Why are FPS gamers against motion controls?

[TerranReaper]

Look at it this way, would you rather use motion controls above a controller or a mouse and keyboard? Especially in any competitive shooter, I think that would put you on a severe disadvantage.

 

[boholikeu]

Arguably - I'd say the main point of contention is that analogue sticks have a certain "mechanical" turning speed, but as soon as you move it to the right you start turning right. With the Wii you've got to go to the edge of a box, and nudge it around more if you want to centre a target better.

Also, arms wobble.

Actually that's a good point, and probably the best I've heard for analogue sticks yet. I still think the "pointing" of a remote translates better to FPS games than a joystick-style motion does, but I suppose that if someone started gaming in the Halo age they'd probably prefer the latter control method.

 

[Booze Zombie]

Well, for one, they hardly even work and I find that my little analogue sticks and my mouse are more accurate.

So, to me, they just seem like the next fad, like 3D bullshit glasses and the yo-yo.

 

[SnowdensOfYesteryear]

As an FPS-er... FPS-guy... FPS-player, along with a person who thinks motion controls can be pretty nifty, I think it'd be cool if we could find a good way to perform it.

The best thing I can remember is the game Snatcher, in which case there was sections where you would use the zapper to shoot at opponents in a very jump-suprisey scene, so you gotta pull the zapper up and shoot at things that jump out at you. I think the idea's neat, a different peripheral for controlling a section that in itself different.

That sentence probably made no sense, but what I'm getting at as such; maybe not for multiplayer gamers, but for immersion, it would be amazing, say, to have a survival horror game where, rather than automatically having a bit of "stutter" in the controls, the game scares the shit out of you and you have to pull up the gun, and rather than it being determined by some random shit, it's YOUR trembling as you lift that gun to shoot Fast Zombie Robert in the face.

Oh, and it would be useful for recoil if we ever got force feedback.

 

[Audio]

I really enjoyed it's use in Metroid: Corruption.
The first Red Steel was so horrid, i didnt finish it and no longer own it..but things have improved since then. You console gamers have always had autoaim...learn to aim properly

 

[ultimateownage]

Because, has the wii has showed us, anything other than party games don't work and have no need for motion controls.

Red Steel 1 was shite, yes the sequal fixed it but what was the point? There is no need to implement motion controls into games. Gamers and FPS gamers specifically find no need for them and dislike them. Sure you can get the headshots, but have you tried turning around? Without an analogue controller it's really fucking clunky and slow.

 

[Buddahcjcc]

"It's not precise,isn't easy to control, and isn't fun.
I don't like it.

My question is, why fix something that isn't broken?"

Because casual ppl's money is shinier than hardcore ppl's money. Play ANY MMO and youll see this very quickly

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

If motion controls worked perfectly it would not be that much of an issue. But till they do, it would just be another frustrating element in a FPS, the random chance that your controller wouldn't work.

Also, the controllers are precise enough. Say i'm trying to aim at someone whose far away on top of a building. I point my control at him. But the control is big(and even if they got it down to the size of your fingertip this would still be an issue, though not as large of one)-which part of where you're pointing does your character aim? After all, you're aiming for a small target. You can't aim effectively for a small target by using something larger than it.

It is easy to point at big things, because the shape of what you are pointing at encompasses the size of the control. But for small things, this makes the controls dodgy and innacurate.

this.

until it reaches the level of "gamer" the movie (which alot of people dont like but i dont think it was too bad) i dont think motion controls will really be a contender with a controller or a kb+m

 

[Ridgemo]

I don't care what they do with motion control, so long as there is always the option of using analogue sticks.

I really don't see why people rave about kinetic being good for head tracking. The moment you turn your head your not looking properly at the screen, have you tried playing a game when you head is at a slight angle from the TV? Doesn't work. Besides, if you do turn and spot something, your going to have to use your analogue sticks to move the gun and aim anyway. Making the looking around entirely pointless.

Kinectic is lame. The sooner we get rid of motion control and 3D the better in my opinion. Of course, that is me speaking for myself.

 

[Yagharek]

Also, the controllers are precise enough. Say i'm trying to aim at someone whose far away on top of a building. I point my control at him. But the control is big(and even if they got it down to the size of your fingertip this would still be an issue, though not as large of one)-which part of where you're pointing does your character aim? After all, you're aiming for a small target. You can't aim effectively for a small target by using something larger than it.

And yet people somehow do it in real life all the time with actual guns...

Besides, when the game translates your "point" on to the screen it uses one dot that can be one pixel thick if the game developer chooses.

Yes, and then you have to be exactly aware of where that point is relative to your controller/pointer. And that would surely vary with your distance and relation to the sensor-meaning it would change on a day to day basis. That just a less accurate version of a mouse that you hold in mid-air. I reckon that'd make reacting quickly and accurately harder.People would probably get used to it, but why bother? I have seen people arguing that it's no worse than a controller, or mouse, but i've not seen a convinving argument for why it's better. So surely the money would be better spent elsewhere?

I also think you'd have to train a very long time to be as accurate with a real gun as on many FPS', in the same amount of time.

