New Game Controllers Push Back on Your Thumbs
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Hey Microsoft! How about this instead of that godawful Kinect-thing that you're spending all your money on? I would love to see where this goes, but as long as the console makers are trying to penetrate the "grandma market", I don't see this getting implemented any time soon.
[sub][sub]Also maybe make them look less like nipples.[/sub][/sub]
[sub][sub]Also maybe make them look less like nipples.[/sub][/sub]
Or a power glove style deal. Especially for the aforementioned DOA titles.BehattedWanderer said:
Sounds like an awful idea to me. It'll be annoying. Using thumbsticks all day already aches my thumbs sometimes, having them jerk my thumbs down will just be painful.
There were flight sticks that had this back in the late 90's, too. It's what "force feedback" used to mean on the PC. It was really cool, because in, say, a flight sim, you could actually feel the resistance on the stick changing when you're about to stall, or in a first person shooter, the stick actually wouldn't let you push it in any further when you hit a wall. I always wondered why rumble took off and that disappeared, aside from cost; considering the ridiculous amounts of money hardcore flight sim fans put into their control setups, you'd think these things would still be around, even if they are more expensive than rumble.
I'm not sure how I feel about this development. Done right, I suppose it could add to the immersion of the game. I see a lot of ways it could be done wrong.
1. Expense: How much is this going to add to the cost of my new controller? Not only will there be additional manufacturing costs, but the technology will need to be licensed from someone. Which brings us to...
2. Patent trolls: After the first gen controllers go out, will I not be able to buy a replacement for five years while the courts fumble their way through the inevitable countless patent infringement claims?
3. Reliability: If I push back too hard to overcome the feedback, will that break the force feedback feature? If force feedback gets broken, will my analog stick still work at all or will I need a new controller?
4. Implementation: What extra developer resources will need to be dedicated to implementing force feedback? Will it actually add anything to the experience?
1. Expense: How much is this going to add to the cost of my new controller? Not only will there be additional manufacturing costs, but the technology will need to be licensed from someone. Which brings us to...
2. Patent trolls: After the first gen controllers go out, will I not be able to buy a replacement for five years while the courts fumble their way through the inevitable countless patent infringement claims?
3. Reliability: If I push back too hard to overcome the feedback, will that break the force feedback feature? If force feedback gets broken, will my analog stick still work at all or will I need a new controller?
4. Implementation: What extra developer resources will need to be dedicated to implementing force feedback? Will it actually add anything to the experience?
I'm not going to lie, that's pretty freaking cool.
Do I want it? I don't know. Maybe with the right game?
Do I want it? I don't know. Maybe with the right game?
Perhaps it's because it's something of a sideline in comparison with the pretty cool tech on display?Doc Slingblade said:
OT: This could be an extremely interesting idea. I like the idea of being able to feel the recoil in my hands. Though it doesn't matter that much as I use mouse and keyboard.
It seems like several people did not understand what this controller actually does, but that's okay I guess...
This does not interest me. At all. It would only drive up the cost of controllers while making them less durable.
I don't need my thumb skin stretched all that badly.
I would love to see other new kinds of immersive feedback from game controllers, but this seems easy to break and easy to wear out.
Those tiny little servos are gonna break in a month of heavy use, easy.
And it uses friction; that's a dead giveaway it will not last.
Anyway, I'll keep hoping for something that will actually lead controllers onward.
Something better than skin stretching, better than motion-exclusive controls.
Something closer to control stick buttons. ("R3" and such.)
That was an innovation I feel was not noticed by many.
And I happen to love that someone thought of it.
This does not interest me. At all. It would only drive up the cost of controllers while making them less durable.
I don't need my thumb skin stretched all that badly.
I would love to see other new kinds of immersive feedback from game controllers, but this seems easy to break and easy to wear out.
Those tiny little servos are gonna break in a month of heavy use, easy.
And it uses friction; that's a dead giveaway it will not last.
Anyway, I'll keep hoping for something that will actually lead controllers onward.
Something better than skin stretching, better than motion-exclusive controls.
Something closer to control stick buttons. ("R3" and such.)
That was an innovation I feel was not noticed by many.
And I happen to love that someone thought of it.
And I'm against people being able to snipe for extended periods of time because there aren't any actual downsides to firing a sniper rifle. You end up making it like Halo where you can take multiple shots really fast, and fire from the hip if you want to, severely undermining the use of assault rifles because it's either deal with really hard hitting attacks that can be tossed out in a matter of seconds, or get close enough that they switch to the shotgun and kill you on the spot. I'd trade the pain radar that gives the shot direction away for slower sniper rifles, and throw in the tactile feedback that moves your aim when you fire to substitute for simulated aim wobbling that doesn't feel natural because it's like SOMEBODY ELSE is moving the gun, and you're constantly fighting them for control.Beautiful End said:
You make a good point. I'm actually not very good at FPS, always choosing an assault rifle and a shotgun in case things get rough (Which I guess I don't know how to use because I always end up dying anyway). It would annoy me that if I'm trying to make a shot, I need to wait for the "recoil" to disappear in order for me to try and shoot again, especially knowing that whoever I'm playing up against is probably better than me at it (I can't even shoot from the hip).weirdguy said:
I suppose something like this would level the field, but it would also screw us newbs. But once again, assuming they execute this correctly, it sounds like a great idea. I kinda wanna see where this goes.
[sub][sub]I just looked at the controller and its resemblance to boobs...and I thought of how GTA would probably use this controller. It was...disturbing.[/sub][/sub]
Games already make assault rifles inaccurate if you just keep firing. You're meant to shoot in bursts to focus your fire. Ironically, some of the rifles that autoburst for you are really bad at aiming, so generally you stick to doing it yourself.
...except for halo, in which you can keep aiming at the person and it'll stay on target. What is up with halo?
As for waiting for recoil, the thing about that is you're generally picking locations that give you enough time to escape once you've fired, or you're not supposed to miss, or somewhere high enough that they can't just throw a grenade at you. That is why there is so much focus on getting that one shot down, rather than just firing at the enemy and letting the autotargeting guide your shots instead, which is just amateurish. Sniper rifles are powerful weapons that can stop somebody in one hit, but the tradeoff is that you don't have much room for error.
On the other hand, most of the sniper's advantage is psychological, because having a stalker with a thing that makes your head explode if they concentrate hard enough doesn't do favors for morale.
...except for halo, in which you can keep aiming at the person and it'll stay on target. What is up with halo?
As for waiting for recoil, the thing about that is you're generally picking locations that give you enough time to escape once you've fired, or you're not supposed to miss, or somewhere high enough that they can't just throw a grenade at you. That is why there is so much focus on getting that one shot down, rather than just firing at the enemy and letting the autotargeting guide your shots instead, which is just amateurish. Sniper rifles are powerful weapons that can stop somebody in one hit, but the tradeoff is that you don't have much room for error.
On the other hand, most of the sniper's advantage is psychological, because having a stalker with a thing that makes your head explode if they concentrate hard enough doesn't do favors for morale.