Topic: Classic Controls Vs Pointer/Motion Controls for FPS's - let battle commence!

[famicomplicated]

With the release of Goldeneye 007 on Wii, the debate of which control setup works best for first-person shooters is yet again a topic of discussion.
This is the forum thread to vote and discuss which is your favourite.


This may be decided on a game-by-game basis for some, but I'm looking for a general opinion, which do you tend to lean towards and why?


If you swear by classic controls, what puts you off pointer controls? (and vice-versa)


In games that allow both control methods in multiplayer mode (like Goldeneye), do you find more success using one method over another?


Keep it clean and stick to the FPS genre, thank you please 

[Sundoulos]

What, no option for a keyboard and mouse?   

[Spak-Spang]

I said motion control for classic games, and Classic Controller for online, but the reason is I play multiplayer split screen in the same room.  So I think classic controller is more simple.  However, if I was playing online, I would want to have pointer controls even for multiplayer.

[Morari]

The IR pointer is vastly superior to any gamepad. It allows for (more) accurate aiming and quick turning if setup correctly. That said, it still feels sluggish and dependent upon auto-aim if you have any kind of experience with first-person shooters. Nothing can replace a good mouse and keyboard, especially for competitive multiplayer.

[TJ Spyke]

I haven't played a real FPS using pointer controls, I did love playing Metroid Prime 3: Corruption with pointer controls though. To be honest though, I am fine with either option.

[ejamer]

Tough question.
 
Most people are naturally biased towards control schemes that they are already familiar with, so opinions often vary depending on whether the gamer has:
- experience playing FPS games on console (ie: dual-analog)
- experience playing FPS games on computer (ie: mouse and keyboard)
- no previous FPS experience
 
 
I voted for always using pointer controls for several reasons.  First, it doesn't make sense (for me) to change preferred control methods for different types of gameplay.  Second, as someone who has limited experience playing console FPS tiles but moderate experience with PC shooters, pointer controls feel closer to the mouse-and-keyboard setup that I am most familiar with.  Finally, the increased speed and accuracy provided by well-designed and configured pointer controls simply seems more natural to me, creating an experience that can't be matched by dual analogs (although it can be approximated with experience).
 
That certainly doesn't mean that others will, or should, agree with my opinion... although hosting this poll on a Nintendo fansite probably means the sample taken will be biased.
 

[KDR_11k]

I have SIGNIFICANTLY higher speed and precision with the pointer. Aiming with an analog stick feels stiff and makes it much harder to keep an overview of your surroundings by having a quick glance at something and when you need to aim for a head (as you do in 95% of the games involving guns) the extra time needed to precisely move the aim cursor with the stick is deadly.

[Sundoulos]

True story...I have an electrical engineering friend who was a PC gaming apoloist.   He tried to cannabalize an N64 controller to sort of jerry-rig it to a mouse interface to play the original GoldenEye in one our gaming nights.  The results didn't turn out too well; I think it had more to do with the implementation than the concept. 

[Retro Deckades]

I picked up a CC Pro when I purchased Goldeneye. It's been several years since I've used a controller for an FPS (the last time was probably for Timesplitters 3). I was actually surprised to learn that I have to acclimatize myself with the CC Pro -- it didn't exactly feel completely natural to use when I briefly tested it. I've been playing the online mode in Goldeneye using the pointer controls exclusively, and it sure does help to make it quick to aim and therefore get the drop on others.

[NWR_insanolord]

I will always use pointer controls if given the option, but I'm fine with dual analog if there's a shooter on 360/PS3 that I want to play.

[Ian Sane]

The Wii ain't exactly abundant with the great first person shooters.  So realistically Metroid Prime 3 is my sole experience with pointer controls.  What I don't like is that I have to keep my hand still.  It's very easy to start bouncing all over the place.  At least with dual-analog if I "rest" I just do nothing.  It's like I can't rest with pointer controls for I have to keep that pointer facing forward.

Is it more accurate?  Yeah, but it's more work on my part.  Maybe it's something I could get used to if more games used it.  But right now if I want a good FPS I'm going with my PS3 where I'll be using dual-analog.  That's just how it is.

With Metroid Prime 3 there was also the problem that I was used to the original Metroid Prime controls and unlike a lot of people I was content with them.  The new controls were fixing a problem I never really felt was there.

The sample size has just been too small.  We'll see how I feel as FPS games with these style controls become more common.

