Control feedback?

[Diduz]

Originally Posted by SunSailor

Please, go into yourselves, and make this game, what it should be. A good aventure game.

Come on, let's not over-react.
This is a pure and straight adventure game. If adventure games were defined by the control method, Grim Fandango wouldn't be an adventure game (and we all know it's one of the best).

[SunSailor]

So, why did Grim Fandango perform that bad? And Monkey Island IV? And the later Broken Sword games? This is no adventure control and it will never, ever prevail and that for very good reasons. I simply don't understand, why every adventure company needs to learn this the hard way. W&Gs controls are pure rubbish, someone started thinking without coming to a suitable end. Take a look at the places, where there are a few more items on the screen, there the game works well with the mouse only. As soon as there are a few less items there, you need to get back to the keyboard, change your sitting position. Yes, these controls are making the game unconformable in a very physic manner. And sorry, the lame excuse, why this way was chosen, is pure lame. Design follows function, here we have the opposite, showing very low craftmanship abilities regarding game design. Even if you stay withing the premises, it would have been easy to add a move to left/right cursor when reaching the screen borders, similar to every standard rts. Just give it a bit a thought and there's always a solution, but the way chosen here is simply crap. Don't you have honest test players in the house?

[Diduz]

Originally Posted by SunSailor

So, why did Grim Fandango perform that bad? And Monkey Island IV? And the later Broken Sword games?

Are you sure that Grim and Monkey 4 performed "bad" because of the controls?
Broken Sword 3, which btw had REALLY bad controls (worse than W&G's), performed well enough to grant another sequel. BS4 had a point&click interface.
I agree with the fact that plain point 'n' click is the best way to control an adventure game, but I don't think that such a well-crafted game needs to be totally bashed just for that. Heck, I don't even bash BS3 as much as I should, considering I hated those controls.
Camera work is more important than controls in a not-totally-free 3D environment and I think the camera here works better than in the aforementioned games.

[Rather Dashing]

Honestly, the controls are more of a nuisance than something that ruin it as an adventure game. The writing is still good, puzzle designs should be interesting. The problem is that the controls are ANNOYING. How many people have said "Oh! When I plug/plugged in the gamepad, the demo will/does play great!" When your PC controls make people want to plug in a gamepad over using the default PC controls when they were fine with the PC controls before, there is fault with the PC control scheme.

We had one button(mouse click) that controlled everything for us in the S&M and Strong Bad games. We have now swapped this out with seven buttons(four arrow keys, both mouse buttons, and SHIFT) that achieve the same thing, but simply aren't as "natural" or comfortable.

I concede that I may have been a bit inclined to hate the controls from the outset. But honestly, I see something different here than I expected. And really, it's the Point and click interface I love, saddled with clunky keyboard controls.

[Abenteuer]

Hi!

being german and an user of adventure-treff.de myself, I´d like to apologize for SunSailors behavior. He has obviously no manners and is a bit too full of himself. Neither does he speak for adventure-treff.de nor is everyone there sharing his opinion.

That said, I think the controls work fairly well but would also prefer a no-keyboard-solution.

[Armakuni]

Adventure games is one of the last genres I can actually play, because of this neurological damage in my fingers - would be a shame for me if Telltale started using keyboard controls for several games now. I simply cannot play games with these kinds of controls, it hurts too much.

This is obviously a purely selfish reason to dislike it, but even if it wasn't for that - I always much preferred point and click.

[SunSailor]

I think, it is obviouse clear, that the new controls aren't, let's say, optimal. Ok, let's face it, they purely suck, and that for very objective reasons:
* In "classic adventure controls", you need one input device - the mouse with two buttons. Decades of adventure games lived very good with this simplicity
* You only needed one hand
* You didn't need to remember control keys
The W&G approach doesn't add *anything* to controlling the game, but does that with more complexity, and that is, why it is bad in an objective way, it fails to honor the "form follows function"-paradigm. Why do we need so many more controls, if this all can already be achieved by a simple mouse and two mouse buttons? I think, the developers hit the second system syndrom or simply don't expect the greater sales on the pc. What we have here, doesn't follow any good experience with adventure controls in the last 20 years. The controls remind of a shooter, but there is a very big differenz. While a shooter keeps the players focus on the keyboard (WASD, changing weapon, execute buttons etc.), while the mouse connects directly between hand and eyes, the W&G controls force the player for a constant switch between both. You need to focus on WASD to reach the object and then change focus on the mouse to select it. That is, why it feels so bad for a noticeable amount of players.

[[TTG] Yare]

Originally Posted by SunSailor

The W&G approach doesn't add *anything* to controlling the game

For point-and-click to work, it would require that we impose limits on the sort of camera shots our choreographers could use -the ground would always need to be in the shot. This restriction is not compatible with a property as cinematic as W&G, so we had to set point-and-click aside for this game and consider other control schemes.

[[TTG] Yare]

Originally Posted by axelkothe

I may like them as soon as my gamepads are working with the game (right now, neither the wired xbox360 pad nor my thrustmaster pc pad are working, both plugged in before starting the game) - aren't they supposed to work?

Your wired Xbox 360 controller should work. I didn't write the controller support stuff, though. Try posting in the support forum.

[kabumm]

The controls may be inconvenient, so I was skeptical at first. But after actually trying the demo, I think that although it might not be optimal, it is acceptable. But I am used to WASD, I don't know about people who have never used that kind of control.

And just for the record:

Originally Posted by SunSailor

I came over from www.adventure-treff.de, which is the leading adventure site here in germany, and there is pure horror about this ridiculous decision.

No, it is not. You are stating your own opinion (in a way which I still find inappropriate - it is your opinion and not the one and only truth) and nothing else - so don't use adventure-treff.de for your argument by indirectly stating that everyone else over there agrees with you. Thanks.

