fallout design as it stands, or wouldn't necessarily make for a better UI. Also there are tons of console games with grid-based inventories for the record.

clunky and bugged af aimbot that breaks the flow of otherwise rt game every 2 minutes

Bad game design = blame consoles, every time, not the devs behind silly/sellout decisions. How do you come to terms with FO1's inventory when there is no console to blame?

general UI so unwieldy that it needs to stop an otherwise rt game for everyone bar the player every time you use it"

More due to the nature of there being a million different types of trash, huge ass inventory, than the UI itself. Again.
They did grid with icons before with Morrowind. Was it notably better? No. Still needed categorisation tabs. Icons often weren't unique (because there was so much stuff) so finding your particular desired potion among all the other potions was a tall order. It was later ported to xbox so lets blame that.