Need a joystick for casual gaming

[Uraniun235]

However, anyone who plays console games can be far more precise with thumbs than most PC-only players would probably imagine.

I'll freely admit that being a mostly-PC gamer, the prospect of trying to get used to not being a total spazz with thumbsticks is a bit daunting.

[Stark]

It's a skill like anything else. There are limits regarding input accuracy given the short length of stick and deadzones, but that's it. PC-only gamers probably can't imagine pulling headshots at point-blank in a twitch shooter, but console gamers do it all the time.

[weemadando]

I agree with Stark that gamepad use is a learned skill. I still far prefer mouse and keyboard, but I'm certainly competent with a gamepad in shooters now.

But I will disagree forever that a gamepad is a decent substitute for a joystick in sims. Especially when one of such awesome quality as the Logitech is so cheap.

[Oskuro]

Of course it is an skill that can be learned. I've seen people play games competently using a wacom tablet of all things. My point is, and always has been, that certain control schemes work better with certain controller types, even if they still work fine with others.

Of course, for consoles, wich aim to have a universal controller, the gamepad is the best option, as it is for users who don't want to have a cartload of control devices cluttering their room. But, if you're willing to go for an specific controller type, then choosing the one that better fits the game is the way to go.

I mean, I'm personally considering adquiring an steering wheel for my driving games, but for the time being use the PS3-style gamepad just fine (Because Logitech can go die in a fire if they expect me to pay over 200€ so I can get a goddam clutch pedal).

[Uraniun235]

It's a skill like anything else. There are limits regarding input accuracy given the short length of stick and deadzones, but that's it. PC-only gamers probably can't imagine pulling headshots at point-blank in a twitch shooter, but console gamers do it all the time.

I can because I remember my stupid spoiled lucky friends with Nintendo 64s and Goldeneye getting absurdly good at that game.

[weemadando]

I'll oppose any use of wheels. If you have never driven a real car, then a gaming wheel may be alright, but anyone who has any driving experience will usually find a wheel to be counter intuitive as they tend to behave in a completely different manner to a real steering wheel. Just use a gamepad or arrow keys.

[Starglider]

Just use a gamepad or arrow keys.

Thumbsticks fine, but arrow keys (or any other digital input) are not going to work on anything but the most simplistic and unrealistic racing games. The notion of trying to play Gran Turismo or even Burnout with digital controls is ridiculous.

[Stark]

But I will disagree forever that a gamepad is a decent substitute for a joystick in sims. Especially when one of such awesome quality as the Logitech is so cheap.

But you're the sort of person who'd actually use it. If I had a joystick, I doubt I could be fucked to get it off the shelf and plug it in if I wanted to play a flight-lite game like Freespace, because a controller is just fine there. Strike Fighters 2 players are a bit of a niche.

[Oskuro]

Maybe I should write an snow-writing simulator. I bet use of a Joystick would be appropiate there

[weemadando]

But I will disagree forever that a gamepad is a decent substitute for a joystick in sims. Especially when one of such awesome quality as the Logitech is so cheap.

But you're the sort of person who'd actually use it. If I had a joystick, I doubt I could be fucked to get it off the shelf and plug it in if I wanted to play a flight-lite game like Freespace, because a controller is just fine there. Strike Fighters 2 players are a bit of a niche.

Nah, I just have it sitting on top of my case (which is on my desk) and I plug it in when needed.

[Drooling Iguana]

But you're the sort of person who'd actually use it. If I had a joystick, I doubt I could be fucked to get it off the shelf and plug it in if I wanted to play a flight-lite game like Freespace, because a controller is just fine there. Strike Fighters 2 players are a bit of a niche.

Freespace is a hell of a lot more fun with a joystick than it is with a gamepad.

[Stark]

Prove it. I've played it with all kinds of controllers, and controllers and joysticks are basically the same (except a controller has enough buttons for all the controls you need for a simple game like Freespace). You probably tried it once, sucked, and decided it was 'bad' rather than simply needing time to get used to. There is certainly no massive gulf of utility as you'd see playing a flight-lite game with keys or mouse.

