Yeah i agree, I'm so fucking unimpressed with Wii. I played Mariokart on it with a friend, which i used to love on the 64 (and still do), and just couldn't enjoy it, as it was close to uncontrollable. My friend was better because I guess she learnt how to anticipate the lag, but that sorta beats the point of making it more accessible...
I'll just stick with a regular controller for now.
what are you talking about? Although I don't like that game, the controller is using bluetooth to register movement, not IR. Explain to me how that can possibly have lag? I found it highly responsive and even shock horror, accurate.
you were just bad at the game, thats the hardware behind the controller.
That's funny tho - even if I agree that FPSes are more accurate on the PC with mouse and KB, I find them much more relaxing on consoles... (when they are thought out for a console control scheme obviously!) Black, Mirrors Edge - they both felt fantastic with a controller in hands!
what are you talking about? Although I don't like that game, the controller is using bluetooth to register movement, not IR. Explain to me how that can possibly have lag? I found it highly responsive and even shock horror, accurate.
you were just bad at the game, thats the hardware behind the controller.
+1, We can't blame the hardware for it's unresponsiveness. It's either the player or the shitty game (Tiger Woods 08 FTW!)
I credit the lag to the tv aswell, this is why there's a lag-setting in games like guitarhero.
in this scenario where you see yourself and expect a 1:1 movement, down to the millisecond, and you can even compare it visually, its easier to notice.
in some random action game running at <30fps you usually forget about it. usually...
Tv's were designed to show you non-interactive stuff, so it didn't matter much how long it would take for that image to reach the screen, as long as it was in sync with the audio.
Just connect an old nintendo to a crt, and then connect it to some new lcd tv, you'll notice some horrible input delay.
That's funny tho - even if I agree that FPSes are more accurate on the PC with mouse and KB, I find them much more relaxing on consoles... (when they are thought out for a console control scheme obviously!) Black, Mirrors Edge - they both felt fantastic with a controller in hands!
I should have been more specific shooters was what I meant.. killzone two on PS3 was pretty but I couldnt play it.. I did play mirrors edge on PS3 and loved it thought it was a fantastic game
Replies
what are you talking about? Although I don't like that game, the controller is using bluetooth to register movement, not IR. Explain to me how that can possibly have lag? I found it highly responsive and even shock horror, accurate.
you were just bad at the game, thats the hardware behind the controller.
That's funny tho - even if I agree that FPSes are more accurate on the PC with mouse and KB, I find them much more relaxing on consoles... (when they are thought out for a console control scheme obviously!) Black, Mirrors Edge - they both felt fantastic with a controller in hands!
+1, We can't blame the hardware for it's unresponsiveness. It's either the player or the shitty game (Tiger Woods 08 FTW!)
in this scenario where you see yourself and expect a 1:1 movement, down to the millisecond, and you can even compare it visually, its easier to notice.
in some random action game running at <30fps you usually forget about it. usually...
Tv's were designed to show you non-interactive stuff, so it didn't matter much how long it would take for that image to reach the screen, as long as it was in sync with the audio.
Just connect an old nintendo to a crt, and then connect it to some new lcd tv, you'll notice some horrible input delay.
I should have been more specific shooters was what I meant.. killzone two on PS3 was pretty but I couldnt play it.. I did play mirrors edge on PS3 and loved it thought it was a fantastic game
[ame]
THERE. 1:1 motion sensing. in 3 dimensions.
now put that thing on a stick, grab the SDK, and go make motion sensor games.