[broodwars]

I'm somewhere in the middle, and whichever I prefer depends on the game.  For example, I prefered pointer control in Resident Evil 4 Wii, but classic control in Goldeneye Wii.  I really have two big issues with pointer control:
 
1.  My natural inclination is sniping.  It's what I enjoy most in shooting-style games, and it's something I have a great deal of difficulty doing with pointer control because the slightest twitch of my wrist throws my aim completely off.  Sure, it's realistic, but if I wanted realism I wouldn't be playing a game.
 
2.  When I pop in a game, I don't want to have to spend 10 minutes - 1 hour calibrating and recalibrating bounding boxes, sliders, etc. to customize the controls for my particular UI quirks.  My OCD won't let me move on until it's "just right".  I just want to put in the game, grab a controller, and go and after Conduit you really can't do that anymore with pointer control.  That's why I liked using it for RE4 and Metroid Prime Trilogy: they got the controls right the first time and I didn't need to waste time recalibrating everything.

[ShyGuy]

I'm very pro pointer controls, it's probably the main reason I bought a Wii. I grew up on early PC first person shooters, and I've never been a big fan of dual analog controls for FPS, The movement is slower and auto aim is annoying.

When I got my Wii on Launch day, I practiced with Red Steel until I got the controls down. I was determined to learn it, because Wii pointer controls looked like my only viable choice if I wanted to play console shooters

I can play a dual analog shooter, I went through a couple Halos, Black, and I actually enjoyed the Left 4 Deads on the 360.

I think since the age of the average game keeps going up, gamers have become more and more resistant to change. If Move and Kinect are bigs hits, a significant chunk of gamers will refuse to adapt.

Pointer controls are much quicker and accurate than dual analog. Try doing something like Wii Play shooting gallery with dual analog.

Sadly auto-aim has crept into Wii pointer FPS as well. Apparently, it shows up in some PC FPS today too. I think this comes from the 360 being the #1 targeted development platform.

[ThePerm]

hmm, if i were to create a control setup

A = context sensitive
+ & - switch weapons
B = shoot
Z = move/aim/turn
c = stop and aim
d-pad = strafe/ look up and down

this way you have the ability to switch from a goldeney n64 setup, to a halo setup, to a wii setup on the fly

[ejamer]

...  What I don't like is that I have to keep my hand still.  It's very easy to start bouncing all over the place.  At least with dual-analog if I "rest" I just do nothing.  It's like I can't rest with pointer controls for I have to keep that pointer facing forward.
...

I don't really understand this line of reasoning.
 
Can't you just rest your arm/elbow on something?  A chair/couch handle has always worked wonderfully for me, and then you just need to make small wrist movements to adjust your aim.  Very stable with virtually no effort required!
 
Almost all games have some type of cursor visible, so it's not like you need to have your arm extended and actually aiming at the screen.  There are a few on-rails shooters that ask you to actually aim using a zapper-like peripheral and no on-screen indication of where you are shooting... but they aren't the norm, and playing that way is usually optional anyway.

[NWR_insanolord]

Yeah, I hate when people complain about having to hold their arm up to aim, as if that were the only way to do it. Rest your arm and pivot your wrist!

[Ian Sane]

Yeah, I hate when people complain about having to hold their arm up to aim, as if that were the only way to do it. Rest your arm and pivot your wrist!

But then I still have to rest my arm on something.  It's still adding extra restrictions that never existed before.  I actually move around a lot when I game.  I'll start of sitting and then maybe slouch, maybe lie on the couch, and then sit on the floor.  Before the Wii I could just do this and my guy on the screen doesn't start staring into the heavens or spin-jumping or anything.  It's very easy to make those adjustment with a normal controller.  I just don't like tying in controls with moving the controller.  There is no real neutral position to allow you to scratch your cheek while you play or change positions.  The controls become fragile in a way.
 
I wonder if one's FPS control preferences are based a lot on their general FPS preferences.  I liked how in DOOM you couldn't aim and the game was designed so that you didn't have to.  Once they added looking around and aiming to the genre the controls had to become much more complicated.  It was easier when it was just simple moving or strafing.  I'm not bothered by auto-aim, I kind of prefer it.  I think more in a "dodge bad guy/shoot bad guy" mentality where specifically aiming is of little concern.  But I don't play deathmatch very much.  I like single player for FPS games or co-op against the computer.  I can see how that could make a big difference.  When you're up against the computer it's you against a whole army.  You kind of want that extra handicapping in your favour like auto-aim.  But against another human you want the truly skilled to win.  You don't want to lose because the game helped the guy with his shot.
 
