The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Imagine the scenario – you wait months for a game to come out. When its released you break your piggy bank (or maybe that’s just me), rush to the shops, purchase it with your hard earned cash, and get home and put it into your PS2/Gamecube/Xbox drive. So far, so good. The title screen comes up, and you start a new game, and its everything that you expected – the graphics are mindblowing, the AI unbelievable, the sound awesome. You pick up the pad and…the controls are terrible. All those other factors that made the game so initially great are instantly negated by a terrible control system. Oh dear.
Effective, efficient, and most of all, easy controls are pivotal in making a successful game. Part of this is down to the quality of the controller, but let’s face it, there is hardly any disparity between controllers these days that that is a non-factor. But it’s the ease at which a game can be played that is most important – Nintendo released this initially with Zelda 64, where on button was used for different actions (which Rare would later term as ‘context sensitive’ in Conker’s BFD), to ensure that in difficult situations, you know exactly what you are doing rather than fumbling around looking for the right button to press.
Control systems can be bad in two main ways – the can be clunky and complicated, or they can simply be downright illogical. But it’s the ease at which a game can be played that is most important – Nintendo released this initially with Zelda 64, where on button was used for different actions (which Rare would later term as ‘context sensitive’ in Conker’s BFD), to ensure that in difficult situations, you know exactly what you are doing rather than fumbling around looking for the right button to press. Nintendo showed just how much they valued the worth of effective control, to the extent that the N64 controller was designed with Mario 64 in mind, ensuring seamless ease of play.
Control systems can be bad in two main ways – the can be clunky and complicated, or they can simply be downright illogical. My personal favourite game, Shenmue, unfortunately manages to be both at the same time. Put simply, to not include 3D analogue control these days is criminal (exemplified in the fact the controllers of the PS2, Xbox and Gamecube have two apiece). To continue the criminal analogy further, in Shenmue’s case relegating the analogue stick to the secondary function of look was worthy of a lengthy prison sentence. Shenmue’s system is illogical as well, as there seems to be no reasoning behind such a rigid system. In the original Tomb Raiders, a case can be made because of the need for precision jumping.
Problems with control also arise in FPS, in that there is a mismatch between physical action and virtual action. Looking and turning is assigned to an analogue stick, because manipulating a joystick is relatively similar to turning your head in reality. But you’re then required to use buttons to run and strafe, which doesn’t make sense, in terms of controlling human movement, as we do not always run in the direction our heads are pointing, for example. Another poor way of control is using the mouse in FPSs, because then you are not shooting, you are simply pointing out where you want to shot, which requires half the skill e.g. Silent Scope on Dreamcast, if using the mouse, becomes stupidly easy. The method of control can change how effective the game is.
When studying Economics at school, I used to learn about barriers to trade, etc. To apply that concept here, poor control systems are a barrier to enjoyment – for videogame veterans a little time and patience and we’ll adjust, but to new fans and beginners, they will simply be put off but this. Conversely, a simple game controls will ensure success – take games like Samba de Amigo, the Dreamcast maraca-‘em-up, a huge hit at parties and the like because first time players can get into it instantly, because as the interface is so accessible, the game is instantly enjoyable. Keep that in mind, developers.
Thanks for reading, Russ.
Effective, efficient, and most of all, easy controls are pivotal in making a successful game. Part of this is down to the quality of the controller, but let’s face it, there is hardly any disparity between controllers these days that that is a non-factor. But it’s the ease at which a game can be played that is most important – Nintendo released this initially with Zelda 64, where on button was used for different actions (which Rare would later term as ‘context sensitive’ in Conker’s BFD), to ensure that in difficult situations, you know exactly what you are doing rather than fumbling around looking for the right button to press.
Control systems can be bad in two main ways – the can be clunky and complicated, or they can simply be downright illogical. But it’s the ease at which a game can be played that is most important – Nintendo released this initially with Zelda 64, where on button was used for different actions (which Rare would later term as ‘context sensitive’ in Conker’s BFD), to ensure that in difficult situations, you know exactly what you are doing rather than fumbling around looking for the right button to press. Nintendo showed just how much they valued the worth of effective control, to the extent that the N64 controller was designed with Mario 64 in mind, ensuring seamless ease of play.
Control systems can be bad in two main ways – the can be clunky and complicated, or they can simply be downright illogical. My personal favourite game, Shenmue, unfortunately manages to be both at the same time. Put simply, to not include 3D analogue control these days is criminal (exemplified in the fact the controllers of the PS2, Xbox and Gamecube have two apiece). To continue the criminal analogy further, in Shenmue’s case relegating the analogue stick to the secondary function of look was worthy of a lengthy prison sentence. Shenmue’s system is illogical as well, as there seems to be no reasoning behind such a rigid system. In the original Tomb Raiders, a case can be made because of the need for precision jumping.
