Kinect And Wheel

[t.o.]

Are you seriously arguing that pad users should in any way be as fast as a wheel user? Try driving a car in real life, then picture doing the same with a pad, then back to a real car, then your pad. Which one offer more control? Not the pad.

There's a good reason why in Forza it's a lot closer, the acrade physic doesn't favor either as it does not accurately simulate real driving physics, it's a far cry from the much more realistic physic of GT5, so natrually.. wheel users would dominate.

Just to clear this up. I don't want people read someone's wish as facts. There is a good reason why but it has NOTHING to do with what this guy just said. There are control buffers built into the control aspect for controller users that help keep the car on the road and offer better control over wheel users. This isn't my opinion but FACT that was told by Turn10 themselves. Google it for yourselves.

Same thing really applies in GT5. You race online and you can EASILY see the cars making movements that should send them into a violent tailspin but don't because controller buffers built in for pad/controller users compensate for the small steering corrections that are impossible with a controller. Both games would be practically unplayable without these buffers for controller users.

Just a little clear up so people don't go around thinking poorly or not at all researched drivel that people make up to feel better about a certain game doesn't come across as fact when in fact it's has no basis in fact whatsoever.

TRANSLATION: This dude just made up a bunch of crap about arcade physics and blah blah blah.

 

[TRC GeorgiaDawg]

Are you seriously arguing that pad users should in any way be as fast as a wheel user? Try driving a car in real life, then picture doing the same with a pad, then back to a real car, then your pad. Which one offer more control? Not the pad.

Yep, that's exactly what I'm arguing. One control method should not be faster than another and people shouldn't have to go out and buy extra stuff just to keep up. We are talking about console games where the vast majority of players will use controllers anyways.

And no, they don't drive with controllers in a real car. Not yet anyways. Well, you could argue a F1 wheel more resembles a video game controller than a wheel. But whatever. It's a apples to oranges comparison to begin with. Because just as they're not driving with gamepads, neither are they sitting there in a motionless chair driving by playing with a upgraded plastic video game toy (wheel).

 

[Bonefork]

One control method should not be faster than another and people shouldn't have to go out and buy extra stuff just to keep up.

There are control buffers built into the control aspect for controller users that help keep the car on the road and offer better control over wheel users.

A wheel, as an input device, is far different from an analog stick... it's very difficult to quickly move an analog stick to 300 degrees (33% to the right) and hold it there exactly, but with a wheel, it's very simple. Likewise, to get a wheel to the full rotation of 900 takes over two full turns, which is considerably harder.

Further, when you press on the joystick you expect certain things to happen. If you push it 100% to the right for a fraction of a second, you're probably trying to make a slight but sudden shift to the right, whereas if you were to hold it, you would expect the car to turn as sharply as possible, but on the computer side all it gets is the raw numbers, and it's "RIGHT=100%" in both scenarios. The racing game (and most any game, really) has to do a little bit of guesswork when it receives a command from the controller, usually by capturing your input in intervals and making adjustments to it to smooth it out and make things work the way it thinks you'd expect them to.

These types of routines are not necessary with a wheel, which is a far more accurate input device, so in turn the player feels more in control, and technically is, though whether this is an advantage or not is entirely up to the skill of the players.

 

[t.o.]

A wheel, as an input device, is far different from an analog stick... it's very difficult to quickly move an analog stick to 300 degrees (33% to the right) and hold it there exactly, but with a wheel, it's very simple. Likewise, to get a wheel to the full rotation of 900 takes over two full turns, which is considerably harder.

Further, when you press on the joystick you expect certain things to happen. If you push it 100% to the right for a fraction of a second, you're probably trying to make a slight but sudden shift to the right, whereas if you were to hold it, you would expect the car to turn as sharply as possible, but on the computer side all it gets is the raw numbers, and it's "RIGHT=100%" in both scenarios. The racing game (and most any game, really) has to do a little bit of guesswork when it receives a command from the controller, usually by capturing your input in intervals and making adjustments to it to smooth it out and make things work the way it thinks you'd expect them to.

These types of routines are not necessary with a wheel, which is a far more accurate input device, so in turn the player feels more in control, and technically is, though whether this is an advantage or not is entirely up to the skill of the players.

This goes to what I said. It would be virtually impossible to play a racing game with a controller if buffers weren't built in. And if they want to sell games they damn sure better put them buffers in or they could forget about selling any meaningful amount. Would be too difficult for the casual racer and both games audience is the casual racer.