[Alyeska]

Prove it. I've played it with all kinds of controllers, and controllers and joysticks are basically the same (except a controller has enough buttons for all the controls you need for a simple game like Freespace). You probably tried it once, sucked, and decided it was 'bad' rather than simply needing time to get used to. There is certainly no massive gulf of utility as you'd see playing a flight-lite game with keys or mouse.

The joystick most suggested in this thread has 12 buttons. An 8 way hat switch. Throttle and 3 axis movement ability. And you say a controller has more options? The 360 controller has 10 usable buttons, two thumb sticks, and a D pad limited to 4 way if I recall. To use any of the options you have to take your thumb off one of the thumb sticks. The joystick takes full advantage of the shape of your hand allowing control over almost the entire unit without having to do one control at a time. A controller limits you to 4 active button uses at one time. A good joystick can allow you to make use of more. The controller might have "enough", but it still can't beat the functionality of a well designed joystick.

Yes, it is up to personal preference, and it can certainly work. But it is not "better".

[General Zod]

Prove it. I've played it with all kinds of controllers, and controllers and joysticks are basically the same (except a controller has enough buttons for all the controls you need for a simple game like Freespace). You probably tried it once, sucked, and decided it was 'bad' rather than simply needing time to get used to. There is certainly no massive gulf of utility as you'd see playing a flight-lite game with keys or mouse.

The joystick most suggested in this thread has 12 buttons. An 8 way hat switch. Throttle and 3 axis movement ability. And you say a controller has more options? The 360 controller has 10 usable buttons, two thumb sticks, and a D pad limited to 4 way if I recall. To use any of the options you have to take your thumb off one of the thumb sticks. The joystick takes full advantage of the shape of your hand allowing control over almost the entire unit without having to do one control at a time. A controller limits you to 4 active button uses at one time. A good joystick can allow you to make use of more. The controller might have "enough", but it still can't beat the functionality of a well designed joystick.

Yes, it is up to personal preference, and it can certainly work. But it is not "better".

Do most games even make use of half of those buttons? Because most games these days can do more with less.

[Ypoknons]

Thumbsticks fine, but arrow keys (or any other digital input) are not going to work on anything but the most simplistic and unrealistic racing games. The notion of trying to play Gran Turismo or even Burnout with digital controls is ridiculous.

I also had a hard time with GRID with arrow keys. I'm not racing expert or car driver, but since the X360 controller and PS3 have throttle triggers I could control the degree of acceleration. Not so with the arrow keys, and that was very frustrating.

[weemadando]

Prove it. I've played it with all kinds of controllers, and controllers and joysticks are basically the same (except a controller has enough buttons for all the controls you need for a simple game like Freespace). You probably tried it once, sucked, and decided it was 'bad' rather than simply needing time to get used to. There is certainly no massive gulf of utility as you'd see playing a flight-lite game with keys or mouse.

I actually preferred playing X-Wing and TIE Fighter with a mouse. Probably because I learnt to play them that way before I ever got a joystick, but that's just the way I play those games.

And Freespace is TOTALLY playable on keyboard. I too have no idea what people are talking about with that.

[Stark]

Yeah, a lot of people did that. I can play most flight-lite games pretty well with keyboard (despite the obvious digital crapness). Controllers just add analog sticks. It's a shame the 360 controller exposes its shoulders as axes (ie, the triggers are two directions on a throttle axis for some reason) so it's not so great for FS2, but when you're used to using [, ] and \ for throttle it isn't a big deal.

Also ITT Alyeska misses the point; a controller has more options because it's useful for flight sims, but not flight sims ONLY AND NOTHING ELSE AT ALL. Sure, there are people who play a lot of sims, but the thread title is 'for casual gaming', not 'for LOMAC extreme'. Zod's point is great, because moving some games to consoles and changing to dual use, menus, overlays etc actually makes them more playable, and having a controller standard helps UI design more than a bunch of joysticks with different number and position of control elements.

The idea that a controller 'limits you to 4 active button uses at one time' is hilarious. Remember what casual gaming is? Let's make a list of games that need more than 4 buttons to be held at the same time.

