Refreshment.01
Member
We have talked about this but most of the time as a tangent in other threads. But my recent experience with a game impelled me to create this thread and dissipate some what.
The industry and it's biggest market specially (America) it's in an action game oriented phase with the dominant genre at the moment being shooters. The more or less established control method is dual analog for movement and camera control, this forces the player to invest most of the "thumb time" in the sticks, so the more time the game doesn't force the player to move from that default position the better.
The specific game case that triggered this topic is in Human Revolution. The designers set in a vast amount of boxes that can be pick up and interacted by the player. In the default controller option, i had to take away the thumb from the stick to push the interaction button, this amounts to thousands of times in a playthrough. Not game braking at all but not optimal either.
We have been playing like this for long and i think that's precisely the problem. So for years, i can't figure out why no manufacturer has incorporated a way for the controller to detect the grip applied to a its handles by the fingers. Middle finger, ring finger, and little finger are much of the time inactive interaction wise, serving just as support.
I think a gripping input method could become the main interaction button in games. It's a really natural interface method that the user can relate to, while maintaining control of movement and camera positioning. See a weapon, box or switch to interact with and just squeeze the controller with the those 3 fingers that most of the time remain idle.
Nintendo had a moment of illumination when they splitted the controller in two, the other piece of the puzzle was coming up with a way to detect pressure in the handle surface. Kind of disappointing seeing them pursue other ventures with the WiiU controller and ignored the evolution path for the Wii Remote.
There are other neglected features that with might discuss in this thread but this first post is long enough already.
The industry and it's biggest market specially (America) it's in an action game oriented phase with the dominant genre at the moment being shooters. The more or less established control method is dual analog for movement and camera control, this forces the player to invest most of the "thumb time" in the sticks, so the more time the game doesn't force the player to move from that default position the better.
The specific game case that triggered this topic is in Human Revolution. The designers set in a vast amount of boxes that can be pick up and interacted by the player. In the default controller option, i had to take away the thumb from the stick to push the interaction button, this amounts to thousands of times in a playthrough. Not game braking at all but not optimal either.
We have been playing like this for long and i think that's precisely the problem. So for years, i can't figure out why no manufacturer has incorporated a way for the controller to detect the grip applied to a its handles by the fingers. Middle finger, ring finger, and little finger are much of the time inactive interaction wise, serving just as support.
I think a gripping input method could become the main interaction button in games. It's a really natural interface method that the user can relate to, while maintaining control of movement and camera positioning. See a weapon, box or switch to interact with and just squeeze the controller with the those 3 fingers that most of the time remain idle.
Nintendo had a moment of illumination when they splitted the controller in two, the other piece of the puzzle was coming up with a way to detect pressure in the handle surface. Kind of disappointing seeing them pursue other ventures with the WiiU controller and ignored the evolution path for the Wii Remote.
There are other neglected features that with might discuss in this thread but this first post is long enough already.
