PS3 DUAL SHOCK 3 DETAILS EMERGE!

[Squeak]

Eh, if there was no spring on the stick, then what happens when you reach the edge and can't look any further in that direction? I know I can't be the only person who has to lift his mouse up and place it back in the center of the mouse pad after like every movement...

There would just be a "lift mouse" button or you could press down on the stick to "lift the mouse"

Wow, you psychotic 'KEYBOARD AND MOUSE ONLY!!!!!1!!' people are really fucked up. Yeah, let's make playing FPS on a console even MORE complicated...

...to solve what, exactly?

To solve the precision problems that even the best analog sticks clearly have, not due to them being imprecise technically, but because you constantly have to counter the springs force.

How about just in games, the view doesn't automatically go back to the center with the joystick, allowing us to make minor adjustments without the unsteadiness of the thumb making the view wobble slightly.

Try putting only your thumb on your mouse and move it around a bit... Works surprisingly well, doesn’t it? If it didn’t twist around the vertical axis it would be fine for regular use.
And if you insist on using more than just you thumb, then the stick grip could be made a little higher to make it more comfortable to hold around the edges.

Again, most console FPSes DO give you the option to TURN OFF auto-centering! >_>

The two ways of moving a cursor around on a screen are radically different.
With the auto centre joystick, the cursor moves relative to how you have moved the joystick. When using the joystick without a spring, the cursor moves relative to how you are moving the joystick. That’s what makes the later much more precise.

 

[Tagrineth]

To solve the precision problems that even the best analog sticks clearly have, not due to them being imprecise technically, but because you constantly have to counter the springs force.

Oh, damn! So your poor, pathetic, feeble thumb has to push against a stick... OMFG, you must get CRAMPS all the time! O_O Must be awful. Y'know... that thing must be exerting at least a FEW OUNCES of force on your thumb! Must be brutal...

The two ways of moving a cursor around on a screen are radically different.
With the auto centre joystick, the cursor moves relative to how you have moved the joystick. When using the joystick without a spring, the cursor moves relative to how you are moving the joystick. That’s what makes the later much more precise.

You... completely lost me with this one.



EDIT:

Well, not so much... I mean it IS a metric ton better, but I certainly wouldn't want to throw K/M conventions pointless onto gamepads... Let them play to their strengths and leave it at that. You're not going to get the same thing my pretending they function like K/M. I'm sure they'll keep refining slowly over time to be more fitting the controllers and more fitting the particular game types, but pretending they can do what they AREN'T is just silly. If you want continuous turning, you just make sure full analog extension continually turns; it's not precisely brain surgery.

OK, yeah, I know, accept, and agree that Keyboard/Mouse is much more precise than dual-analogue. No questions there.

But my point is, dual-analogue is about as precise as you can get it. I don't understand AT ALL what Squeak's argument is up there with the whole "Lift Mouse" button - that's just adding a completely worthless layer of extra complexity. If you want continuous turning, HOLD THE FUCKING STICK ALL THE WAY TO ONE SIDE FOR A MOMENT for crying out loud. >_>

 

[malcolm]

The two ways of moving a cursor around on a screen are radically different.
With the auto centre joystick, the cursor moves relative to how you have moved the joystick. When using the joystick without a spring, the cursor moves relative to how you are moving the joystick. That’s what makes the later much more precise.

You... completely lost me with this one.

Well the first is like a joystick and the second is like a mouse , the view moves when the joystick moves, so you control direction directly instead of the speed to change direction, so obviously you need to turn of auto centering or have a lift mouse option for this.

 

[Squeak]

To solve the precision problems that even the best analog sticks clearly have, not due to them being imprecise technically, but because you constantly have to counter the springs force.

Oh, damn! So your poor, pathetic, feeble thumb has to push against a stick... OMFG, you must get CRAMPS all the time! O_O Must be awful. Y'know... that thing must be exerting at least a FEW OUNCES of force on your thumb! Must be brutal...

