| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Arch Michael7
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
8
   |
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello everybody, I posted a much longer version of this in the general forums right before finding out that there was a feedback forum. Good job me.
Anyways - I'll try to keep this shorter than the other post. I play a lot of console games, and much of that time is spent with FPS's. When I started reading about Dust, I got extremely excited. Paid the 20 bucks, and jumped in for the first time this weekend. The first thing I thought was OMG THIS GAME IS GOING TO BE THE ONLY FPS I EVER PLAY AGAIN. The second thing I thought was "why the hell can't I seem to keep my reticule on this guy - he's only 30 feet away from me...".
I turned auto assist on.
I turned my 240hz on the tv down to 60hz.
I turned my sensitivity down to 1.
I still couldn't seem to maintain target. That's when I started to realize that the controls were really REALLY floaty. They aren't tight and responsive like in BF3 - they are glidy, like my reticule is on a thin sheet of ice. Even with a vast background of console playing, with a huge amount of time invested in FPS's, I just can't get the feel for these controls - and that's really something that shouldn't ever happen with a FPS. That's one of the major strengths of the genre - the fact that anybody who has played games in the last 12 years can pick up a controller, and immediately feel right at home in your world. It's why games like Condemned, Fallout 3 and Bioshock use that control scheme - it's the "Run, Jump and Shoot" of our current console generation.
I'm going to keep playing this game a LOT, trying to dig into the nuts and bolts of it - but I've never once picked up a FPS and had this kind of trouble. I think the controls need tightened up and made more responsive and "crunchy" personally. |
Patches The Hyena
204
|
Posted - 2012.09.03 14:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
Agreed with you in general, pretty sure I still agree. |
Niarum
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 09:56:00 -
[3] - Quote
Yep, fast, direct and responsible controls should be priority number 1 for a FPS. I disagree on the "tight and responsive" adjective for BF3 controls - at least on the PS3. My BF3 had a controller lag of 160 miliseconds, even after all the patches (it was 190 before the patches) and that is just awful. I already sold the game. It was not my TV because I've measured the input lag of my TV using the guide on AVForums and its 40 msecs, and MW3 or Bad Company 2 had about 60-80 msecs of controller lag. It was the same with Killzone 2, it has an unbearable amount of input lag.
So I would ask the devs, if you want to use some other game controls as reference please don't look at BF3 of Killzone games, look at COD games. I know COD games are anathema over here, but their controls are really good and I think that is part of their success. |
Gemini Reynolds
Sanmatar Kelkoons
Minmatar Republic
69
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 10:17:00 -
[4] - Quote
OMGARGLEBARGLECODGARBLE!
Oh come on, you know someone was going to.
I agree though that it's a bit difficult to work out exactly how far my crosshairs are going to move given X amount of stick movement at any particular point in time. I don't go down to the mS, because that's...yeah. Anyways it would be a lot better with less of a 'deadzone' for movement or maybe I'm just misunderstanding how the controls are programmed in the first place. In any case, tracking a moving target isn't exactly happening if there's any distance greater than medium (and is likely directly tied in to the 'dodge dance' that drives some completely nuts). |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |