Ubi: we don't see us investing hugely in a mouse and keyboard setup for Ass Creed 3

FYI - AC2 works perfectly fine with the wireless 360 controller (probably due to patching)
 
Just use whatever is more comfortable for you and stop telling other people that they are morons for doing different.

I played AC1 with KB+M because I did not have a 360 controller at the time and I found many of the more complex combos to be very difficult. However, Force Unleashed made me buy a 360 controller because it was near impossible without hurting my wrist to do combos in it. I have used the controller for different games that I have found it easier with, but with games that are shooting, I use the KM+B.

For example, I use a 360 controller for the Batman AA and AC, Trine 2, Force Unleashed 1 and 2, Assassin's Creed games, Limbo, Gears of War, Alice: Madness and others. I also use it for MAME games.

As far as Mass Effect goes, I found the KB+M to be much better for me.

My big complain with Ubisoft was with the non-support of the wireless 360 controller in AC2. Sure, you could hack it with a .DLL to get it to work, but they spent the time to fix it in the Splinter Cell game that had the same problem but ignored AC2 completely. I had to get a new 360 controller because a shoulder button stopped working, so I got a wired one and there are no issues anymore.

edit: I guess AC2 was finally fixed for the wireless controller as I haven't played it in a while with the wireless and now have a wired. I was typing all of this as others were commenting.
 
Last edited:
Tudz said:
It allows you to control the camera and the character simultaneously with continuous analog input rather than sudden discrete button presses on the keyboard while still giving good access to 4 buttons. This continuous analog control of both camera and character allow you to point your character in a general direction to make broad sweeping melee attacks or controlling the direction of the character while still allowing some freedom of the camera to monitor different angles.

The controller buttons then offer 4 actions which can easily be timed and sequenced (I dunno about you, but trying to do combos and blocking and jumping and dodging I find easier to do on the 4 controller buttons + triggers than either jumping between my 2 main mouse buttons and the keyboard or using the awkward sidebuttons on the mouse).
Click to expand...

Once you learn to control the analog mouse camera look in conjunction with your 8-directional WASD cluster, you have FAR more precise effective analog control than analog sticks can ever offer. It's also often extremely difficult in third person games to simultaneously control the camera and perform actions. The problem is simple: your 4 primary actions on ABXY are controlled by a single thumb and so is the right analog stick (which controls your camera). Nowhere is this more obviously horrible to me than when I'm freerunning in Assassin's Creed with a controller (which requires you to hold down A/X on 360/PS3) and also trying to look around. You can't control the camera while sprinting because you have to hold down the X button. You are forced to live with what the game's automated camera feels like showing you. It's constrictive and imprecise, which you realize when you try to make a nice angled jump and end up plummeting 5 stories into the middle of an alleyway.

This doesn't happen with a mouse and keyboard. I have mouse 1 controlled by my pointer finger, mouse 2 controlled by my ring finger, middle mouse controlled by my middle finger, and two side buttons controlled by my thumb. I also have easy access to control and shift with my pinky and space, alt and some other keys with my thumb. It's also very easy to have quick access to several buttons with my WASD cluster keys when I'm not in need of them. I can operate about 15 buttons AND I don't even have to sacrifice absolute, pinpoint control of my camera, which is something that controllers don't even offer when you're standing still doing nothing. I can exactly align my movement with the direction I want to go and hit any jump I want, bang on.

Tudz said:
The game that drove me to buy a controller was actually Star Wars Force Unleashed. To independantly control my character with one analog stick, getting him pointed at the correct enemy, while using the other analog stick to keep the camera in a good position and then be able to link dodge/fast attack/slow attack/block/jump to attack effectively through the controller buttons was just vastly easier than using a mouse and keyboard. I started playing the game on medium with mouse + keyboard and was getting stuck up in certain tough areas where it didn't offer me the combined mobility and fast actions to get myself out of danger while still positioning myself to attack and block. As soon as I started using a controller, the game got so much easier AND felt more natural such that I could boost the difficulty to hard and still get through it more easily.
Click to expand...

Once again you are stating something that doesn't make sense. I never played TFU with either control setup, but I don't get why you feel you have better control of the camera with a controller than with a mouse. This is so completely contradictory to me that I can't even wrap my brain around it. How do you control the camera with the right analog stick while simultaneously mashing the face buttons of a standard console controller to perform attacks? It's doable if you put your primary functions on the shoulder buttons (which is how FPS games do it), but fighting games typically don't/can't put enough functions up there, and triggers aren't the best mashing buttons. Even if you managed it, why would you want the slowness and imprecision of acceleration-dominated analog stick control when you can have perfectly linear, fast, pinpoint accurate mouse control to pick your targets?

