Do gamers not understand what good and bad controls are anymore?

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

So, there's all these complaints about The Last Guardian having bad controls or PS2-era controls. The boy purposefully has weight to him unlike most modern gaming characters. That doesn't mean the controls are bad. Plus, it takes only like 10 minutes to adjust to the controls as well. I hear people (and IGN) mention that triangle is not the usual jump button, well fucking change it then, problem solved.

Anyways, after playing TLG, I've moved onto Rise of the Tomb Raider and it has some pretty bad controls for a modern day TPS. It's not much of a problem getting through the vast majority of areas, but I got to probably the 1st tough combat section and the control issues completely reveal themselves when you need quick, responsive, and accurate controls. The aiming just isn't right, the aim acceleration is nonexistent. Any cover system that is contextual sucks and I've already gotten killed by it a couple times now. You can't even adjust the freaking camera sensitivity, you aim with the free look camera in any shooter and not being able to aim the way you like is a huge fail. Overall, the latest Tomb Raider has worse controls than even Uncharted, which has average controls at best.

Where's reviewer criticism of Uncharted's or Tomb Raider's controls? It's almost nonexistent. Uncharted 4 has a 93 average score on MetaCritic with average controls at best. How does that happen? Jim Sterling's review of TLG criticizes one button being used for numerous things, which rarely interfere with each other. While Uncharted ever since the first game has used the same button for cover and roll, and the game constantly puts you in cover when you want to roll or vice verse. Jim's review of Rise of the Tomb Raider never even mentions controls. Yet, I've already died numerous times in Rise due to controls and never died once in TLG due to controls. Modern controls while being more contextual and easier to use lack more accurate controls of past generations. Go back to Metal Gear Solid 4 and just see how many more actions you can do without any contextual controls whatsoever (and just check out just how many control options you have too, there's literally tabs of things you can change). Yeah, they are harder to learn, but you can do far more with them and you won't die because of them.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

So, there's all these complaints about The Last Guardian having bad controls or PS2-era controls. The boy purposefully has weight to him unlike most modern gaming characters. That doesn't mean the controls are bad. Plus, it takes only like 10 minutes to adjust to the controls as well. I hear people (and IGN) mention that triangle is not the usual jump button, well fucking change it then, problem solved.

Anyways, after playing TLG, I've moved onto Rise of the Tomb Raider and it has some pretty bad controls for a modern day TPS. It's not much of a problem getting through the vast majority of areas, but I got to probably the 1st tough combat section and the control issues completely reveal themselves when you need quick, responsive, and accurate controls. The aiming just isn't right, the aim acceleration is nonexistent. Any cover system that is contextual sucks and I've already gotten killed by it a couple times now. You can't even adjust the freaking camera sensitivity, you aim with the free look camera in any shooter and not being able to aim the way you like is a huge fail. Overall, the latest Tomb Raider has worse controls than even Uncharted, which has average controls at best.

Where's reviewer criticism of Uncharted's or Tomb Raider's controls? It's almost nonexistent. Uncharted 4 has a 93 average score on MetaCritic with average controls at best. How does that happen? Jim Sterling's review of TLG criticizes one button being used for numerous things, which rarely interfere with each other. While Uncharted ever since the first game has used the same button for cover and roll, and the game constantly puts you in cover when you want to roll or vice verse. Jim's review of Rise of the Tomb Raider never even mentions controls. Yet, I've already died numerous times in Rise due to controls and never died once in TLG due to controls. Modern controls while being more contextual and easier to use lack more accurate controls of past generations. Go back to Metal Gear Solid 4 and just see how many more actions you can do without any contextual controls whatsoever (and just check out just how many control options you have too, there's literally tabs of things you can change). Yeah, they are harder to learn, but you can do far more with them and you won't die because of them.

Maybe, just maybe, other people experience things differently and commenting on how their subjective perception is wrong because you had a different experience is ludicrously arrogant. Feel free to say you disagree with criticism all you want, but realize that as much as you disagree with the respective reviewer's opinion, you are also wide open to the same level of criticism.
Its not objective fact, stop arguing it like it is.