I think that's why I was so cool with Metroid Prime's controls.  I just want to kill the bad guys and explore the world and find new abilities.  Lock-on aiming is cool for me because it suits my desires.  I don't need to work to shoot the bad guys.  It's just dodge, shoot, solve puzzle, continue to explore.  But I can imagine that if you're more into deatchmatch multiplayer in FPS games you've conditioned yourself to be expecting and wanting that sort of precision aiming, even though the game was not really designed to require it (Metroid Prime 2 last boss being the frustrating exception).
 
It's kind of like having a jump button in Zelda.  Some people really could not adapt to that and it took me a little while to get used to the auto-jump.  I was too used to Mario where you need that precision jumping.  The whole thing is kind of like Ridge Racer vs. Gran Turismo where they're both car racing games but the target audience is such that one audience demands considerably more precision in the controls while the other would find it needlessly complicated.
 
So when you state your preference maybe you should also state what you want to get out of an FPS game.

[King of Twitch]

What a bunch of sissies. How do you think Samus Aran feels? Running around the galaxy all day, backtracking all night, risking her life so you can have the FREEDOM to live without fear of the Space Pirates? And you just sit there on your couch complaining about moving your arms, eating mac donald's, able to hit pause anytime you want. Ingrates.

[Killer_Man_Jaro]

As a general rule, I will use the pointer controls to begin with and most of the time, I'll stick with them, unless something about it feels wrong. Although to be honest, if we are discussing the first person shooter specifically, there aren't many pointer & motion FPS's to speak of. The only first-person games I have on Wii are Metroid Prime 3 and Eledees, neither of which really qualify in the traditional sense. If we expand the frame of reference, I have really enjoyed using the pointer in favour of classic controls for several games - Battalion Wars II is one of the lesser known examples that comes to mind.

Ian Sane, I'm not sure what you're getting at - "you should also state what you want to get out of an FPS game". I would have thought you'd be playing to have fun; what could you want to get out of playing a game that would influence your choice of control scheme as well?

[broodwars]

Ian Sane, I'm not sure what you're getting at - "you should also state what you want to get out of an FPS game". I would have thought you'd be playing to have fun; what could you want to get out of playing a game that would influence your choice of control scheme as well?

Considering he used Doom as an example, I'm going to hazard a guess that "what you want to get out of an FPS game" means "the style of FPS you enjoy playing."  For instance, if you just like playing an FPS where you run & gun, precision isn't altogether necessary so you might prefer a control scheme that trades away precision for immersiveness.  If you, like me, prefer playing an FPS that's somewhat stealth-based (or heavy on sniping) like the new Goldeneye, perhaps you want that extra bit of precision that comes with using a dual-analog stick (since it's harder to muck up your aim).
 
As for the whole "why don't you rest your arm?" thing, I can't do that in fast-paced FPS games.  It limits the movement of my wrist too much to not have some amount of free space around my wrist so it has to be somewhat elevated in the air.  In slower-pace First-Person games like Metroid Prime 3 or titles like Twilight Princess, there's a lot less rapid movement so it isn't really an issue.

[kraken613]

Keyboard and Mouse>>>>>>>>>>> Wii Controls>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dual Analog

I play atleast 75% of my games on PC and it's all because of the controls. If I am on Wii NO WAY I am using dual analog.

[NWR_insanolord]

Ian Sane, I'm not sure what you're getting at - "you should also state what you want to get out of an FPS game". I would have thought you'd be playing to have fun; what could you want to get out of playing a game that would influence your choice of control scheme as well?

Considering he used Doom as an example, I'm going to hazard a guess that "what you want to get out of an FPS game" means "the style of FPS you enjoy playing."  For instance, if you just like playing an FPS where you run & gun, precision isn't altogether necessary so you might prefer a control scheme that trades away precision for immersiveness.  If you, like me, prefer playing an FPS that's somewhat stealth-based (or heavy on sniping) like the new Goldeneye, perhaps you want that extra bit of precision that comes with using a dual-analog stick (since it's harder to muck up your aim).
 
As for the whole "why don't you rest your arm?" thing, I can't do that in fast-paced FPS games.  It limits the movement of my wrist too much to not have some amount of free space around my wrist so it has to be somewhat elevated in the air.  In slower-pace First-Person games like Metroid Prime 3 or titles like Twilight Princess, there's a lot less rapid movement so it isn't really an issue.

