Yeah, in other words, precision. like I mentioned.



Of course it depends on the game, but if you're talking about the same game on console and PC, the PC's gonna let you turn faster unless the sensitivity is cranked way down. Unless turning is on the keys instead of the mouse, then it's pretty much a push I guess.

My take on the origional topic of discussion.

Brink will get the people intelligent enough to realize Call of Duty has bigger issues than anyone lets on. Im from the CoD fanbase myself and the fact that Brink is still peer to peer on consoles doesn't bother me nearly as much as the behind the scenes shenanigans that go on in the CoD worlds networking problems. That stated, Brink is also a fix to a great many FPS specific problems. Personally when this game hits I'm most likely done with CoD forever.

On the keyboard + Mouse vs Controller discussion:

As an older PC player my razer mouse keyboard and soundsystem were top notch when new and those tools did not dissapoint. Precision is the name of the game and regardless how good a controller is the mouse will always be more precice. Hard advantage Board + Mouse > Controller. Granted the controlls cannot make up for the intelligence of the individual behind them but from a technological standpoint, Mouse wins.

I play the original call of duty.


Though its a pain to find anyone on my xbox, yes I know what you are going to say "Buy it for PC", can't don't have the space.




But anyways, c'mon you know what I'm talking about, the call of duty "kids" you know the ones that think Call of Duty 4, was the first CoD?

Those are the same "kids" that play halo 2 and 3, (halo 1 was legit, lets be honest).

Its just the same generic crowd that sees "Oh this is new, all my friends are talking about it, I'm going to buy it".


Thats not a gamer, thats a dude-man-bro.


If you just look at the level design, and the AI from Call of Duty 1, you just wonder where things went wrong. How did the AI get less intelligent? haha

Call of duty 2, and 4 I'll admit I enjoy, though I wish 4 was better balanced.

The fact that KB/M is more accurate than controllers, is just that, a physiological fact.

Think about the amount of muscles you use in both. In controller there is just the small muscles of your thumbs, that can't be that accurate and the area they move in is only couple centimeters.
Physiologically, those muscles can not match the precision and quickness of the muscles of your entire arm, that have the area of 20-40 cm in their use.
A single thumb can't do as complex moves as your arm can.

I'm surprised no one has ever told this when you've asked.

Oh dear.. keep going, you are surely making my day.

i dont think its goin to make any impact on cod players, i think its goin to hurt bfbc2 tho since both are objective base shooters.

Most of all, because it's simply wrong, I guess.

EDIT: I figured I would just repost my explanation for it as well, so you don't have to wonder WHY your statement is wrong.

Here it comes ...

The major difference between mouse-control and stick-control is the way you give movement-input.

When you move the mouse into one direction, your crosshair will move into the same direction. Depending on how far you move your mouse, the crosshair moves equally far.
Now when you want to move with the stick, you move it into one direction and your crosshair will keep moving while the stick is hold down.

The stick does not allow you (read: It. Does. Not. Allow.) to move at an accurate range, but just very vaguely.
And no matter how hard you train, you can't translate the accuracy of a mouse to the stick.

It's true that the system itself is lacking, being only couple centimeters in diameter, like I said, which causes the effect you described.
But even during small movements, in which your statement doesn't apply that much (and I apologize if I misunderstood, and it actually does apply), the movement of the mouse, in which you use your whole hand, is more accurate than the one of the thumb's.
What I'm trying to say, that even if they created a stick or some other interface that would be perfectly responsive, the thumb can never be as accurate. If you have laptop, try to wiggle your thumb as fast as you can on the touchpad (and only your thumb, keep your hand stationary), then try how fast you can move your mouse.

Ah, I get your point now.
I understood you were saying that training a lot with a gamepad would allow you to become as good as with a mouse and thus the whole difference-debate was down to a psychological factor. Which it obviously is not.


However, I also have to disagree with your actual statement: Hand-movement and thumb-movement can be equally accurate. That is something which is down to training, really.
You can play as good with a trackball-mouse, as with a common one. Heck, you could even play with a pen-tablet and be as good as with a mouse.
But never with a gamepad which has sticks. It's all down to direct and indirect input.

I can believe that one can create very accurate skills with a trackball, and be as good in gaming as someone using mouse, but I still believe that the movement would be inherently different. Like in my previous example, not being able to shake the cursor as fast as with a mouse. Which just comes down to the shear difference in size of the area that's used.
I could be wrong though.

well they are 2 different styles of games its really up to opinion unless you mean in sales because nothing will EVER beat cod in sales because people just keep hoping its worth the money and are really excited the first 2 weeks then realise, wtf did i just spend 60 bux on!?

Could be, could be.

I don't have a trackball-mouse, even though I had one years ago. Anyway, by doing the theoretical movement of my thumb compared to my whole hand, it doesn't make much of a difference. Moving your thumb over a touchpad is something different again, because technically your thumb replaces the mouse and instead of a sensor inside the mouse/thumb, it's in the surface.

Once again back to movement-speed, though: I'm moving my mouse (Logitech MX518) over wood; I don't have a mousepad. So this might reduce the movement-ability of my mouse. Even though the MX518 has amazing slide-pad-thingies.

