The most competitive automotive racing is typically done without a foot operated clutch and stick shifter. F1 style paddle shifters provide the fastest shifting when matched with the proper transmission.

"Automatic" transmissions like the one found in the Porsche 997 Turbo, are actually faster than their manual counterparts, regardless of which driver is operating. The same would be the case with the Nissan R35 GT-R if a traditional foot op clutch/stick were available.

But the whole manual vs. automatic transmission thing has absolutely nothing to do with keyboard vs. analog stick for movement. Nothing.


Having to devote three fingers for movement on a keyboard is my biggest gripe. A one thumb connected d-pad is a much better solution without even adding an analog stick.

Using the pinky to use shift and control is awkward. Using the thumb to press alt isn't much better.

Clearly, gaming was not in mind when the QWERTY keyboard was originally designed.

A gaming keyboard is a much better solution in terms of layout, but still doesn't address the whole "three fingers to move" issue, which frankly, all PC gamers have accepted anyway, despite its shortcomings.

But as it's been said already, all PC gamers effectively "steer" with the mouse anyway. W is simply the forward button, while A and D are the lateral/strafe left and right buttons.


(FragFX was an interesting idea, but the execution was less than ideal. Cheaply made for one. No games on consoles being originally designed for use with it is another hit.)

Seriously, it's like you're me from the future after I've gotten more into PC gaming, especially this part: "but still doesn't address the whole "three fingers to move" issue, which frankly, all PC gamers have accepted anyway, despite its shortcomings."

Also, I too was deeply intrigued by the FragFX, If I ever get a PS3, this may just be worth getting. I'd actually have to see it in action to know for certain though.

Hey! Stop stealing from me. The three button thing was MY excuse. Get your own excuse!

How hard is it to understand that the mouse is part of the movement? That's why it keeps being brought up. Removing the mouse automatically leaves you with 4 directoins to move with and that'd be like using the D-pad on the controllers and no aiming stick at all. I don't see how it's on PAR with analog sticks when it's utterly pointless to be walking at any speed between the max and 0. I fully agree, there is nothing that the WASD can do better than the dpad or analog, but there is absolutely nothing that can match the WASD when you add a mouse to the combination. The bold statement is astoundingly at odds with itself. How do I lose control if I have more control than before?

As to your wii control scheme, yes I loved the MP3 scheme the best out of any console FPS control scheme, but here is a very good question for you, what happens when you remove the lock-on? The lock-on is even more of a crutch than auto-aim. Without it how do you look around? You have to move the cursor around the edge of the screen and thus not keeping the target ON the person as you follow them around. As for the movement, not once in playing MP3 and shooting things did I ever use anything in between forward, back, left, right to the max. You still fail to answer my persistent question, why would you want to move in a diagonal other than the 45 degree one or to move at less than max speed when you are getting shot at?

@greenmedic88

Didn't know that about the Porsche but it's always nice to know. The problem with Automatic isn't the speed of the shifting, it's the fact that it shifts for you, you don't choose when.

Warning: try before you buy with the FragFX if possible.

Or buy at a place with a generous return policy.

The thing about the FragFX is that they have had ridiculous problems with QC. High failure rate right out of the box. As I said, they're cheaply made.

Supposedly the most competitive FPS gamers and teams on PSN use the FragFX, which should say something about its effectiveness when working properly (requires firmware updates, which are not easy to install).

Last since I checked, they're not being sold at retail which means until Splitfish's new controller comes out (if), availability may be limited which means you will probably end up paying a premium.

Mouse aiming alone (even with the cheap-ass mouse included) gives you a huge advantage over other players. It's practically cheating.

It's also nice to have four thumb operated buttons right on the mouse.

I find that movement on the keyboard is just as good, if not better than on a console added with the accuracy of the mouse I'd take a FPS on PC over console anyday.

I'm going to answer what I think was meant from Grey Acumen. He doesn't mean don't consider the mouse like it's not important to movement. He means take it out of the equation to see if there's a better solution to moving than WASD or the arrow keys. If we were to insert a button like configuration in the cross formation of a D-Pad, with the equivalent functionality of keyboard keys and it was placed in a way where the thumb could do the moving instead of three fingers, all while the mouse controls it's own portion of the movement as usual, do you think that would be an improvement or not?

Strongly better accuracy in aiming is far better than slightly better angles in movement.

On a keyboard the movement reaction is instant where as an analogue stick has a "slowdown" moment where the joystick is still crossing over through the slower movement section then accelerating into the new direction, a keyboard reacts immediately.

Also movement is only in a flat plane, aiming is in a full 360 degree all directions spherical area area making the accuracy that much more important and large.

And not being able to strafe in every random angle doesn't make up for being able to turn ultra fast and nail that important headshot. Plus all our buttons are in easy reach while still keeping our fingers on the important keys and mouse.

Mouse/Keyboard owns Gamepad any day in FPS and RTS.

"As to your wii control scheme, yes I loved the MP3 scheme the best out of any console FPS control scheme, but here is a very good question for you, what happens when you remove the lock-on? The lock-on is even more of a crutch than auto-aim. Without it how do you look around? You have to move the cursor around the edge of the screen and thus not keeping the target ON the person as you follow them around. As for the movement, not once in playing MP3 and shooting things did I ever use anything in between forward, back, left, right to the max. You still fail to answer my persistent question, why would you want to move in a diagonal other than the 45 degree one or to move at less than max speed when you are getting shot at?

@greenmedic88

Didn't know that about the Porsche but it's always nice to know. The problem with Automatic isn't the speed of the shifting, it's the fact that it shifts for you, you don't choose when. It's also much more simpler to just press the gas and the break than having to change gears in between, or even more importantly know why and when to change gears."

Depends on the type of ATX in question. If it's a standard slushbox like the one in your commuter car, then yes; they remove the connection any decent, non-pedestrian driver should have with their engine (the kind that watches RPMs rather than the speedometer). When I drive my ATX commuter, the only time I watch the RPMs is to keep fuel consumption down. Frankly, with a regular ATX, there isn't any other point.

But the Tiptronic in the Porsche, like the dual clutch transmission in the new GT-R is a paddle shifter without a foot operated clutch, allowing for instant user operated gear changes, faster than any foot clutch/gated stick.

(For the record, the car I built for racing used a six-speed manual, but speed is speed regardless of whether a foot operated clutch is involved)

As for MP3... glad to hear I wasn't the only one who thought that using the pointer to both aim and swivel wasn't just a bit wonky. And yes, the lock-on function WAS a crutch to fix the inherent problems such a system brings.

And to answer your question, it's to run around in circles of various diameters. PC gamers don't do this; it's always side to side hopping since virtually all FPS games base their moving defense around exaggerated jumping (Unreal), typically in tandem with A and D. Of course Halo does the whole bionic rabbit leaping defense even more.

In real life (which of course has little bearing on the video game rendition), there is no jumping around to avoid gunfire (would be comical to see this). You can either cut left and right at various angles like a running back, or you can round off your angles depending on the terrain and situation.

Ok that makes a lot more sense. That would depend on the game. I personally would never change the 3 finger approach since having to 3 fingers to 4 directions (especially the starfes, very impotant for jousting) gives you a much quicker response time than 1 finger to 4 buttons (especially with moves like double-tap available), of course this is only relevant in games like UT2004 where your response time has to be perfect or you are dead. In slower games it really would not matter between the two and they'd be just equal. Given that I would never change it since I would like to have the option of extremely quick reaction times when needed.