I strongly disagree that analog aiming is more precise than pointer aiming. When you rest your arm, you rest the back of your forearm on a chair arm or your leg and you have full motion in your wrist and a much steadier hand than if you just hold it in the air.

[Ian Sane]

Ian Sane, I'm not sure what you're getting at - "you should also state what you want to get out of an FPS game". I would have thought you'd be playing to have fun; what could you want to get out of playing a game that would influence your choice of control scheme as well?

What kind of experience do you want?  Do you just want to play deathmatch multiplayer or do you prefer the single player campaign or do you like both equally?  Do you like a mindless shooter or one where you have fulfill mission objectives or solve puzzles?  Do you want a lot of emphasis on precision aiming or do you want to just fire at an enemy in your general sights?  It's a complicated genre with a lot of variations and I'm guessing that that plays a part in what sort of controls a person prefers.

[Morari]

It's a complicated genre with a lot of variations and I'm guessing that that plays a part in what sort of controls a person prefers.

No, not really. I want quick, responsive controls regardless of what I'm doing within my game.

[famicomplicated]

Interesting comments so far guys, thanks!
If I could throw in my 2 cents. I'm a pointer-man myself, I always think that when I'm using dual analogue controls it feels like I'm steering a dumper truck with 2 chopsticks attached to my thumbs. (unnatural)

I'm from a mouse/keyboard background, when I first moved to console FPS's (Goldeneye) I tried the dual analogue option in that (the first console shooter to have it?) and didn't like it even back then.
I loved the default setup that Rare chose, the birth of the "stop n' shoot with a cross-hair for accuracy" era was born right there.

That lasted me fine until the following dual-analogue-only era, where aiming was now done in sync with movement, playing games like TimeSplitters, Halo 1 etc never sat comfortably with me, just felt too "twitchy" aiming with my right thumb.

When the Wii came along, I felt that with the pointer controls gave me a happy medium that sat nicely somewhere between the analogue movement of GE64 and the super-accuracy of a mouse pointer, (my 2 favourite control options of yore) without the negatives that those controls had (digital strafing in GE and digital movement with a M/KB setup)

The ideal setup would be a USB nunchuck attached to a PC, but I think the Wii is a fantastic (and more realistic) alternative.

[Killer_Man_Jaro]

No, not really. I want quick, responsive controls regardless of what I'm doing within my game.

Exactly, Morari. I think that's the primary factor in how people decide what sort of control set-up to use. Which feels quicker and more responsive to them personally? As for me, I like the tactile sensitivity and instantaneous readjustments that I pull off with the pointer (which also applies to a mouse), but I know others, after years of convention, feel more comfortable with a twin stick controller.

[KDR_11k]

The Wii ain't exactly abundant with the great first person shooters.  So realistically Metroid Prime 3 is my sole experience with pointer controls.  What I don't like is that I have to keep my hand still.  It's very easy to start bouncing all over the place.  At least with dual-analog if I "rest" I just do nothing.  It's like I can't rest with pointer controls for I have to keep that pointer facing forward.

Is it more accurate?  Yeah, but it's more work on my part.  Maybe it's something I could get used to if more games used it.  But right now if I want a good FPS I'm going with my PS3 where I'll be using dual-analog.  That's just how it is.

With Metroid Prime 3 there was also the problem that I was used to the original Metroid Prime controls and unlike a lot of people I was content with them.  The new controls were fixing a problem I never really felt was there.

The sample size has just been too small.  We'll see how I feel as FPS games with these style controls become more common.

Maybe you're holding it wrong, I can rest my hand on my leg and still aim fine without fatigue. It just makes waggle gestures hard to do.

[Jonnyboy117]

I find that with most pointer FPS controls on Wii, there is a trade-off between increased aiming accuracy within the given view and decreased turn speed/fidelity. What I mean by the latter is that you can jack up the turn speed and make it more responsive by shrinking the bounding box, but my personal experience shows that doing so also makes it hard to turn exactly when and how much you want to.

Therefore, the usefulness of pointer controls is a combination of control interface design (how much can you customize settings to your personal preference) and the actual game design (how much accurate aiming and quick turning is required during gameplay). Corruption works very well in this scheme, partly because enemies rarely stray outside of your view. In Goldeneye multiplayer, opponents may run circles around you, making it hard (for me) to keep up and aim "on the run" when using pointer controls.

I generally prefer dual joystick for comfort and familiarity reasons, although there is also quite a bit of variability in how well that scheme is implemented, depending on the game. The classic controls feel excellent in Goldeneye without any setup.