As I understand it, you wouldn't mind having to use an autocentre mouse?
Imagine every time you let go of the mouse, it darts back to centre, and you would always have to keep a firm grip on it.

EDIT:

Well, not so much... I mean it IS a metric ton better, but I certainly wouldn't want to throw K/M conventions pointless onto gamepads... Let them play to their strengths and leave it at that. You're not going to get the same thing my pretending they function like K/M. I'm sure they'll keep refining slowly over time to be more fitting the controllers and more fitting the particular game types, but pretending they can do what they AREN'T is just silly. If you want continuous turning, you just make sure full analog extension continually turns; it's not precisely brain surgery.

OK, yeah, I know, accept, and agree that Keyboard/Mouse is much more precise than dual-analogue. No questions there.

But my point is, dual-analogue is about as precise as you can get it.

Now you completely lost me with this one.
It's both much more precise, and as precise as it gets?!

I don't understand AT ALL what Squeak's argument is up there with the whole "Lift Mouse" button - that's just adding a completely worthless layer of extra complexity. If you want continuous turning, HOLD THE FUCKING STICK ALL THE WAY TO ONE SIDE FOR A MOMENT for crying out loud. >_>

So your poor, pathetic, feeble brain can't handle the complexity of the concept of lifting a mouse... I can imagine, it must be a struggle of almost epic proportions, every time you have to use a computer!
I mean lifting the mouse and moving it, BUT THE POINTER STAYS IN THE SAME PLACE!! The mind boggles at the idea!

 

[Fox5]

But my point is, dual-analogue is about as precise as you can get it.

Now you completely lost me with this one.
It's both much more precise, and as precise as it gets?!

Ah yes, my pet Seaman also had trouble understanding ambigious statements in the English language, or so he told me. "Those two buildings are the tallest buildings in America. But only one building can be the tallest, so how can there be two tallest buildings? It boggles the mind." Of course, Seaman wasn't a very bright fish, it's IQ was probably just below living for a human.
I believe Tag meant it's as precise at it gets, short of using a keyboard and mouse.

 

[cthellis42]

So your poor, pathetic, feeble brain can't handle the complexity of the concept of lifting a mouse... I can imagine, it must be a struggle of almost epic proportions, every time you have to use a computer!
I mean lifting the mouse and moving it, BUT THE POINTER STAYS IN THE SAME PLACE!! The mind boggles at the idea!

It's not the concept, it's the purpose. The purpose in lifting the mouse and moving it on a computer is to continue moving in the desired direction, since you can run out of "mousing space." With a gamepad, hitting a button to be able to thumb the analog to the other side without affecting movement and then let go and start tracking again simply to continue going in the same direction is an absurd add considering if you just hold the mouse at full extension to the side you wanted to go to, you do EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT and continue moving in that direction. What on earth would be the point? No limitation of the gamepad's control scheme when compared to a mouse's is going to be fixed by this.

That being said, and auto-center button wouldn't be a bad or complex addition to a game. I find them useful even on keyboards (though mainly use them in MMORPGs rather than FPSes).

 

[Squeak]

With a gamepad, hitting a button to be able to thumb the analog to the other side without affecting movement and then let go and start tracking again simply to continue going in the same direction is an absurd add

It only seems that way to you because you are not used to it. I’ll bet it isn’t any less intuitive or cumbersome, than learning to do it with a real mouse.
First time mouse users also has great difficulty with running out of space, and keeping the mouse still, when clicking and various other things. Point being, that there is no such thing as real intuitiveness.

 

[Tagrineth]

As I understand it, you wouldn't mind having to use an autocentre mouse?
Imagine every time you let go of the mouse, it darts back to centre, and you would always have to keep a firm grip on it.

You've either never actually played a dual-analogue FPS, or you've always left the settings with "AUTO CENTRE" (or 'lookspring' sometimes) ON.

You obviously have NO IDEA what you're talking about... because EVERY SINGLE CONSOLE FPS on an Analogue-capable system (yes, including the handful of FPS games on the SEGA fricking SATURN) has had an option to TURN LOOKSPRING OFF.