 

[Randomologist]

Pick up a Wiimote or similarly weighted object. Make your character turn 360 degrees. Now pick up a regular controller and do the same thing. The latter takes up far less time. Only a few seconds, but reflexes count.

 

[Gladion]

Pick up a Wiimote or similarly weighted object. Make your character turn 360 degrees. Now pick up a regular controller and do the same thing. The latter takes up far less time. Only a few seconds, but reflexes count.

Not only is there never a situation where you quickly need to turn 360 degrees in any game, but also this is dependend on the turn-speed set in the game and has nothing to do with the input device.

OT: Among gamers, FPS-fans have this weird thought implemented in their brains that their favourite genre is somewhat the most 'hardcore' one (despite being actually the most played and most mainstream) and they don't want it to be tainted by silly kids' stuff like motion control.

 

[Randomologist]

Pick up a Wiimote or similarly weighted object. Make your character turn 360 degrees. Now pick up a regular controller and do the same thing. The latter takes up far less time. Only a few seconds, but reflexes count.

Not only is there never a situation where you quickly need to turn 360 degrees in any game, but also this is dependend on the turn-speed set in the game and has nothing to do with the input device.

This was purely an idea to demonstrate the problem. I know you don't need to turn 360. I could equally have said 180. My point was that motion controls cannot currently match both the speed and precision of normal controls.

 

[TheGuy(wantstobe)]

Pick up a Wiimote or similarly weighted object. Make your character turn 360 degrees. Now pick up a regular controller and do the same thing. The latter takes up far less time. Only a few seconds, but reflexes count.

Not only is there never a situation where you quickly need to turn 360 degrees in any game, but also this is dependend on the turn-speed set in the game and has nothing to do with the input device.

This was purely an idea to demonstrate the problem. I know you don't need to turn 360. I could equally have said 180. My point was that motion controls cannot currently match both the speed and precision of normal controls.

/facepalm The turn speed is a set variable independant of input method. This can be set to however fast/slow the dev wants or leave it in the hands of the players if they so choose. Again regardless of input method. If you can't realise that then all your arguments are invalid.

As to precision it goes mouse+KB>well done motion controls>middling motion>Dual analogue=the worst motion controls providing of course you don't have parkinsons/huntingtons etc which would cause the pointer device to shake a lot

 

[migo]

I dont think its just FPS fans, I think most people just hate it in general. But personaly, I dont see how motion controls can translate into a FPS without the game being a rail shooter (And I hate rail shooters).

This is rather simple - the other controller, used the same way you would anyway with the left analog stick for moving.

 

[cornmancer]

I'm against it because they're fucking stupid and I play games to relax, flailing about like a monkey with down syndrome is not relaxing.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Because I can't remember a proper motion-controlled FPS working with a proper gun-like controller.

I would absolutely adore playing a good one, but I don't want to point and click like I'm shooting a phaser remote, I want to play an FPS as if I'm actually shooting things; with iron sights!

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

snip

Seriously that can be done with a keyboard and mouse and if you are not even going to read my post to find out that I said keyboard and mouse is the best for FPS games don't even bother to quote back. You haven't even said how it fixes the problem of going off screen so how to do turn then with it? I can't even watch the thing. If you are going to do something like that embed something from youtube or give a link to website. That fact that it works on a sensor to something that isn't even on the screen does make it a control issue. So I relly don't see hwo citing one person doing this suddenly makes it better. So please, please explain to me how you are supposed to turn around properly with them? As so far I still think keyboard and mouse is the best combo.

Pick up a Wiimote or similarly weighted object. Make your character turn 360 degrees. Now pick up a regular controller and do the same thing. The latter takes up far less time. Only a few seconds, but reflexes count.

Not only is there never a situation where you quickly need to turn 360 degrees in any game, but also this is dependend on the turn-speed set in the game and has nothing to do with the input device.

TF2 spychecking, Killing Floor checking your back for specimens, any CoD game checking to see if someone is there in S&D do I really need to go on with more examples. Also while I am aware you can adjust turn speed the fact that you can go off the sensor is an issue.

 

[Randomologist]

Pick up a Wiimote or similarly weighted object. Make your character turn 360 degrees. Now pick up a regular controller and do the same thing. The latter takes up far less time. Only a few seconds, but reflexes count.

Not only is there never a situation where you quickly need to turn 360 degrees in any game, but also this is dependend on the turn-speed set in the game and has nothing to do with the input device.

This was purely an idea to demonstrate the problem. I know you don't need to turn 360. I could equally have said 180. My point was that motion controls cannot currently match both the speed and precision of normal controls.

/facepalm The turn speed is a set variable independant of input method. This can be set to however fast/slow the dev wants or leave it in the hands of the players if they so choose. Again regardless of input method. If you can't realise that then all your arguments are invalid.

As to precision it goes mouse+KB>well done motion controls>middling motion>Dual analogue=the worst motion controls providing of course you don't have parkinsons/huntingtons etc which would cause the pointer device to shake a lot

I know it's a variable input, you're missing the point. If you have a motion controller set to a high sensitivity, its quick to turn but accuracy can be an issue, in my experience. Conversely, if it's slow, accuracy is improved but turn rate is decreased. What I'm saying is, it's difficult to find a happy medium. Some games have it set OK, some do not.