[weemadando]

But again, like I said before - it's a value proposition. Are you happy to spend 30 USD on a flight stick that will only ever see use in sims?

If so, then go right ahead - it will make the experience that much better.

If no, then maybe look at hte 360 controller as a better overall solution for all your needs.

[Alyeska]

Yeah, a lot of people did that. I can play most flight-lite games pretty well with keyboard (despite the obvious digital crapness). Controllers just add analog sticks. It's a shame the 360 controller exposes its shoulders as axes (ie, the triggers are two directions on a throttle axis for some reason) so it's not so great for FS2, but when you're used to using [, ] and \ for throttle it isn't a big deal.

Also ITT Alyeska misses the point; a controller has more options because it's useful for flight sims, but not flight sims ONLY AND NOTHING ELSE AT ALL. Sure, there are people who play a lot of sims, but the thread title is 'for casual gaming', not 'for LOMAC extreme'. Zod's point is great, because moving some games to consoles and changing to dual use, menus, overlays etc actually makes them more playable, and having a controller standard helps UI design more than a bunch of joysticks with different number and position of control elements.

The idea that a controller 'limits you to 4 active button uses at one time' is hilarious. Remember what casual gaming is? Let's make a list of games that need more than 4 buttons to be held at the same time.

And you miss the point that a PC gamer is already going to have a mouse and keyboard, so the controller is already an extra option and is less useful because the mouse and keyboard will be defaulted for almost every single game.

[Alyeska]

But again, like I said before - it's a value proposition. Are you happy to spend 30 USD on a flight stick that will only ever see use in sims?

If so, then go right ahead - it will make the experience that much better.

If no, then maybe look at hte 360 controller as a better overall solution for all your needs.

The choice is between a joystick I will only use in games and a controller I will never use at all. I have a computer. I have zero need for a controller because I have a mouse and a keyboard. If I want to fly, I get a joystick. The controller is not a better overall solution. It ignores the presence of already having a mouse and keyboard on the computer to begin with.

[aieeegrunt]

I may actually have a case where a joystick would work better for an individual than a more normal console controller.

My girlfriend mangled one of her thumbs playing baseball. She wants to play Left 4 Dead but continously complains about how two analog sticks are an affront to gaming and that God Intended Us to Use d-pads for movement. It was amusing watching her trying to strafe using the xbox's dPad thought.

I suspect the real problem is simply that one of her thumbs is fucked (she has some numbness and whatnot). Is it possible to set up a joystick like that described in this thread to work with xbox FPS games?

[Stark]

And you miss the point that a PC gamer is already going to have a mouse and keyboard, so the controller is already an extra option and is less useful because the mouse and keyboard will be defaulted for almost every single game.

So now you're saying a joystick or mouse and keyboard is better for every game? Hilarious. I guess if you only play shooters and sims (ie, not casual) you might have a point; but if someone specifically asks for a casual gaming controller, you can't just declare a controller useless because YOU don't use one. Before you get butthurt, I've already repeatedly stated that for people like you and Ando joysticks make sense due to sim play. For normal (ie not simhard) people they're nearly useless. I actually discovered I had one packed from when I moved; I haven't touched it IN YEARS because it's totally redundant.

I particularly enjoy that you have silently dropped your entire 'elite power of mega joysticks 4 button' argument. Perhaps you realised it was worthless to non-sim players, or even that you can press more than 4 buttons on a controller without issue. Have you ever used a controller?

I suspect the real problem is simply that one of her thumbs is fucked (she has some numbness and whatnot). Is it possible to set up a joystick like that described in this thread to work with xbox FPS games?

No. You can jigger around with the stick assignments sometimes, but the two-stick arrangement is core to the controller scheme.

[Alyeska]

So now you're saying a joystick or mouse and keyboard is better for every game? Hilarious. I guess if you only play shooters and sims (ie, not casual) you might have a point; but if someone specifically asks for a casual gaming controller, you can't just declare a controller useless because YOU don't use one. Before you get butthurt, I've already repeatedly stated that for people like you and Ando joysticks make sense due to sim play. For normal (ie not simhard) people they're nearly useless. I actually discovered I had one packed from when I moved; I haven't touched it IN YEARS because it's totally redundant.