In other words, if you let go of the stick, YOU KEEP LOOKING IN THAT DIRECTION.

If you want to adjust your view a little to the left, you move the stick a TINY BIT from the CENTRE, not from some space off to the left. You then let go of it, and you KEEP looking off to one side.

You aren't forced to keep the stick down or up slightly to look down or up slightly.

The only time you need to keep holding the stick is if you want continuous rotation. >_> NOT to hold your aim in one place.

I could prove it. Later tonight, or maybe tomorrow, I'll take a photo of TimeSplitters 2, with both sticks in neutral position, looking up at a 45º angle. >_>

OK, yeah, I know, accept, and agree that Keyboard/Mouse is much more precise than dual-analogue. No questions there.

But my point is, dual-analogue is about as precise as you can get it.

Now you completely lost me with this one.
It's both much more precise, and as precise as it gets?![/quote]

You can't read the English language too well, can you? "About as precise as you can get it, as in you can't do much more WITH DUAL ANALOGUE, not dual-analogue is the most precise possible control method.

So your poor, pathetic, feeble brain can't handle the complexity of the concept of lifting a mouse... I can imagine, it must be a struggle of almost epic proportions, every time you have to use a computer!
I mean lifting the mouse and moving it, BUT THE POINTER STAYS IN THE SAME PLACE!! The mind boggles at the idea!

Sweetie, I do indeed play PC FPS using keyboard/mouse. After I stopped playing StarCraft, I played Tribes almost as rabidly as I had played SC. I've also played a bit of Unreal Tournament online, and I used to -win- Deathmatches in Quake3 on dial-up. I'm no slouch with a k/m combo.

 

[cthellis42]

I'm no slouch with a k/m combo.

H4! 1 pwn Â¥0µ 1n ($ b107(h, $µ(|{ Ã￾349£3. 4WP 4WP!

 

[Tagrineth]

I'm no slouch with a k/m combo.

H4! 1 pwn Â¥0µ 1n ($ b107(h, $µ(|{ Ã￾349£3. 4WP 4WP!

Ha! I pwn you in CS biotch, suck ...

...what? You lost me after that part.

I never liked Half-Life anyway.

 

[Fox5]

According to the l33t translator he said either
ha! i am good you in cs blotch [a] suci{ ðeagle. awp awp!
or
hai i pwn you in cs biotch, suci{ ðeagle. awp awpi

So I guess he said
"Ha! I own you in cs, biotch, suck deagle. Awp awp!" Hmm, yes, interesting but hardly conclusive.

 

[Squeak]

As I understand it, you wouldn't mind having to use an autocentre mouse?
Imagine every time you let go of the mouse, it darts back to centre, and you would always have to keep a firm grip on it.

You've either never actually played a dual-analogue FPS, or you've always left the settings with "AUTO CENTRE" (or 'lookspring' sometimes)ON.
You obviously have NO IDEA what you're talking about... because EVERY SINGLE CONSOLE FPS on an Analogue-capable system (yes, including the handful of FPS games on the SEGA fricking SATURN) has had an option to TURN LOOKSPRING OFF.

Okay, maybe that was a poor analogy, but my point was that, if you’re going to do spatially relative control, a spring, or other restrictions on movement, even very small ones, are going to spoil your precision.

I could prove it. Later tonight, or maybe tomorrow, I'll take a photo of TimeSplitters 2, with both sticks in neutral position, looking up at a 45º angle. >_>

No need to do that, I’ve seen plenty of that game for a long time.

OK, yeah, I know, accept, and agree that Keyboard/Mouse is much more precise than dual-analogue. No questions there.

But my point is, dual-analogue is about as precise as you can get it.

Now you completely lost me with this one.
It's both much more precise, and as precise as it gets?!

You can't read the English language too well, can you? "About as precise as you can get it, as in you can't do much more WITH DUAL ANALOGUE, not dual-analogue is the most precise possible control method.

