I seriously don't understand how people think that more precise aiming automatically means better control for a FPS or TPS. There's a lot more to it than just aiming. It might work better with some games where aiming is the most important thing like Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter or older games that are more straight forward. But games like Halo and Gears of War would actually be harder to play with the Wii setup.
In Gears, running to and from cover as well as melee or active reload wouldn't work very well. In a game like that aiming isn't everything. You have to worry more about dodging, rolling and quick-twitch reactions, all of which would be harder to perform with a Wii setup.
In Halo, jumping around, driving vehicles, quick crouching, punching or anything that isn't aiming would also be more difficult. I have played these games with a mouse (way better than IR) and I found it easier to just use the 360 controller.
And about the auto-aim, it isn't that bad. I haven't seen any games that "lock-on", if anything Wii games seem to do this more.
Aiming is important in a shooting game, but mobility, actions and turning are just as important. I find it easier to lose track of what I'm doing in a Wii shooter. I think the Wii setup is better for on-rail shooters, which is why I think those games work better since the only thing that matters is aiming and shooting.
Many people are complete beasts with DA and quite frankly wouldn't benefit from either IR or a Mouse. Any advantage you get from better aiming is offset by other limitations to this setup.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