No. Your default configuration is already going to have a mouse and a keyboard. There is already sufficient control to play almost every game. And speaking of casual games. The Sims. Defense Grid. World of Goo. Do you honestly think people are going to go out and purchase a controller just to play those games? People gaming on a PC whom by a controller are not casual gamers in the first place. Then again, joystick users aren't either. Kinda defeats the purpose.

The point I was making is that the supposed usefulness of the controller does not actually exist because an alternate control method is already the default option on the PC. It has usefulness on a console, but not on a PC. So now the question comes down to preference. If you don't want to play a game with a mouse and keyboard, what do you buy? And that has nothing to do with usefulness and everything to do with preference.

I particularly enjoy that you have silently dropped your entire 'elite power of mega joysticks 4 button' argument. Perhaps you realised it was worthless to non-sim players, or even that you can press more than 4 buttons on a controller without issue. Have you ever used a controller?

I have not dropped the argument. It does not need any defending. It simply is. You proclaimed the controller to be the end all of perfection and that it offers superior choice and capabilities. I correctly pointed out the flaws in your argument. You are now arguing your personal preference, but you are prefacing it as the most "useful" option. Don't butter up your opinions as fact.

[Stark]

So now you're saying a joystick or mouse and keyboard is better for every game? Hilarious. I guess if you only play shooters and sims (ie, not casual) you might have a point; but if someone specifically asks for a casual gaming controller, you can't just declare a controller useless because YOU don't use one. Before you get butthurt, I've already repeatedly stated that for people like you and Ando joysticks make sense due to sim play. For normal (ie not simhard) people they're nearly useless. I actually discovered I had one packed from when I moved; I haven't touched it IN YEARS because it's totally redundant.

No. Your default configuration is already going to have a mouse and a keyboard. There is already sufficient control to play almost every game.

Says who? By that rationale you don't need any peripherals at all; except people have always used them, because they're better. Keyboard and mouse is passable for most games and good for RTS/FPS, that's all. It's not a religion or a best fit.

And speaking of casual games. The Sims. Defense Grid. World of Goo. Do you honestly think people are going to go out and purchase a controller just to play those games? People gaming on a PC whom by a controller are not casual gamers in the first place. Then again, joystick users aren't either. Kinda defeats the purpose.

Wow, let's play 'choose a list of games that use a given control scheme'! Let's play Geometry Wars or Meteos with the keyboard and mouse!

That you declare people who buy peripherals 'not casual gamers' is both staggeringly arrogant and instantly defeats the OP; your input is thus 'don't buy anything because casual = cheap'. That said, the OP does appear to class complex games like Orbiter and Il-2 as 'casual', so...

The point I was making is that the supposed usefulness of the controller does not actually exist because an alternate control method is already the default option on the PC.

Alternate != better. People use controllers all the time; you declaring unilaterally that they are useless doesn't change that. There are people who didn't spend the last twenty years playing games with a keyboard and for whom controllers are much easier to use.

It has usefulness on a console, but not on a PC.

Except for all those people who use them, I guess. Who made you Baseless Declarator Of Usefulness?

So now the question comes down to preference. If you don't want to play a game with a mouse and keyboard, what do you buy? And that has nothing to do with usefulness and everything to do with preference.

Really? I thought the equation 'buy joystick to play one tiny genre or buy controller to play that genre and other games too' was entirely determined by usefulness. Unless and except those people who play extremely complex sims or have a hankering to wave their hand around when playing a game, there's no reason for a PC gamer to buy a joystick. They're single-genre. They're like driving wheels.

I have not dropped the argument. It does not need any defending. It simply is. You proclaimed the controller to be the end all of perfection and that it offers superior choice and capabilities. I correctly pointed out the flaws in your argument. You are now arguing your personal preference, but you are prefacing it as the most "useful" option. Don't butter up your opinions as fact.

Quote me saying that ' controller to be the end all of perfection and that it offers superior choice and capabilities'. I said it was more flexible, and thus in general a better choice outside the very niche games that demand a complex joystick. The only one making absolute statements here is you.