 

[SmallHatLogan]

Any more? There are plenty of people, presumably on these very forums, who genuinely think tank controls are a good thing (outside the context of actually being in a tank). That shit's been around for ages.

Anyway, people grow accustomed to certain control schemes and as long as it's familiar and gets the job done a few hiccups here and there aren't going to bother them. I can't comment on the games you mentioned because I haven't played them. But take Mass Effect 3 for example. One button for sprint, dodge roll, take cover, leave cover, and vault over cover. It's a bit overloaded but I found it only fucks me on the odd occasion, and even then it usually doesn't result in death (there have been a couple of accidental vaultings into incoming fire but they're few and far between). Is there a better way they could've been designed? Probably. Do I care? Not really.

As for The Last Guardian, I don't know the specific problems people are having but if the controls are not great but also unconventional then people are a lot more likely to take notice.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

To me the normal jump button is X for action games because all action games like dmc god of war bayonetta and ninja gaiden use X for it, also old tomb raider used it as well.


Nowadays a lot of games use a "do all things" button which is both run and jump and climb up/down depending on what is nearby so if that is the standard anything more complex may feel bad but that is unavoidable. It is a question of simplicity vs freedom.


Players not used to weighty realistic movement will struggle in games which contain it. It is more of a testament to their low degree of variety in gaming experiences than anything, if you only started gaming recently and all you know is shooters TLG will of course feel odd. Ico felt odd for me too back in the day. The trick is wether you keep perservering or not.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

The major issue I take with the whole "weighty = realistic" argument is that, personally, these controls feel less natural and more like an initial drunken stumble turned into a run/fast walk.
Natural movement should feel effortless. I don't notice weighty steps when I choose to walk forward unless I've been drinking or are otherwise in a state of abnormal perception. In games, to feel natural I shouldn't need to initially feel awkward in my control set when moving in any direction. I don't want to feel like I'm relearning to walk. That is why "weighted" controls feel awkward or sluggish to me, and perhaps many other people.

 

[CaitSeith]

Any more? There are plenty of people, presumably on these very forums, who genuinely think tank controls are a good thing (outside the context of actually being in a tank). That shit's been around for ages.

Anyway, people grow accustomed to certain control schemes and as long as it's familiar and gets the job done a few hiccups here and there aren't going to bother them. I can't comment on the games you mentioned because I haven't played them. But take Mass Effect 3 for example. One button for sprint, dodge roll, take cover, leave cover, and vault over cover. It's a bit overloaded but I found it only fucks me on the odd occasion, and even then it usually doesn't result in death (there have been a couple of accidental vaultings into incoming fire but they're few and far between). Is there a better way they could've been designed? Probably. Do I care? Not really.

As for The Last Guardian, I don't know the specific problems people are having but if the controls are not great but also unconventional then people are a lot more likely to take notice.

The thing is the controls are for platforming and solving puzzles. Controls from any modern puzzle platformer to do the exact same actions (running, jumping, climbing, etc) for the same goals are tighter and more responsive than TLG's. On the other hand, controls from puzzle platformers in the PS2 era are much more similar to TLG's; not because they added more to the experience, but because the developers still were experimenting which one gave the best experience. Controls in modern puzzle platformers are the refined result of those experiments. And let's not talk about the camera controls (because it would be redundant).

 

[Casual Shinji]

I can understand why people find the controls for The Last Guardian frustrating. They're very outside the norm, they're floppy, and heavily tied to the game's physics. Especially the latter makes it so you never truly feel like you have solid footing. And the camera doesn't help matters much either.

I had very little issue with them, apart from climbing Trico feeling very sticky, and the underwater swimming being atrocious.

More than anything this has showed me how subjective objects of frustration can be. I can be quite prone to rage out during a game, but The Last Guardian only got two very light ones out of me. And neither had anything to do with the general controls or Trico.

