By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
your mother on 01 August 2007
Edit Thread
Desroko said:
your mother said:
Desroko said:
your mother said:
Desroko said:
I'd like to see touch pads icontinued; I like how the iPhone is used without a stylus, for example. There wouldn't be a need for d-pads anymore, which seem clunkier as time goes by.

I dunno. Touch pads can be nice, but there are two major inconveniences that I can think of off the top of my head:

  • Ever used a touchscreen-only remote control? They look slick and all, but you need to look at the screen to see which button you are pressing. With hard buttons (traditional remotes) you can feel the unique shapes and sizes of buttons which means you don't have to keep an eye on the remote in order to switch channels (which implies you take your eyes off the TV). Now put that into a gaming context and the problem is rather apparent.
  • Just imagine trying to pull off a "shoryuken" with a touchscreen!

I'm not sure either of this is really a problem. I've yet to see a game controller that has as many inputs as your average TV control, so it's not realy a valid comparison. The standard diamond-shaped pad can easily be recreated, as its four inputs in a rather large area, while a number pad has nine over a relatively smaller one. No one really looks down at the similarly-shaped face buttons on an Xbox or PS controller, because with a bit of practice your thumb knows where to go.

 

As for the second - just touch your thumb to the bottom of the pad and sweep it counter-clockwise for a quarter, and then press whatever corresponds to "Punch." To my mind this is quite a bit smoother than even the Xbox d-pad, which makes an effort to facilitate continuous motions.

I feel it would be a major issue as up to now I can't think of a DS title that utilizes the touchscreen that doesn't require you to fix your eyes on the screen to know what you are doing.

Well, with Mario Kart DS you just have to tap anywhere on the screen to switch between map modes, but then again, the touchscreen in this case serves only as a toggle.

Regarding the input issue: Let's compare a gamepad with a phone. They both have about the same number of buttons. I don't think you can dial a number on a touchscreen without looking at it. You can, however, do so with a phone with hard buttons.

I don't know how the iPhone handles this, but if they have come up with a way for you to dial a number without having to look at the touchscreen then I agree we may have a winner. Otherwise, I think touchscreen either needs to mature more, or perhaps there are other alternatives out there that are being researched.


I think I already mentioned this, but I'll explainmy thinking more clearly. Replicating a traditional nine-input number pad and a four-input d-pad aren't even close. The lower number of inputs and the different placement of the buttons make the latter far simpler.

But there's another issue - while it is indeed possible for you to recognize buttons on a d-pad by shape and placement alone, in practice very few gamers do. You don't feel for the Square button or X button - you know where they are. When holding a controller, your thumb can reach very few places, and the four buttons of a d-pad and the four quadrants of a similarly-sized touchpad are all in easy distance and set far enough from each other that you can easily find them, even under duress, without sight or touch. You just stab the area where you know the button to be, without hesitation.

This may be something that needs to physicaly verified in order to be believed (and unfortunately, I'm not going to whip up a prototype to prove my point), but I'm confident that this wouldn't be a problem.

 

Edit: It just occurred to me - if anyone is worried about knowing where you have pressed after you've done it, there's no reason for the pad to be physically indistinguishable from the casing. I'm seeing a circular pad, about the same size or slightly larger than an Xbox d-pad, raised slightly from the surface of the controller itself. That way you can feel the edge (or not) and know whether you've pressed in the center, the top, bottom, left, or right, or some combination. You'll be a natural in no time.


I'm not talking about comparing nine buttons on a phone with a d-pad. I'm talking about replicating all the buttons on a gamepad and incorporating them into a touchscreen. I think there would be an issue.

However, does anyone know how the iPhone works? I've heard some nice things about that screen, but up to now I haven't been able to get my hands on one so everything I know is still unfortunately theoretical.

I agree with the placement. You don't look at the buttons (Well, not the ones familiar to the controls anyhow! I do know people who still look to find the X or Y button because they don't play that frequently.) but again I am not sure if it would hold up under all circumstances (e.g. you shift your thumb a bit off-center to where the quadrants are aligned and you end up losing the "up" quadrant, for example. Sure, you can quickly look at the screen and shift your thumb accordingly to resolve the issue, but that is an issue that wouldn't exist with traditional buttons in the first place. Therefore, while it may improve certain aspects, it isn't without its problems.

The problem with having raised, indented or otherwise physical features on a touchscreen is that you are reducing its flexibility to that of assigned hard buttons (as per my previous reply to cringer8's post) which for me defeats the purpose of having a touchscreen in the first place - why replace buttons with what is essentially another set of buttons?