Problems with control also arise in FPS, in that there is a mismatch between physical action and virtual action. Looking and turning is assigned to an analogue stick, because manipulating a joystick is relatively similar to turning your head in reality. But you’re then required to use buttons to run and strafe, which doesn’t make sense, in terms of controlling human movement, as we do not always run in the direction our heads are pointing, for example. Another poor way of control is using the mouse in FPSs, because then you are not shooting, you are simply pointing out where you want to shot, which requires half the skill e.g. Silent Scope on Dreamcast, if using the mouse, becomes stupidly easy. The method of control can change how effective the game is.
When studying Economics at school, I used to learn about barriers to trade, etc. To apply that concept here, poor control systems are a barrier to enjoyment – for videogame veterans a little time and patience and we’ll adjust, but to new fans and beginners, they will simply be put off but this. Conversely, a simple game controls will ensure success – take games like Samba de Amigo, the Dreamcast maraca-‘em-up, a huge hit at parties and the like because first time players can get into it instantly, because as the interface is so accessible, the game is instantly enjoyable. Keep that in mind, developers.
Thanks for reading, Russ.
Page:
Woooo!! Thanks a million SR, you've made an otherwise uneventful day very special - thanks guys!
:D
:D
Well done on the Gad.
Well done mate.
Welldone on the GAD Russel {:-D
Ok, i'm sorry :'(
So if your on about a gameplay issue here then I think that your clearly right. For example FIFA 2002 looked good and had all the teams and that but the controls were sluggish and slow and made the game hell. On the other hand a game like Pro Evo has lightining fast responsive controls that make mistakes down to the player and not the controls. Basically I think the control was the difference between the two games showing that control is clearly a major aspect. :D
So if your on about a gameplay issue here then I think that your clearly right. For example FIFA 2002 looked good and had all the teams and that but the controls were sluggish and slow and made the game hell. On the other hand a game like Pro Evo has lightining fast responsive controls that make mistakes down to the player and not the controls. Basically I think the control was the difference between the two games showing that control is clearly a major aspect. :D
It's a bit harsh to judge the quality of a controller when you are just playing it for a couple of minutes, especially when you're so used to another. Anyway, I was referring to in-games controls, the quality of the controller just being an extension of that argument.
Good post.
I agree on what Afro Joe said..
I was walking past a Game Cube today and saw a nice looking basket ball game so I stopped to play. After learning the controls i begin a match. I was so annoyed at the poor layout of the GC controller. It's as though they had shoved buttons anywhere they fit on the pad and it was ver difficult to position your finger exactly where the buttons were.
I agree on what Afro Joe said..
I was walking past a Game Cube today and saw a nice looking basket ball game so I stopped to play. After learning the controls i begin a match. I was so annoyed at the poor layout of the GC controller. It's as though they had shoved buttons anywhere they fit on the pad and it was ver difficult to position your finger exactly where the buttons were.
Mario Sunshine will, to all intents and purposes, probably be brilliant, but it won't be as pivotal as Mario 64. The controls in Mario 64, and more spcifically, the controller, was excellent. If the controls were poor, then 3D games (especially those similar) might never have happened, which would have changed the gaming landscape forever...
Yes very good
Thats why i like the PS2, apart from everything else it gives the controlles are very easy to use the best lay out of buttons and shape out in the console world just so easy to use i think the PS2 needs more games like FF or like Mario on the Nintendo i saw Mario Sun Shine in Debinhams and it looked really good
Thats why i like the PS2, apart from everything else it gives the controlles are very easy to use the best lay out of buttons and shape out in the console world just so easy to use i think the PS2 needs more games like FF or like Mario on the Nintendo i saw Mario Sun Shine in Debinhams and it looked really good
Excellent post!
Of course the control means everything. Crap controller = Degraded game.
Frustration can be cause with the wrong type of control. You could press the wrong button, previously thinking of a better set out control, and the button would be in a different place, which could lead you even to not buying a Sony console, that is of course, if it was a Sony control, which results in you missing out just because of one control.
I'm droning on, so I'll shush.
Nice post.
Of course the control means everything. Crap controller = Degraded game.
Frustration can be cause with the wrong type of control. You could press the wrong button, previously thinking of a better set out control, and the button would be in a different place, which could lead you even to not buying a Sony console, that is of course, if it was a Sony control, which results in you missing out just because of one control.
I'm droning on, so I'll shush.
Nice post.
Page: