Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzzychickens
If you took a FPS designed to properly support gamepad and mouse, then took the worlds best players from the PC and the best on consoles (gamepad users) and set out to see which control interface was more accurate - you'd see a heavy advantage go to mouse users.
|
You would see that the mouse users would aim faster and more accurately - but that's an advantage specifically to aiming on a 3d engine, and only if the engine is designed so that aiming is a particularly vital part of the game; for instance, in most shooters, hitting the enemy with one or two bullets won't kill them in reality, so aim matters with automatic weapons. If the engine were designed with realistic damage, a gamepad could dominate simply by picking an approximate direction and strafing, using the greater mobility of the thumbstick vs wasd.
But that's not how shooters are designed, since Quake. They're not realistic. Neither mice nor gamepads can approach the accuracy or speed of aiming in real life, but the games are designed so that mice can do it fastest.
Anyhow, shooter engines don't work like flight-sim engines. The object isn't to point in an exact direction or turn 180's in 200 milliseconds. If a mouse could fly a plane better than a joystick, they'd use mice in real planes. A gamepad is a ready-made throttle and stick. If they'd introduce control mapping then BOP could be made full-sim easily, using button combos. Such as, l1+x = fuel mix up, l1 + triangle = fuel mix down, l1 + square and l1 + circle = wheel brakes, r1 + x = tailwheel lock, etc. And allow no-WEP as an option so altitude won't be so trivialized.