I’ve finally been able to play both control systems during the same timeframe and in succession. And have been able to find both its flaws and successes. Now of course the 2 games that I played aren’t the best for both control setups but that actually makes them more comparable as we’ll see even when its not at its best who is still better. Not to mention at the end of the analysis I’ll bring in 2 games that I played shortly just to see which was better out of the best.
Anyways over the last 2 weeks I played and beat Farcry: Instincts on the Xbox and Call of Duty 3 on the Wii. Both control schemes I hadn’t played for an FPS for 2 weeks from my last play which were with Halo 2 and Metroid Prime 3.
Meaning after 2 weeks of rest with each I started up and beat them in adventure mode. Lets first describe my experiences with each.
In Farcry: Instincs I immediately started having problems shooting. I could not move and shoot at the same time. I would be shooting everywhere and whatnot. So I decided it must be the sensitivity. So I adjusted the sensitivity and finally I found one that allowed me to move my reticule on screen at a good speed. Thus I continued and the first enemy I saw I shot for the head but missed about 2 ft to the left. It was going to be a long trip haha.
Thus throughout most of the first 3 levels in Farcry: Instincts on Xbox my accuracy was well terrible. To make a headshot I’d have to literally stop and take a lot of time to aim while they were shooting at me. And really to hit any enemy it was more like I get it on the same level as the enemy then strafe to get the reticule on them. I stopped aiming for the head after 2 levels as it just wasn’t worth it. The learning curve to get back into dual analog even only after 2 weeks of rest is still troubling. Something that a game shouldn’t have to do. Towards the midpoint of the game I started to get better at shooting and soon I could be running and shoot and be able to shot people normally. But they were never extremely accurate. I’d still have to take a lot of time to hit the head and sometimes flat out miss the enemy.
Ultimately it was obvious that there was a serious learning curve and even when you do get good at the controls it still takes many hours more of practice to finally get used to it. For me to be master of that game’s controls it could have taken me weeks.
Now in Call of Duty 3 once again same scenario. In the first scene where it asks you to hit the helmets off the background enviroment I fired 5 shots to hit 4 of them. Only missed once.
As soon as action started though and didn’t have time to aim it was a little more difficult. I was missing quite a bit in the first level. But towards half way in the middle of the level the controls became smooth. My actions were no longer eratic but carefully contrived from my hand and I new I was doing what I thought I was doing. When using the rifle I was able to get head shots easy and I started to almost never miss with it. Even at really long distances with no scope of a sniper rifle at hand. Something that would have been impossible to do with anyting in Farcry.
Also I learned that your submachine gun is best for when your moving and unscoped. I could literally run in houses and turn corners and move my reticule over enemies while moving and hit them dead on. This only took about a 30 min learning curve and by the end of the game I had complete mastery of the controls. To the point where I felt I didn’t even need to scope to hit people way back.
After playing these 2 games it let me know that there are a few things different between these controls. First of all wiimote control is definetly a lot more direct way of playing. Because you actually move your reticule you feel you have definite more control. Unlike dual analog where its more I felt I didn’t necessarily have any control. That it was more I’d go to the thumbstick and move it once to register how fast the reticule moved on screen. Kinda like a guess ya know with the first movement as there is no direct tie at you at all times to know how its going to move. The only way I think I could have felt that direct control is if I had complete mastery over the controls where I knew exactly each time how far it would move with a simple thumbstick movement. Somthing that would take numerous hours of gameplay time to figure out.
The second thing I noticed is that Wiimote control was just more satisfying. I love the Farcry game and I think if it wasn’t for my love for the game I probably would have finished the game at all. AS I was bored halfway through as the fights were very unsatisfying. Nothing brought me into the game. While I really didn’t like the COD3 singleplayer I just loved wiimote control for the FPS. For one every kill is a lot more satisfying as you feel like you are doing the shooting(don’t quote some Jack Thompson shit on that cuase I don’t want to hear it). Secondly because its more involved it really does get you more involved. Something that the indirect shooting of Farcry could not get me into.
And obviously the last thing I noticed is that accuracy was definetly better on COD3 than Farcry: Instincts.
After playing both I actually am now replaying COD3 on hard mode. That’s what I played it during my test. And this is actually the 5th time I’ve run through the COD3 single player as I enjoy just the gameplay through wiimote control. And you can ask many people around I’ve never been much for FPS or war games in general. COD3 is only my 3rd war game I’ve ever bought. The fact of the matter was that Wiimote controls are easier to adjust too whether you’ve already played it or for the first time. Not only that the gameplay is a hell of a lot more satisfying. And finally the shooting aspect is a lot quicker and a lot more accurate. and even further is more real.
Now of course we know that COD3 was not the best motion controlled game on Wii and that I’m more adjusted personally to Halo 2. So I put that to test. Both these titles I hadn’t played for 2 weeks as stated. I borrowed my bro’s copy of MP3 while he wasn’t looking and replayed through the first couple of levels. On advanced controls they were so smooth that in no time I was popping people while running. Hell I didn’t even need to lock onto them to shoot them. It was unneccessary. Controls were smooth, satisfying, quick, accurate, and real.
Then I opened up the first level of Halo 2. Was waiting for that first door to be open. Immediately I noticed that I was no longer that same beast you remember me online as. I had problem hitting grunts in the head and wasted a lot of ammo when those could have been used on something else if I had hit the grunts in the head. Now because I was so used to the controls it took me half way through the first level to get back my groove on. I had mastered the controls. So now the test is was my mastery of H2 controls better than the MP3 controls. And I have to say I still noticed something about dual analog. Even when I’m such a beast at Halo 2 I would still miss by large distances. Even while sniping. Not to mention after missing it took even longer to follow them. While on MP3 following and shooting was easy. No problem.
I really found out that if the target is moving when I do hit them its more like I moved the thumbstick fast for my quick reaction time and its only because of my mastery of the controls that I’m able to be able to hit them. It’s not like I’m actually doing the killing but more like I’m simply getting lucky with the kill. It wasn’t satisfying at all. I mean I felt very detached from teh entire sequence of the shot. Although I was quite beastly I still missed of course. Also its just that dual analog is so stagnant. I mean you move it to one little block and then move again. Adn although for the best of us that stop is in milliseconds, with wiimote control there is no stop. You’d shoot something on the move and be able to follow it if still alive or go to another enemy if dead.
It was apparent that by testing the controls of both that wiimote control was simply superior. The turning in Metroid was flawless at similar levels of an analog turn. The other thing that wiimote control had is that because the control is direct it makes the gameplay, the shooting, ect just that more satisfying. YOu don’t get that kinda satisfaction in a dual analog game unless you online and you shot the loudmouth 5 yr old in the head.
Overall wiimote control was smooth, accurate, quick, satisfying, direct, ane real. While dual analog at mastery level is accuarte and quick, its not smooth, indirect, unreal, and of course unsatisfying.
Now I may be only telling my opinion but I find wiimote control simply superior to that of analog. Although I don’t know if it’s as good as PC control, which it probably isn’t, but it definetly does top dual analog. Tops it in every aspect. I know some people are going to disagree but this is what I’m almost sure about after doing this test.
I’m not trying to make any statement against dual analog, as I still enjoy those kinda games that use it but like I admit when Wii online is not as good as Xlive and PSN, I have to admit that Wiimote control for FPS is simply superior to that of dual analog.
__________________