 

[CaitSeith]

Geez, I don't know who is worse: you or CriticalGaming with the "fanboys can't see TLG is objectively a terrible game" argument (on second thought, shaming people for liking a game is definitely worse in my book). At least we can say there are diverse opinions in the forums.

 

[Vendor-Lazarus]

You think you have it bad? ^^

Try being a PC gamer in an era swamped with bad 'ports and PC games striving to accommodate console players any way they can. ,)

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Maybe, just maybe, other people experience things differently and commenting on how their subjective perception is wrong because you had a different experience is ludicrously arrogant. Feel free to say you disagree with criticism all you want, but realize that as much as you disagree with the respective reviewer's opinion, you are also wide open to the same level of criticism.
Its not objective fact, stop arguing it like it is.

Are you actually defending not having an option to change the sensitivity of the camera you aim with? Aiming is the most important control aspect with regards to a shooter. Not having a camera sensitivity option in a TPS is the same exact thing as not being able to change look speed in a FPS. That's pretty damn objective if you ask me.

But take Mass Effect 3 for example. One button for sprint, dodge roll, take cover, leave cover, and vault over cover. It's a bit overloaded but I found it only fucks me on the odd occasion, and even then it usually doesn't result in death (there have been a couple of accidental vaultings into incoming fire but they're few and far between). Is there a better way they could've been designed? Probably. Do I care? Not really.

Sadly ME3 controls better than some full-on TPSs. The worst aspect of ME3 was the aim-assist. I got hardcore into the MP for a bit and the worst was centering on a phantom's head only for your aim to get moved to a low level enemy when you brought up the crosshairs.

To me the normal jump button is X for action games because all action games like dmc god of war bayonetta and ninja gaiden use X for it, also old tomb raider used it as well.

Like I said, with regards to TLG using triangle for jump, you can change it. Even "professional" sites like IGN seem to not know about a rather basic PS4 feature. For example, I switched the shoulder buttons on Tomb Raider so I can shoot with L1+R1 because I don't like using the triggers. I also HATE HATE HATE sprinting with L3 in any shooter so I change that on every shooter I play. I feel pressing the left stick in while pushed forward ruins the left stick over time.

The major issue I take with the whole "weighty = realistic" argument is that, personally, these controls feel less natural and more like an initial drunken stumble turned into a run/fast walk.

It depends on the game for me. TLG doesn't have you stringing jumps together while you're being chased by a helicopter shooting at you. TLG doesn't have you stringing any jumps together, it's all about making one jump at a time. I guess it's sorta like a Souls game vs a spectacle fighter (DMC, Bayo, etc). A Souls game purposefully has your character take some time to attack after you press attack nor can you cancel out of an attack in the middle of it. That works fine for a Souls game but those controls in Bayonetta wouldn't work. That's pretty much the same thing with regards to TLG vs say a Mario game. At the same time, I don't get how anyone can say Uncharted is a better platformer when it doesn't really have platforming at all, it's all automated. Hell, the PSP Uncharted game lets you draw a line from Point A to B to have Drake automatically get from A to B so you don't have to actually climb something because your input is actually meaningless.

Geez, I don't know who is worse: you or CriticalGaming with the "fanboys can't see TLG is a objectively terrible game" argument (on second thought, shaming people for liking a game is definitely worse in book). At least we can say there are diverse opinions in the forums.

TLG doesn't have perfect controls, but at the same time I don't die because of them. The laggy camera is an issue, but you can get used to it. I do really hate how there's not a movement speed between running and stealthily walking. It's annoying having basically binary movement on an analog stick. There should've been a jogging speed as well. And, climbing on creatures has never been perfected yet from SotC to Dragon's Dogma to TLG. It is refreshing to get a game with actual platforming like TLG even if there's some minor issues. With a lot of games with platforming now, it's not real or tied to physics, it's all animation based. There's several jumps in Uncharted and Tomb Raider that just don't make sense. I'll see the distance required to make a jump in say Uncharted and I know that distance is just too far and doesn't make any sense, yet Drake will make the jump with an animation that makes no sense with regards to any type of physics whatsoever. Whereas in TLG, every jump made sense with regards to distance and physics. Some times I actually get hung up in games like Uncharted because I think that must be the wrong way to go because the distance is just too far then to realize that it's literally the only way to go.

