(Untitled)

[erikman]

Why the Mouse Is Better for First Person Shooters, or Consoles Are for ChumpsThe mouse operates on distance (you move it). Moving the crosshair some exact amount on the screen using the mouse requires moving the mouse by some exact amount. Your brain needs only to process the ratio at which mouse movement translates to screen movement, or (distance

Comments

[legolas_i_haran]

While I agree the mouse is better, I disagree on part of your reasons why

[erikman]

I never said 1:1 ratio - my monitor is a 22" widescreen, that would play merry hell with my desk space (and my arm would get really tired). I just meant X-distance:Y-distance.

[legolas_i_haran]

Thats why its not distance = distance

[saint_lotus]

It is. You misunderstood. Whats worse: the context is painfully obvious in the post. "Some" distance moved is directly equal to "some" distance moved, as opposed to distance moved plus acceleration (time value) being equal to distance.

So if you want to be super anal, you can say:
some distance = some distance

and:
some distance * some time = some distance

Since all "somes" are constant, they're irrelevant in the comparison analysis, though, and can reasonably be dropped. Distance = distance.

[leppyweppy11]

While it may be mathematically proven to be better, I still prefer playing a game with a controller, because ironically it makes me feel less in control of the game and therefore like the game is more of a challenge.

[legolas_i_haran]

Yea thats true. His argument was that intuition is more important while I argued that potential is important. The actual necessities of a good gaming experience is quite subjective so thats hard to argue.

[tsuru]

Where would the Wii remote fall in all of this?