6 ms·

What next -- a three-button mouse or a punched card reader? (Let me unpack that: the iPad -- with multitouch screen and accelerometer and gyro -- provides a un

by cstross 15y ago

What next -- a three-button mouse or a punched card reader? (Let me unpack that: the iPad -- with multitouch screen and accelerometer and gyro -- provides a unique user interface of its own. While this accessory is fundamentally the n'th generation descendant of the 1970s console game controller. I'm kind of annoyed, because if this catches on it will potentially cost us a raft of new user interface innovations by allowing lazy back-ports of console titles instead of forcing developers to confront the inherent strengths and weaknesses of an entirely new and different way of doing things. If I wanted a console with a traditional controller I'd buy a PS3 or an XBox360 ...)

chedigitz 15y ago
Agree 100%. The whole thing feels backwards, a lazy bandaid. What's next, using a bridle to control a car?
brudgers 15y ago
>"a unique user interface of its own." For a game developer, this might tend to limit the desirability of porting existing games to the market or even developing games for it. A lot of time and thought went into the dual stick interface.
- extension 15y ago
  As a player, I don't want to see existing joystick games ported to iOS. I can already play those games in their existing form, and the virtual joystick experience, for all the thought that has been put into it, still sucks. What I want to see on iOS are games that fit naturally into the touch interface, which can be existing games that just adapt well, or entirely new concepts. What makes a touch interface work, I think, is directly manipulating what you see. Control schemes that rely on "body extension", like a joystick or directional pad, rarely translate well.
- ja2ke 15y ago
  I don't think the unique input methods brought on by a multitouch glass display has limited the desirability to game developers... 3-4 years ago that could have been a concern, but the huge iOS games market has shown that to not be the case. We're getting unique, tremendously well-selling experiences on touch/mobile devices with great regularity. Major publishers and indies are churning out games for these devices, all without a keyboard, mouse, or controller required to play. It's true that you can't play every genre of game on an iPad, but it's also been true for years that not every genre of PC game would play well on a mainline TV console (traditional adventure games, strategy games, and anything with a lot of diverse/unique user input or complex underlying systems tends to fail on a 360 controller/living room couch situation), and not every GameBoy/DS game would work well there either. That aside, personally as a gamer I'm glad that there are game systems out there with nearly mutually exclusive input methods, because it prevents lazy ports, and lazy ports generally, basically, suck to play.
glhaynes 15y ago
I can't imagine this kind of thing ever catching on to an extent that it'd stop the next Tiny Wings from showing up on the app store. If 5% of iPad owners ever ends up owning an external game controller for it, I'll be shocked. Besides, even if a lot of people had one of these, they'd only want to use it for those games which don't translate well to touch/tilt.
zyb09 15y ago
gah, please keep your dumb satirical remark for yourself. You obvisouly don't even have an interst in games, because if you actually played them, you would notice, that almost half of the iOS games emulate gamepad controls on the touch screen - which is always worse then having a real gamepad.
baddox 15y ago
That's bull. Sure, it's got its own unique user interface, but why should that mean a gamepad wouldn't be useful? Remember, the iPad is also a nice portable ~10" screen in a really compact housing with decent CPU/graphics capability, decent battery life, etc. There's no reason it wouldn't make an excellent arcade or console gaming machine. Heck, from what you're saying, it sounds like you'd be against listening to music or watching a TV show on an iPad, since that wouldn't be using its "unique user interface" to its fullest capability.
CognitiveLens 15y ago
I don't own a PS3 or an XBox360. Neither do many people who own iPads. A significant number of us are interested in playing games that are well suited to an external controller, but are not interested in spending $200+ on a new game system (plus display), particularly when we already own a portable device that is capable of running the software but is limited by its native interface. I understand that the ability to plug in a controller can support lazy porting, but I suspect this is largely in addition to dedicated work on using the touch interface in creative ways on new projects. "Forcing" developers to confront new interaction design is an odd expectation for a popular consumer electronic device, and doesn't really justify denying a large group of users the opportunity to enjoy some great games/software through the use of an optional accessory.

by cstross 15y ago

chedigitz 15y ago

Agree 100%. The whole thing feels backwards, a lazy bandaid. What's next, using a bridle to control a car?

brudgers 15y ago

>"a unique user interface of its own." For a game developer, this might tend to limit the desirability of porting existing games to the market or even developing games for it. A lot of time and thought went into the dual stick interface.

extension 15y ago
As a player, I don't want to see existing joystick games ported to iOS. I can already play those games in their existing form, and the virtual joystick experience, for all the thought that has been put into it, still sucks. What I want to see on iOS are games that fit naturally into the touch interface, which can be existing games that just adapt well, or entirely new concepts. What makes a touch interface work, I think, is directly manipulating what you see. Control schemes that rely on "body extension", like a joystick or directional pad, rarely translate well.
ja2ke 15y ago
I don't think the unique input methods brought on by a multitouch glass display has limited the desirability to game developers... 3-4 years ago that could have been a concern, but the huge iOS games market has shown that to not be the case. We're getting unique, tremendously well-selling experiences on touch/mobile devices with great regularity. Major publishers and indies are churning out games for these devices, all without a keyboard, mouse, or controller required to play. It's true that you can't play every genre of game on an iPad, but it's also been true for years that not every genre of PC game would play well on a mainline TV console (traditional adventure games, strategy games, and anything with a lot of diverse/unique user input or complex underlying systems tends to fail on a 360 controller/living room couch situation), and not every GameBoy/DS game would work well there either. That aside, personally as a gamer I'm glad that there are game systems out there with nearly mutually exclusive input methods, because it prevents lazy ports, and lazy ports generally, basically, suck to play.

glhaynes 15y ago

I can't imagine this kind of thing ever catching on to an extent that it'd stop the next Tiny Wings from showing up on the app store. If 5% of iPad owners ever ends up owning an external game controller for it, I'll be shocked. Besides, even if a lot of people had one of these, they'd only want to use it for those games which don't translate well to touch/tilt.

zyb09 15y ago

gah, please keep your dumb satirical remark for yourself. You obvisouly don't even have an interst in games, because if you actually played them, you would notice, that almost half of the iOS games emulate gamepad controls on the touch screen - which is always worse then having a real gamepad.

baddox 15y ago

That's bull. Sure, it's got its own unique user interface, but why should that mean a gamepad wouldn't be useful? Remember, the iPad is also a nice portable ~10" screen in a really compact housing with decent CPU/graphics capability, decent battery life, etc. There's no reason it wouldn't make an excellent arcade or console gaming machine. Heck, from what you're saying, it sounds like you'd be against listening to music or watching a TV show on an iPad, since that wouldn't be using its "unique user interface" to its fullest capability.

CognitiveLens 15y ago

I don't own a PS3 or an XBox360. Neither do many people who own iPads. A significant number of us are interested in playing games that are well suited to an external controller, but are not interested in spending $200+ on a new game system (plus display), particularly when we already own a portable device that is capable of running the software but is limited by its native interface. I understand that the ability to plug in a controller can support lazy porting, but I suspect this is largely in addition to dedicated work on using the touch interface in creative ways on new projects. "Forcing" developers to confront new interaction design is an odd expectation for a popular consumer electronic device, and doesn't really justify denying a large group of users the opportunity to enjoy some great games/software through the use of an optional accessory.