 

[shrekfan246]

Are you actually defending not having an option to change the sensitivity of the camera you aim with? Aiming is the most important control aspect with regards to a shooter. Not having a camera sensitivity option in a TPS is the same exact thing as not being able to change look speed in a FPS. That's pretty damn objective if you ask me.

Perhaps, and here's a wild thought, you should try playing shooters on PC.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Are you actually defending not having an option to change the sensitivity of the camera you aim with? Aiming is the most important control aspect with regards to a shooter. Not having a camera sensitivity option in a TPS is the same exact thing as not being able to change look speed in a FPS. That's pretty damn objective if you ask me.

Perhaps, and here's a wild thought, you should try playing shooters on PC.

There's really no reason to not include options regardless of platform. And how about "professional" reviewers mentioning such things in the reviews? TotalBiscuit goes through all the options. I can adjust to any controls very well. Outside of one sequence so far in Tomb Raider where you do need quick and accurate controls, the game controls fine enough. However, it isn't really until you need to do things quick and accurate that you can see how the controls fail. That's the exact reason why Uncharted plays fine enough in single player, but its online sucks because you're playing against humans and not AI, thus you need really solid controls that the game just doesn't have. Playing Tomb Raider on PC, the controls would also still fail as I very much doubt there's a cover button.

Plus I mean.. What did people expect from the Last Guardian? Shadow of the Colossus wasn't exactly conventional in its controls either.

TLG plays just like you'd expect a Team ICO game to play like, different doesn't equate to bad. I was worried way back when news of Santa Monica coming in to help development that TLG would no longer feel like a Team ICO game anymore. If SotC was developed by a different studio using "modern" controls, the colossus fights would probably end up being like Castlevania Lords of Shadow Titan fights, which would be horrible.

 

[shrekfan246]

Playing Tomb Raider on PC, the controls would also still fail as I very much doubt there's a cover button.

For the record, I'm going to say that this is a YMMV thing as well, because I actually fucking love the contextual cover in the Tomb Raider reboot games, and vastly prefer it to the button-snap system in games like Gears of War or Mass Effect 2/3.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Playing Tomb Raider on PC, the controls would also still fail as I very much doubt there's a cover button.

For the record, I'm going to say that this is a YMMV thing as well, because I actually fucking love the contextual cover in the Tomb Raider reboot games, and vastly prefer it to the button-snap system in games like Gears of War or Mass Effect 2/3.

The contextual cover system is definitely easier no doubt; however, those cover systems will get you killed, that's just a fact. Any time a game attempts to predict what you want to do, there's going to be times when it predicts wrong, there's just no way around that. Any flaws in the control system are magnified online. Again, that's not that big a deal against AI, but against human players that gets you killed. I think quite a few people prefer MGS5's controls over MGS4 because they are less complicated, but that doesn't make MGS5's controls better. MGS5's contextual cover system gets you killed so often online plus it makes you mess up your shooting and grenade throws. When playing against human players, you rarely want to use the cover system (as you want freedom of movement) but you do want to use cover; basically, you want to stand behind cover without sticking to it, and that's obviously rather hard to do when a game puts you into cover automatically when you stand behind a wall. Requiring a button to do that removes all those issues. Watch high-level play in any cover shooter like Uncharted or Ghost Recon Future Soldier and you'll see players very sparingly use the cover system.

Here's a clip I made awhile back where the MGS5 cover system gets me killed. I wanted to box slide away and do something like this [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp94mSajw10] hopefully, but the game sticks me to cover and I end up in a crouched position, which you need to be in a standing position to box slide.

 

[shrekfan246]

Playing Tomb Raider on PC, the controls would also still fail as I very much doubt there's a cover button.

