It's from Microsoft.

Bye
Thanee

True, but on most (read that as every!) other game or computer program I have ever seen, it gives you a list of OS's and versions that this software is compatible with. This bastardized creation is only for Vista and Xbox360, period. That's what I meant by that.

They didn't even ask for input from Wizkids/FanPro, nevermind Dumpshock. Of course, they don't have to, since they don't need to come to us for to use the digital rights. It would have been cool, but Microsoft isn't really known for working well with others in game development.

I would actually agree with random aiming with a reticle for a game that was supposed to be super realistic, i.e. a military sim of some kind. Even if you've got perfect mouse skills your M9 isn't going to be headshot accurate at 100 feet; it's going to be accurate within this big circle that represents the margin of error. That would be good. In the interests of realism I'd also love things like aiming going out the window while walking, which doesn't happen in most FPSes probably because a lot of the gameplay is seen as manuvering and dodging and if too much advantage is given to people who realistically "camp" people complain.

But for a fantasy style game, I'm not sure why you'd want to make success or failure less sensitive to motor skills and reflexes. I mean, that's what the game is about, right? The game is first and foremost about your motor skills and reflexes and second place is your ability to process abstract 3D thought inside your head, i.e. how your manuver. I'm not sure what you'd gain by favoring randomness over skill in a game that isn't supposed to be a realistic simulation.

i don't recall hearing about FASA Interactive altering MechAssault in response to the massive fan backlash.

You don't have to sit across a table from him every Sunday and try to keep a campaign on track

You could say that. But realisticly camping is out of the question anyway in this game because of the ability to see through walls, fly and teleport. What the reticle's functionality means in practice is that there are extra levels of skill involved in shooting people. You still need to be nimble with your fingers, but you can imrove conciderably only by understanding how to make your accuracy improve in the game. It means that cooler heads prevail. I think it's just one of the features included to promote a more sensible way of playing in this FPS.

Ask and you shall receive. (Requires the .NET 2.0 Framework to be installed, because I just didn't feel like breaking out gcc.)

My god, that was badass, and ferocious! I feel so emotional! I ran your .exe and the text was even green, just like in the old game!

You're a very, very kind person. Thank you. Today, you have really touched me emotionally.

Indeed. Believe it or not I actually typed it into DOS Box a few times as I was preparing to run various abandonware games. I'd run it a couple times before playing my game and a couple of times before quitting DOS Box. It was much appreciated.

Mine's better.

And...I...didn't see yours.

I should rewrite it! Play some perl golf!

Better than sexually.

That's what happened with Unreal.

A driving or flying game? There's no way those will ever be equal between a console and a pc. No game will be. The PC is simply too customizable for a console to have any sort of equal footing. The ammount of input a PC user can use (keyboard and mouse) versus what a console player has (a controller) is simply ludicrous.

FPS's are as close as you can come to an "equal experience" because they really only require the ability to guide movement, select weapons and a trigger to pull.

At least, that's how I see it.

I just hope this game catches on a bit to be successful, enough to convince them to try other things with the property.

Erm... What? Do you have anything to support that claim with? Trying not to be insulting here, but FPSs are where the difference between mouse and keyboard controls is arguably one of the greatest in terms of actual control. There's almost no comparison. There was talk that the Space Orb 360 was a contender, but I think the company that made it went bust or discontinued it as there aren't even final windows XP drivers and the link to the company site now links to one of those targeted search engines.

Yes, I do agree that mouse and keyboard will almost definitely be ahead in any game where there are a plethora of control options. In these cases, the ability to map options to readily accessible keys will give a distinct advantage to the PC player.

There are two main reasons why the mouse is better than a joypad for FPS purposes:

1. You can set your mouse sensitivity so high that you can turn 180 degrees and shoot someone behind you in a fraction of a second. Unless you have a very accurate pad (more accurate than I think exists), setting your pad's sensitivity so high that this becomes possible is almost definately detrimental to your aim.
2. Distance moved is based on distance travelled, not time spent doing it. This is a far easier correlation for the brain, which is used to needing to move limbs to particular points in space.
   
   Joypad control requires you work out a function of stick movement against time that will result in that total distance travelled. As you have to move the stick, you start by accelerating, get faster in the middle, and decelerate at the end (or overshoot but try and time your shot so that you are pointing at the enemy at the time). That's a lot to work out, and you've not even factored the fact that distance moved by your finger on the button might not necessarily correlate directly to rotation speed.

I have to admit that I've not really played many racing or flying games recently, but it strikes me that issue 1 isn't really applicable to them. You're unable to turn around immediately in a car/airplane/spacecraft anyway. The last time I controlled a game like that with the mouse, the mouse movement controlled the destination of the turn and the craft turned to match that vector. This means the extra work from issue 2

Whether issue 2 is still applicable depends on whether you're using a mouse or a joystick. With joysticks, the main edge a PC user will get is the plethora of customisable controls at his fingertips. When using a mouse (using the system above), the computer works-out the turning function for you. Depending on the game, you may even be able to see and correct your final vector before you reach it through camera movement or HUD effects.

Still, I reiterate that the FPS is where the difference is arguably most pronounced. Many of the potential advantages in racing or flying games can be minimised/eliminated if the the controls on the PC are simple and arcade-style, like many console games are and thus what many PC ports of console games are like. The last time I played a game on both console and PC it was one of the Grand Theft Auto series (Vice City IIRC), and I don't remember feeling particularly advantaged when I played it on my PC.

Perhaps we're not talking about the same things here. I'd agree that the very advanced flight simulators probably have some of the games with the most complex controls in the world. I wasn't meaning flight simulators though, I was meaning flying games.

There are plenty of flying games out there, and in the 'flying game' category I include space flight and similar games, where the controls are fairly simple. It isn't possible to turn 360 degrees in a split second, and the controls aren't much more complex than turning, acceleration, brakes, and a few weapons controls for good measure.

Now I admit that I haven't played many flight games recently. I have tried playing both driving games and FPS games, on both platforms, recently and I can say with complete confidence that there was no comparison... The PC is much, much, much better when it comes to FPS games, and they're about equal when it comes to driving games.

This comes from someone who's been in clans for Enemy Territory, and my flatmate supports me on this who has been in numerous quake clans and was top of our old university's quake rankings. There is truly no comparison.

Also note that I'm meaning driving games here too, not driving simulators (are there really any in the style of M$ flight sim?). Think the GTA series, since 3.

Yeah, strangely that crack was how I heard about the game... My head had been turned from shadowrun for so long that it turned-up in a conversation about how stupid Microsoft were.

Incidentally, I hear it's not much of a crack. They apparently just force it to do an OS check, and not to install or run on an XP machine. The motivation not being to not support XP because they couldn't, but because they want people to buy XP.

I hate Micro$oft sometimes.

It's from Microsoft... it's not meant to work on many OS, it's meant to increase the sale of Windows Vista.

AFAIK, there isn't even anything in the game, that actually needs DX10.

Bye
Thanee