PS, how is an irrelevant lie about only being able to press four buttons at once 'correctly pointing out the flaws in my argument'? Is that something that 'simply is' and doesn't need defending? Do I need to put up a youtube video? How is it even relevant to more than a tiny fraction of games almost nobody is going to play?

[Alyeska]

Stop quoting my name directly in every single quoted response, it makes responding to you needlessly irritating. Its not good form.

Says who? By that rationale you don't need any peripherals at all; except people have always used them, because they're better. Keyboard and mouse is passable for most games and good for RTS/FPS, that's all. It's not a religion or a best fit.

The mouse and keyboard is default. So your looking at an additional peripherial that suits what you want. Preference.

Wow, let's play 'choose a list of games that use a given control scheme'! Let's play Geometry Wars or Meteos with the keyboard and mouse!

Way to miss the point. Most casual games that exist on the PC are not heavy on the control setup and function quite well without a controller.

That you declare people who buy peripherals 'not casual gamers' is both staggeringly arrogant and instantly defeats the OP; your input is thus 'don't buy anything because casual = cheap'. That said, the OP does appear to class complex games like Orbiter and Il-2 as 'casual', so...

A casual gamer is typically one that does not invest a lot of time or effort into gaming. They don't by many games, they play more simplistic games often, and they rarely buy all the bells and whistle attachments. So they typically don't have peripherals, or they wouldn't be a casual gamer anymore.

Alternate != better. People use controllers all the time; you declaring unilaterally that they are useless doesn't change that. There are people who didn't spend the last twenty years playing games with a keyboard and for whom controllers are much easier to use.

I didn't say better. And alternative does not mean worse either. My point is that people who play PC games in the first place are already accustomed to the mouse and keyboard as a method of play. So they select an option that fits what they need.

Except for all those people who use them, I guess. Who made you Baseless Declarator Of Usefulness?

Having a virtual keyboard for Halo 2 on the PC so that you can input your name using the 360 controller is useful. Except for the little fact that its useless because the computer already comes with a mouse and keyboard. Same principle. The controller is "jack of all trades, master of none" so to speak. And its usefulness is pointless on the PC as I already indicated.

Really? I thought the equation 'buy joystick to play one tiny genre or buy controller to play that genre and other games too' was entirely determined by usefulness. Unless and except those people who play extremely complex sims or have a hankering to wave their hand around when playing a game, there's no reason for a PC gamer to buy a joystick. They're single-genre. They're like driving wheels.

And what are the people going to use the controller for outside of flying? They are going to play FPS games? How about RTS games? Seriously. Your argument that Joysticks are awful is because the controller can also be used for other games that PC gamers historically favor the mouse and keyboard for. Are you even thinking your argument through before you post and make a fool of yourself?

A PC Gamer is going to default to the mouse and keyboard. It is an overwhelming preferred control method by the PC gaming crowd for games like FPS and RTS. So your usefulness argument about the controller just goes out the window, again. Its a preference only, and its not preferred by most gamers. Sure it can handle Freespace 2. Most people who play Freespace 2 don't prefer it. They will play with the mouse and keyboard, or they will play with the joystick. This has been made abundantly clear in this thread Stark. And you still refuse to see the reality right in front of you. The usefulness of the controller exists at the preference of the PC gamer. And the preference largely does not exist. So its not useful.

Quote me saying that ' controller to be the end all of perfection and that it offers superior choice and capabilities'. I said it was more flexible, and thus in general a better choice outside the very niche games that demand a complex joystick. The only one making absolute statements here is you.

Its more flexible, except no one wants what it can do. So its worthless.

PS, how is an irrelevant lie about only being able to press four buttons at once 'correctly pointing out the flaws in my argument'? Is that something that 'simply is' and doesn't need defending? Do I need to put up a youtube video? How is it even relevant to more than a tiny fraction of games almost nobody is going to play?

Two index fingers, two thumbs. I don't count button mashing as a means of hitting more buttons. And it requires you take your thumb off one stick. Controller is limited to only 4 fingers/thumbs. Joystick is not. Accusing someone of lying while not considering the actual biology facts makes you look like a fool.