If the combat was anything like it is in Arkham Asylum/City, then MKB controls involve aligning your camera in such a way that one of your 8-directional WASD combos will send you flying at the target you want to punch next. You press AS+mouse 1 if you want to punch the guy behind you and to the left, much like you would move the left analog to the 8-o'clock position and hit square/X on a controller. The difference comes when you want to actually look behind you in that direction. With a mouse, it takes like one nanosecond for me to do a 180 of the camera to look at what enemies are behind me. With a controller, there is a laborious half-second to full second and then often some imprecision to where I end up looking as the camera slowly swivels around to look where I want it to.

Everything I'm talking about crumbles in games with a fixed camera. God of War's combat sequences often involve fixed camera angles, and there having full analog control of movement really does help because you lack the ability to use the camera and your movement in harmony to make precise moves. The same thing tends to apply to racing games and flight simulators, but those are an entirely different style of gaming.

Eisenblut said:
Just use whatever is more comfortable for you and stop telling other people that they are morons for doing different.
Click to expand...

Many people are comfortable playing FPS games with analog sticks, but I can absolutely guarantee that a mouse and keyboard is better for that. So it becomes a question of priority then: do you want the absolute best and most rewarding control scheme, or do you want the control scheme that is easier and more comfortable? Tough to use a KBM setup while sitting on a couch, and it can be difficult to configure them in games that don't implement them properly. Nowhere is that more obvious than the festival of mouse acceleration that is Assassin's Creed 2 and beyond.
 
Last edited:
krameriffic said:
Once you learn to control the analog mouse camera look in conjunction with your 8-directional WASD cluster, you have FAR more precise effective analog control than analog sticks can ever offer.
Click to expand...
I disagree with that statement in the context of 3rd person melee combat games.
It's also often extremely difficult in third person games to simultaneously control the camera and perform actions. The problem is simple: your 4 primary actions on ABXY are controlled by a single thumb and so is the right analog stick (which controls your camera). Nowhere is this more obviously horrible to me than when I'm freerunning in Assassin's Creed with a controller (which requires you to hold down A/X on 360/PS3) and also trying to look around. You can't control the camera while sprinting because you have to hold down the X button. You are forced to live with what the game's automated camera feels like showing you. It's constrictive and imprecise, which you realize when you try to make a nice angled jump and end up plummeting 5 stories into the middle of an alleyway.
Click to expand...
That may be a problem, but not one I have personally experienced as a direct result of the way the camera behaves.
I can operate about 15 buttons AND I don't even have to sacrifice absolute, pinpoint control of my camera,
Click to expand...
My contention is that yes, you have 15 buttons, but it is more awkward to press those buttons in combinations that result in you pulling of attack combos, jumps, dodges and blocks with great timing. I'm sure you CAN do it, but I personally find it harder.

Once again you are stating something that doesn't make sense. I never played TFU with either control setup, but I don't get why you feel you have better control of the camera with a controller than with a mouse. This is so completely contradictory to me that I can't even wrap my brain around it.
Click to expand...
I switched context to talking about button pressing rather than the camera. I am aware you can't control the camera while pressing attack buttons (at least not easily), but in most games I don't have a problem with that. Maybe I just have good spatial awareness or something.

The problem with you arguing my points is that all my points were personal opinion. You complain that people don't have a reason for saying "its better with a controller", then you complain about my reasoning as well.

At the end of the day, the reason I use the controller is because I pick it up and it feels more natural. I pick up the controller, I get more kills. I pick up the controller and I die less in platforming sections. I pick up the controller and I am better able to defeat large groups of enemies. I outlined the reasons why I think this is the case.

Note how many time I said "I" in that sentence.

I'm fully aware the mouse offers more precision, I never go into an FPS game even attempting to use a controller, it'd be silly. But there is reasons why many people prefer controllers in this type of game... maybe you don't agree with those reasons or maybe you've overcome them through your own playstyle, doesn't change the fact they exist otherwise people wouldn't prefer it. Like I said earlier in the thread, I'm a full blown PC gamer, I'm well attuned to WASD and KBM for all the first person shooters I play, may not be pro, but I hold my own in any FPS game I've tried so far. BUT, I still prefer a controller for 3rd person platforming and melee games, and my reasoning for that is what I posted previously. That is, analog control over both movement and camera is more natural (I never said precise :p but precise enough to fulfil the precision requirements of a non-shooting 3rd person melee and platforming game) and more natural control over button combinations on a controller than on a keyboard. Being able to press 8 different buttons to link together combinations of attacks, dodges, blocks and jumps I simply find far easier to do while controlling my character's direction with the right analog stick than it is while trying to control direction with WASD.

