Originally Posted by Crator
That's IF the controller really sucks that much. Cause I don't have any evidence of that other then the MS XBox article that was linked.
|
Think about the basic physics of it: a controller requires you to move your crosshair from point A to point B at a constant speed, capped to your mouse sensitivity; a mouse essentially lets you "place" your cursor where you want it by moving your hand to the corresponding position on your desk. A controller moves in a direction, a mouse snaps to a point.
Think about doing a quick check behind you as you're running along; with the mouse this is two quick flicks to turn 180 and then turn back, taking a fraction of a second. With a controller, in order to do it in anywhere near the same amount of time you would have to have your sensitivity so high that the slightest touch of the stick causes a large amount of movement, making fine aiming extremely difficult. In reality, in order to have decent aim, most players use a controller sensitivity that means doing a simple check of their 6 takes a couple of seconds or more!
This is the heart of the issue, even without taking into account the difference in stability and control you have with your whole hand and arm controlling a mouse, compared to your thumb which is the least dexterous part of your hand!
Now put this into PS2, where situational awareness is a vital skill in the complex, open environments where attacks can come from any direction, including above you, and any half decent player is constantly looking all around them for threats and targets.
Controllers are just disabled compared to a mouse, there is absolutely no room for debate in this.