Okay, no need to get patronising (or matronising maybe? ). "It", could be understood either way in that context. I just interpreted it (the sentence), in what I thought was the most plausible way. Because, what would be the point of saying that dual analogs are precise as they get? That would be saying indirectly "your right, analog sticks do need change", which seemed to conflict with the tone in the rest of your post.

But obviously you’re quite satisfied with how analog sticks and controls work today, and that’s fine (although it shows al little lack of vision).

So your poor, pathetic, feeble brain can't handle the complexity of the concept of lifting a mouse... I can imagine, it must be a struggle of almost epic proportions, every time you have to use a computer!
I mean lifting the mouse and moving it, BUT THE POINTER STAYS IN THE SAME PLACE!! The mind boggles at the idea!

Sweetie, I do indeed play PC FPS using keyboard/mouse. After I stopped playing StarCraft, I played Tribes almost as rabidly as I had played SC. I've also played a bit of Unreal Tournament online, and I used to -win- Deathmatches in Quake3 on dial-up. I'm no slouch with a k/m combo.

Ooh, on dail-up too?! I’m very impressed.
You just seem to miss that I wasn’t talking exclusively about fps. games, but about a new method of control in general.

 

[Tagrineth]

Okay, maybe that was a poor analogy, but my point was that, if you’re going to do spatially relative control, a spring, or other restrictions on movement, even very small ones, are going to spoil your precision.

Mice have friction you have to contend with.

Plus I'm hyperactive, so I have somewhat shaky hands. That takes some effort to curb on a PC FPS, and now that it's been about two years since I last touched a PC FPS... my aim in UT the other night was just AWFUL. It was embarrassing. >_>

Okay, no need to get patronising (or matronising maybe? ). "It", could be understood either way in that context. I just interpreted it (the sentence), in what I thought was the most plausible way. Because, what would be the point of saying that dual analogs are precise as they get? That would be saying indirectly "your right, analog sticks do need change", which seemed to conflict with the tone in the rest of your post.

No, saying dual analogues are as precise as they can get is saying indirectly, "You're wrong, your change is counter-productive."

But obviously you’re quite satisfied with how analog sticks and controls work today, and that’s fine (although it shows al little lack of vision).

<snip>

Ooh, on dail-up too?! I’m very impressed.
You just seem to miss that I wasn’t talking exclusively about fps. games, but about a new method of control in general.

Yeah, I used to be damn good in Q3A. Makes me sad to think I can't steady my aim anymore... oh well, I'm competent with dual analogue, and prefer consoles anyway, so it doesn't matter much to me. At least, it doesn't matter until Tribes: Vengeance appears...

And I don't see how a "lift mouse" button would do any good for an analogue stick... maybe removing the spring would help playing some classics like Star Wars Arcade (in Star Wars: Rebel Strike for GC) which are pretty hard to aim in because of the stick being a little on the unsteady side...

 

[Fox5]

Tag, mice don't have that much friction, or at least my optical mouse on a cloth pad doesn't. And I can't imagine how you can have shaky hands on a mouse but not on a joystick, I hate playing console fps because I can see my aim shaking while in manual aiming mode, and often just miss headshots because of it.

BTW, how about a mini track ball installed on controllers, or maybe an optical sensor that you move your finger over. Oooh ooh wait! I got it, all future console fpses should support touch screen or lightguns.(actually, I'm seriously still waiting for a decent fps with lightgun support, I once imagined the n64 could have some kind of gun adapter on it(basically mount the controller on an arm using the handles), and you would either palm the control stick, or just use the dpad, and use face buttons for some high tech functions. Or they could have had just the gun barrel on the extension port, and you would use the z button to fire, and the control stick to move around.(though the width of the n64 would block some of the screen if you raised it to eye level)

 

[cthellis42]

So I guess he said
"Ha! I own you in cs, biotch, suck deagle. Awp awp!" Hmm, yes, interesting but hardly conclusive.

Yes. And it's certainly conclusive, as you can tell from my expert use of l337.

Mice have friction you have to contend with.