For the record, I'm going to say that this is a YMMV thing as well, because I actually fucking love the contextual cover in the Tomb Raider reboot games, and vastly prefer it to the button-snap system in games like Gears of War or Mass Effect 2/3.

The contextual cover system is definitely easier no doubt; however, those cover systems will get you killed, that's just a fact. Any time a game attempts to predict what you want to do, there's going to be times when it predicts wrong, there's just no way around that.

See, you say that, but I just haven't seen it myself, so once again, it's kind of a very personal point.

Any flaws in the control system are magnified online. Again, that's not that big a deal against AI, but against human players that gets you killed.

There are quite a few things that go into getting killed while playing online games. I'm not going to say that contextual cover isn't a bigger problem in online play, but the biggest reasons for that would just be the issues inherent in online play itself, primary among them being latency and people glitching the system. Even with a solid connection, I still sigh every time I'm invaded in a Dark Souls game because everyone seems to be able to hit me from five miles away while my attacks whiff them even with visibly direct connections. There's a reason I don't typically play online games, and it's not because contextual cover gets me killed. So while I will agree that you have a point here, it's still a highly subjective one and not one where you can just say "contextual cover is always shit no matter what! Nobody should ever use it for anything ever!"

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I don't like automatic cover either. It was disruptive in MGSV, having your character perform this slow animation that alters your aim slightly any time they're near an object. How lazy or technically challenged do you have to be to think manual cover is cumbersome? MGS4 was more functional, and both MGS4 and MGS3 had better online modes than MGSV.

I never got a chance to play MGS3's online but I played MGS4's online all 4 years the servers were up. MGS5's online is pretty disappointing; obviously the controls aren't nearly as good, the devs don't know what they are doing as they take out things that increase the skillgap, and the balance is awful. It's really not that hard to balance guns. And, it's just so stupid to give a class stealth camo or NVG.

See, you say that, but I just haven't seen it myself, so once again, it's kind of a very personal point.

There are quite a few things that go into getting killed while playing online games. I'm not going to say that contextual cover isn't a bigger problem in online play, but the biggest reasons for that would just be the issues inherent in online play itself, primary among them being latency and people glitching the system. Even with a solid connection, I still sigh every time I'm invaded in a Dark Souls game because everyone seems to be able to hit me from five miles away while my attacks whiff them even with visibly direct connections. There's a reason I don't typically play online games, and it's not because contextual cover gets me killed. So while I will agree that you have a point here, it's still a highly subjective one and not one where you can just say "contextual cover is always shit no matter what! Nobody should ever use it for anything ever!"

I showed a clip where the cover system screws you over. The game put me into cover thus putting my character in a crouched position which then didn't let me do what I wanted to do. I didn't ask nor want to be in cover.

I can't really comment on how the Souls games play online, I've always heard the netcode is horrible though. However, the vast majority of the time, normal lag will not get you killed. Players that blame lag for most deaths just aren't nearly as good as they think they are. When you don't take responsibility for your deaths that means you don't think it's your fault meaning you won't get better because you're blaming the game instead of yourself. If you actually pay attention to what the other better "laggier" player is doing that you're not doing, you'll almost always find it's not lag and it's just you being outplayed.

Anyways, back to cover systems. Another reason why you want to stand behind a wall or even crouch behind chest-high cover (and not use the cover system) is because when you shoot from the cover system, it's very predictable where you and your head will be. If you just move out from cover, your actions and position are much less predictable. Also, you can expose less of your body when standing behind a wall and shooting vs using the cover system and "popping" out. Not using the game's cover system gives you that freedom of movement in shooting and also escaping from say a grenade or other explosive, that fraction of a section it takes to separate yourself from cover to then move away from a grenade can easily be the difference. I hope you can see just how bad and disadvantageous a game putting you into cover can be when you don't want to get into cover. And a simple button press resolves the whole issue.

Here's a video (queued up at the right time) from Ghost Recon Future Soldier showing you exactly why you should use the actual cover system as little as possible: