Spindel said:
Zkuq said:
I think aim assist is probably mostly just compensation for the inferior control method rather than intentional dumbing down. That said, I do think having an analog stick is mostly an advantage for movement, but it's definitely a disadvantage for aiming. Unfortunately there are no popular options for analog movement with mouse controls, so that control scheme is probably not well supported in practice. curl-6 said:
Possibly a hot take, but I reckon there are a ton of great console FPS, a ton of great FPS post the 2000s, and a number of really good COD games. |
As the person who brought up the matter, I don't object to this at all. I don't have much experience with console shooters due to my dislike of the control method, so I can't really speak much about them. I just find it curious that it would seem that for some reason or another, most replies to this thread seem to prefer earlier shooters. As an anecdote, I like both old and new Wolfenstein games, and while the most recent games in the series have been good too, I do prefer the older ones. I think it might have something to do with the snappier controls, but it's been a while since I've played any Wolfenstein games, so I could be remembering the more recent ones incorrectly. I do know for certain that the older ones definitely had very snappy controls though. |
So far, of all the FPSs I’ve played, both on computer and on console, having a toggle between running (fast movement), walking (slow movement) and walking crouched along with 8 movement directions have been enough and having analogue movement has offered no form of advantage nor been implemented to matter. |
I see you have not played Metal Gear Solid V on PC, although to be honest, that's the only game where analog controls for movement are particularly useful - and even, I'd rather play MGSV with keyboard and mouse for vastly superior aiming. To elaborate a bit on MGSV: there's basically toggles for too fast to stay silent and silent but too slow to be able to get anywhere in time. If I recall correctly, they're not even useless speeds, so it's not like either should be replaced, and having even more different toggles would be quite unusual.
Anyway, having that extra bit of control is superior in general, even if it doesn't matter much in practice.
SvennoJ said:
Zkuq said:
I think aim assist is probably mostly just compensation for the inferior control method rather than intentional dumbing down. That said, I do think having an analog stick is mostly an advantage for movement, but it's definitely a disadvantage for aiming. Unfortunately there are no popular options for analog movement with mouse controls, so that control scheme is probably not well supported in practice. |
VR ;) (although you said no popular options, I wish VR was popular ugh)
I also don't find analog control for movement at all advantageous. It's needed for twin stick to use side ways movement for fine aiming or to compensate for the slower turn speed running around corners. Yet with KB+Mouse just 4 movement directions are fine, preferably with instant start/stop, no sliding nonsense. In VR with analog movement I'm mostly compensating for the annoying "move in the direction you're looking" control scheme. My ideal is having a neck, analog control rotates the body independent of head movement. |
In most cases, VR is more like an entirely separate mode rather than a control method. I guess that's a fair point though.
I see we have another that hasn't played Metal Gear Solid V on PC.