So does the rest of the universe. Meanwhile, smart gamers have Everglides (or similar) and unti-friction pads and... mmm... like buttah!

my aim in UT the other night was just AWFUL. It was embarrassing. >_>

That's what happens when you take two years off ANY game!

And I don't see how a "lift mouse" button would do any good for an analogue stick...

I can't really see it either. Overcomplication to bring about something people can get anyway, just not in precisely the same manner. Each game should mainly just spend a lot of time working out the levels and sensitivites that work best for their games. (And customization options would be nice.) I mean one COULD toss in the "life mouse" key--I'm always a fan of more options--but I can't see how more than a handful of people would want to use it.

 

[Fafalada]

The eyetoy software could be made to recognise the DS3, if it was a specific colour or had a reflective sticker on it, or something like that. But that would require the player to always hold the pad in a position, where it would be visible to the camera. That would not be very convenient or comfortable in the long run, I suspect.

I was more thinking to use DS3 for extra controls not necesserily something that would directly communicate with camera. Though if you actually did the special color thing it might open some interesting possibilities too.

Hand and gesture recognition should be possible on PS3, but would still be very demanding resource wise, taking a lot of power away from the main application.
And again, it would probably become very tiring waving you hands around all the time.

Not necesserily so demanding as it may look - besides you could vary just how much you want to do depending on the game (not just processing wise - obviously controlling schemes could be a lot more varied too).
And the whole point of gesture recognition as opposed to simple motion tracing (which current EyeToy does) is that you don't actually need to wave your hands around a lot - or widely.
Think in lines of a realistic&usable application of Minority Report interface, as opposed to the hollywood one(which had no usable purpose save making the 'operator' look cool).
As far as certain genres go - I see this as the means to probably ultimate controller scheme short of stuff like mind control

Neither method would be very precise.
Mechanical controls are still more precise and you can set the speed/exchange ratio as you like.

Talking about shooting games - the "eyetoy" approach would have precision on the level of a lightgun, which in my experience easily matches speed/precision ratio of a mouse - and in effect greatly outmatches any joystick based controllers.

 

[Evil_Cloud]

Speaking of PS3... The console, or at least the first concept, tech demo's and eventual games, will be presented in March, in Japan. Sony has announced they have something BIG (bigger then PSP) coming up in march, and have invited many press. Or so I heard from my source.

 

[Megadrive1988]

Speaking of PS3... The console, or at least the first concept, tech demo's and eventual games, will be presented in March, in Japan. Sony has announced they have something BIG (bigger then PSP) coming up in march, and have invited many press. Or so I heard from my source.

chance of that happening: 60% imho

so we shall see 8)

 

[hey69]

yeah, my source goes even further and claims that japan launch will be end of 2004 (i don't take it but yeah, ...)
eventueally pushed back to end of 2005

well he claims even nintendo and MS will launch or TRY to launch end of 2004... to be continued

 

[Guden Oden]

You obviously have NO IDEA what you're talking about... because EVERY SINGLE CONSOLE FPS on an Analogue-capable system (yes, including the handful of FPS games on the SEGA fricking SATURN) has had an option to TURN LOOKSPRING OFF.

Um, I'm probably a bit late to the party here, but anyway... A few additions/clarifications to your somewhat sweeping statement:

Turok for N64 had no option to turn off lookspring. If you centered the stick the view centered as well. Obviously not ideal from a precision viewpoint, but the game didn't really suffer from it (many weapons had splash damage or benefitted from spraying fire every which way), and the player was often required to do fast up/down motions too, so it was actually a neccessary part of gameplay. With a bit of practice it worked fine (and there was a sensitivity slider too btw).

Goldeneye for N64 (DUH, lol) had no option to turn lookspring ON. While it worked fine, aiming was a lot slower in GE than in Turok. As the weapons were almost exclusively bullet-based and the game engine running at lower framerate, this was probably a good thing though. Still required a lot of re-adjustment switching between the two games.

Metroid Prime (NOT for N64! ) has no option to turn off lookspring. Granted, the player needs to stand still to aim freely, but the way aiming works when panning around is definitely "springy" in nature.