On a side note, now that I'm thinking about it, a mouse that uses both, mouse for big changes and the ball to correct it, would perhaps offer the most abundant scale of movement possible.

I must disagree again, here.


What you think about does already happen. Especially on consoles. Players generally aim with the stick, but correct their aiming by moving around. This is not so common on PCs, though, because the mouse is already accurate enough.

Now if you'd want to use the mouse to move your reticule to the left and want to correct your movement to the left a little, by using a trackball, this would result in an indirect input, similar to the sticks one.

On a side note, I believe that mouse is already indirect input. Or then you are using some slightly different term.

But anyways, I wonder if you misunderstood me. I didn't mean that either the mouse or trackball would control the characters movement, only the movement of the cursor. That kind of correction is different from the kind of correction that involves the character moving.
I fail to see how adding another level of cursor adjusting would make it less accurate, or somehow bring up the bad sides of using the sticks. One example of using it would be to sort of manually change the sensitivity of your mouse, by moving the trackball to the opposite direction if needed. It sounds really outlandish and it would take a remarkably long time to master it, but I don't see why it couldn't add to the movement.

What you think of is basicly moving the stick all the way and when coming close to the target, slowly move it back towards a centered position.
It's just much easier to make a step into the other direction to compensate for that little "protrusion" (don't really know what to put right there ...).

A system with - technically - two mouse-inputs would only work if the reticule must not be centered on the screen. So your mouse would move the center of the screen, while the trackball moves the position of the reticule on the screen.

And the difference between direct and indirect movement is what I described early on.
When you move the mouse into one direction, your crosshair will move into the same direction. Depending on how far you move your mouse, the crosshair moves equally far.
Now when you want to move with the stick, you move it into one direction and your crosshair will keep moving while the stick is hold down.



We're getting way off-topic here, are we?

I'm living proof, that is false.


Practice makes perfect.


And if I wake up and haven't smoked anything, I don't miss. Ever.

Ah, I forgot that you described what you mean when you say direct input. And yes this is off-topic so I'll leave it here.

I disagree that it would be like "moving the stick all the way and when coming close to the target, slowly move it back towards a centered position", mainly because in my example both of the input devices are what you would describe as direct. I fail to see the whole point of that anology, since it differs in no way from normal movement with sticks, and moving your character can't fix the y-axis among other things. The corrections done with the trackball (that has been set to low sensitivity) wouldn't be "slow backtracking", they would be just very minor tweaks, especially for situations when your target is very far away. This would be exactly like moving your character when you aim, except you don't actually need to move, and you can correct more things than just the x-axis.
Basically as you said, two mouse-inputs, and there is no reason why this wouldn't work with a fixed reticule. If you move your reticule left and pull the trackball right, your reticule goes slower, if you move the trackball left also, it goes faster. This would be one of the ways you could use it.
But as I said, I do recognize how hard this is, and in the end you might end up as good if you just used that time it took to learn it to just perfect your mouse-aim. I still think it's possible to be used for seemingly changing the sensitivity on the fly more effectively and fluidly to fit whatever situation you're in, than just pressing a button that changes your sensitivity from one gear to the other.

To many sheeple play CoD

cod of duty is not better than brink its to old and out of style its the same thing every game hat why i never liked it

I do think the game will hold it's own and gain a lot of popularity after it's released and word of it spreads.

Unfortunately I can almost guarantee it won't match CoD in popularity. That game has gotten so mainstream that it's going to take something that's very similar in theme but improved, which Brink isn't. Brink is a totally dif theme. That doesn't mean Brink is going to be bad though by any means. It's like all things that get popular. Look at McDonald's, they aren't the best fast food, but everyone knows them. Look at Coke, or Nike's, they aren't the best soda or shoe but we all know them simply because once they got popular it's tough to get passed up by anything regardless of the level of quality. Hopefully Battlefield 3 will de-throne the stale CoD series though, just saying.

I'm not so certain of that. Black ops pushed many people away from COD but I think if Brink is advertised good enough it could draw a large crowd to it from COD. Because I believe COD is having its fall like Medal Of Honor and many titles before it unless their next partner really steps it up It, COD could go down in a spiral it could possibly never recover from.

I also sense that CoD is in it's "over the hill" stage. But you underestimate how many 10 year olds play the game and other close minded people who absolutely refuse to enjoy anything else as far as multiplayer shooters go. It's still got a huge following, it takes up what, over 50% of the gamer population on Xbox LIVE at any given moment? If any game is going to finally stick the fork in it I think it'll be Battlefield 3, but that might even be a bit premature a time to expect CoD to finally just go away. It'd be nice if you were right though; I'd love it if Brink actually assassinated CoD in cold blood like that. Brink looks like the better game already.

yea its releasing right next to Cod's next game but I think if members get the word around and enough of the adds are seen and they put it on the dashboard on xbox 360 and on the ps3s Brink might pick up popularity.

It could possibly because Bethesda is known for publishing good games and is usually good at advertising games just look at fallout new Vegas and rage.