Many people are comfortable playing FPS games with analog sticks, but I can absolutely guarantee that a mouse and keyboard is better for that. So it becomes a question of priority then: do you want the absolute best and most rewarding control scheme, or do you want the control scheme that is easier and more comfortable? Tough to use a KBM setup while sitting on a couch, and it can be difficult to configure them in games that don't implement them properly. Nowhere is that more obvious than the festival of mouse acceleration that is Assassin's Creed 2 and beyond.
Click to expand...
Your comparison to FPS is not valid because FPS definitely 100% revolves around accuracy and speed with aiming, 3rd person melee does not. Yes, there are people comfortable playing FPS with controller, but anyone with much exposure to KBM will tell you that a KBM is better for an FPS game because you need accuracy and speed in aiming.

The thing is, in the context of 3rd person melee, I don't think kbm is "absolute best". You can argue reasons why it is and I can argue reasons why its not, but I simply don't think it is. What we need is a game like Ninja Gaiden on PC, but with online multiplayer and see what the larger portion of people are using and if they are disadvantaged by it. Personally I think the result of such a study would show most people would find controller easier to use, but at the top level there would be a mix because there are no great definite advantages to either that can't be overcome with practice. Hell, you find top Live for Speed players using the keyboard even though almost everyone will tell you its a royal pain in the arse to do it and you're at a disadvantage for trying.
 
it's absurd to me that anyone would try to claim a controller could possibly function better when there's any camera movement involved. why would it matter if it's first or third person, you still need free camera movement. something that cannot be accomplished with a controller, when you have to share a stick with at least 4 other buttons on the same finger. what if you want to turn and use those buttons at the same time? easier than just moving your hand and pushing any combinations of buttons you want, using all 10 fingers?

MavericK96 said:
The real problem here is, why have perfectly adequate KB&M controls in AC, AC2, AC:B and AC:R, then just totally ditch it for AC3?



Exactly. There is NO reason why they can't do this other than being lazy and trying to release a direct console port.
Click to expand...

it's just marketing, don't overthink it. there are 2 potential outcomes here - a. they release a game with shitty kbm controls and get to say "we told you so", or b. they actually do right by it and get showered with praise. it's all about lowering standards, to put themselves in a good light no matter what happens.
 
krameriffic said:
Nowhere is this more obviously horrible to me than when I'm freerunning in Assassin's Creed with a controller (which requires you to hold down A/X on 360/PS3) and also trying to look around. You can't control the camera while sprinting because you have to hold down the X button. You are forced to live with what the game's automated camera feels like showing you. It's constrictive and imprecise, which you realize when you try to make a nice angled jump and end up plummeting 5 stories into the middle of an alleyway.
Click to expand...

I just loaded up both AC2 and ACB and I think you're exaggerating there :p Yes, I agree you can't freelook while running (holding right trigger+A) on the Xbox controller (at least with the default key mapping)... however doing it with a keyboard is damned near impossible as well because to move the mouse around to look left will in turn move Ezio left unless you compensate by pressing W and D together to run diagonally or D to run sideways. Due to the discrete nature of WASD, there's no smooth transition which makes it awkward and unnatural whether you're running or fast running. Meanwhile the default key mapping on the controller, looking around independantly of Ezio moving while fast running is pretty much impossible because you can't press A and right thumbstick at the same time, HOWEVER, regular running and looking around simultaneously is far easier on the controller because as you move the right thumbstick around (an analog input) you compensate by moving the left thumstick to keep Ezio's movement in the correct direction, which is easier because it is also an analog input (cementing my dual continuous analog for a controller vs single analog and single discrete digital input for kbm).

I will admit looking around with the mouse was faster than the analog, but beyond that, I still think the controller holds the cards in a game like a 3rd person melee platformer.
 
They won't invest much in optimizing for PC, so I won't invest much in the game.

I bought AC 1 and 2 for $5 each on Steam sale. Never bothered with Brotherhood or Revelations and I've got quite the backlog anyway. I'll get AC 3 for $5 in a year or two and Ubi can be happy to get that much.
 
The people bickering over which control method is better are missing the point completely.

It's about choice. Ubisoft is seeking to undermine it by implying that there will be no real care or consideration into a control method that is proven viable by previous games in this series.
 
Plague_Injected said:
The people bickering over which control method is better are missing the point completely.

It's about choice. Ubisoft is seeking to undermine it by implying that there will be no real care or consideration into a control method that is proven viable by previous games in this series.
Click to expand...

The problem Plague is that there is no solidarity amongst PC gamers, as long they are not personally affected they simply don't give a shit. Quite a sad state of affairs....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top