[Derwin]

Originally Posted by [TTG] Yare

For point-and-click to work, it would require that we impose limits on the sort of camera shots our choreographers could use -the ground would always need to be in the shot. This restriction is not compatible with a property as cinematic as W&G, so we had to set point-and-click aside for this game and consider other control schemes.

While I agree that point and click limits framing, at least probably in the TT Tool, I do wonder if imposing those limits would have been better than implementing keyboard controls. In TT games, the scene choreographers have free reign in cut-scenes, but why does the framing have to be unlimited in gameplay segments requiring free roaming?

I must say thank you, however, for allowing the character to path-find to a clicked object across the room. It was times like this when my frustration subsided, as it returned to a more natural point and click interface.

*EDIT* Also, the ground doesn't always need to be in the shot. The only reason for it to need to be in the shot is if you do not hand script hot zones for movement. I realize this would take longer to implement, as each scene would need to be custom scripted, and I realize that this may not even be possible with the TT tool. But a slight isometric perspective should, in theory, be able to provide both the user and the program to determine where a click takes the character, without the ground being in frame.

[seagul]

I love the demo. The controlls are a bit unfamiliar to me, but it's ok. By the next episode it will become second nature to me.

[Freelance Poster]

Originally Posted by seagul

I love the demo. The controlls are a bit unfamiliar to me, but it's ok. By the next episode it will become second nature to me.

I agree. The controls seemed strange at first, but I quickly got comfortable with them. I don't see a problem with them.

[[TTG] Yare]

Originally Posted by Derwin

*EDIT* Also, the ground doesn't always need to be in the shot. The only reason for it to need to be in the shot is if you do not hand script hot zones for movement.

You're right, of course. But the nature of episodic game development requires us to pick our battles. If we had to hand-script, tweak, and test the movement on a camera-by-camera basis, that work couldn't start until the art team was done framing all of the shots. It would also take a chunk from our limited pool of episode-specific programming time, which is usually spent on minigames and stuff like that.

Since we want to deliver as much "new game" as possible to you guys for your money, we strive to minimize the amount of time spent on episode-specific UI and control work.

[SunSailor]

Sorry, but that is non-sense, it would be easy to do a raycast to the walkable area and the selectable items, only. No need to do any extra skripting and even other games, like sam and max, would benefit from this. There is absolutely no need to quit the raycast because of obstacles. But sure, you have to do compromises, but we'll see, how this will affect the sales. I won't buy the game, even if I'm really sad about that, but my spare time is too valueable to spend it with uncomfortable control experiments, which already failed in the past - and that more than once.

[[TTG] Yare]

Originally Posted by SunSailor

it would be easy to do a raycast to the walkable area and the selectable items, only

That's a good idea, but it comes with its own set of drawbacks.

If the ground is on the screen, we can cast a ray from a click and determine where it hit the ground. There is one correct solution.

If the ground is not on the screen, we have to cast a plane from where the user clicked, and see where it intersects the ground. The result of this is a line with infinite solutions. The user may have intended to walk far away from the camera, or near it, or anywhere in between. There's mathematically no way to tell.

I'm sorry that you find the controls unmanageable.

[Rather Dashing]

Yare, I really have to admire your no-nonsense, down-to-earth and simple explanations of the real limitations you face and the goals you are trying to achieve. While I may disagree with some decisions, I really can come to respect them when approached this way. You've obviously thought about it and worked hard to provide the best solution you could given the resources you had, and I can respect that.

It still doesn't feel "right" to me, of course, and I feel most natural with a Sam and Max control scheme. I have to question how much is gained as opposed to how much just doesn't feel right, but I do think I can "get it" from your perspective.

[Chris1]

Originally Posted by Will

Only wired remotes work.

Wow. That's quite a downer.

Any PC game I've ever played has support for any gamepad. Windows treats all gamepads as just an object after all; if the user moves the stick or presses a button then you get returned (x y or z) which axis has been moved or (1, 2, 3...) which button has been pressed.

I'm confused as to why the team has choose to try and detect which pad is being used and only allow certain ones.
Now I have to choose between using the keyboard and mouse, or taking the time to set up either an Autohotkey or a Xpadder script.

Given the many positive reactions to it in this thread, I'll probably use the keyboard and mouse setup.
As much as I'd like to use my pad - and I'm sure Autohotkey could get it working if I really wanted it - I feel that writing code to get hardware working is a task that should fall to the authors of the game, and not the player.



Oh, and by the way, don't read too much into my whining. I'll probably still enough the game either way.

[[TTG] Yare]

Originally Posted by Rather Dashing

While I may disagree with some decisions, I really can come to respect them when approached this way.

I appreciate it.

And thanks for taking the time to provide feedback on the controls.

[DaVince]

The movement controls are a little "wobbly": it's difficult to move around once the scene changes, due to the movement direction staying the same until you completely stop moving. I think things might work better if pressing down would ALWAYS mean that Wallace starts moving towards the camera.

Also, complete camera switches either don't work or kick in too late: I have to be too close to the edge of the screen before the next angle is viewed, and it's usually too sudden. A quick "swing" of the camera to the right angle once Wallace moves towards the edge would work better, I think.

Other than that the controls are great - No problems with the inventory (though I'd really like to access it by clicking the screen border too or something like that). R for inventory should also be mapped to tab I think. Q is quite useful for checking out stuff.

Will multiple actions on some items be possible? The right mouse button is still free and it'd be sweet if we could have at least 1 but sometimes more than 1 action on items. Shouldn't be too much extra explanation.

(Disclaimer: didn't read any of the other posts yet. I'm gonna do that now.)