Digital Joysticks provide better control than Analog Joysticks

[Divya16]

All d-pads do that, though on modern consoles they've taken a back seat (that started ~1996/97 with analog sticks being clearly superior for almost anything to do with 3D, though you had many more options with the PC anyway)

 

That's where they are mistaken if they think analog is required for 3D or perhaps you're mistaken as I do see modern systems using digital controllers-- not as easy to use as a stick-based joystick but digital nonetheless. And Atari also has 3D stuff using digital joystick like Choplifter, Flip Flop, Star wars, etc. Creativity helps in implementing digital joysticks in some games rather than take the inferior analog approach.

 

That's all folks, my popcorn just finished.

[+poobah]

Interesting that while I have been speaking about the analog joystick's issues, gameport itself is inconsistent regarding noise, timing, etc. that affects reading the joystick. I just read the same joystick (Gravis) on Gateway 2000 90Mhz machine and range is 0..1300 and it reads 0..798 on another machine. The value represent ticks of 1.19318Mhz timer so processor speed isn't affecting things.

That's why DOS games had you calibrate the stick at the beginning of every game and why windows stuff had you calibrate in the device driver settings of the control panel. (pretty much unnecessary for USB stuff though as that's all digital)

You can't calibrate noise, resisitance, etc. They vary with temperature, how long your machine is on, the phase of the moon, etc. If the USB joystick isn't doing some sort of automated calibration on the analog joystick, I would be surprised.

Yes you can.

Be surprised.

 

Don't confuse a poor method of reading joysticks (waiting for 555's to timeout) with analog sticks in general.

[Bryan]

Just a quick note about reading pots such as paddles and sticks...

 

The cheap and dirty way is to charge a capacitor through the pot and measure the time it takes to reach a trigger voltage. This is how Atari paddles (& 5200 sticks) and old PC sticks work. The problem is that any deterioration/contamination of the pot results in jittery performance since the resistance of the wiper/resistive element junction is part of the overall equation.

 

The superior way is to put a voltage across the resistive element and use a high-impedance circuit to measure the voltage at the wiper position. This method is largely immune to the resistance of the wiper/resistive element junction and will not jitter. Atari converted Pokey to use this method in their Warlords arcade machine by inserting a comparator between the Pokey inputs and the voltage coming from the pots. When Pokey had charged a local cap to a higher voltage than the one coming from the pot, the comparator output flipped and caused Pokey to latch at that moment. This method kept the pot out of the charging circuit.

 

-Bry

[kool kitty89]

All d-pads do that, though on modern consoles they've taken a back seat (that started ~1996/97 with analog sticks being clearly superior for almost anything to do with 3D, though you had many more options with the PC anyway)

 

That's where they are mistaken if they think analog is required for 3D or perhaps you're mistaken as I do see modern systems using digital controllers-- not as easy to use as a stick-based joystick but digital nonetheless. And Atari also has 3D stuff using digital joystick like Choplifter, Flip Flop, Star wars, etc. Creativity helps in implementing digital joysticks in some games rather than take the inferior analog approach.

Nope, all analog (or at least variable -I'm almost positive it's pots, but some might use magnetic proximity or the mechano-optical mechanism of the Nintendo brand N64 pads).

 

Sure you have D-pads, but all are fairly poor (everything post N64 has been that way more or less -dreamcast was boarderline), the primary control scheme is 2-axis analog, or often dual 2-axis analog sticks and 2 more analog triggers. (analog or variable, same results)

 

Of course the output is all digital, but that's the same as older systems, it's just that the older systems had internal ADCs so the controllers were simpler. (POKEY takes analog values and outputs 8-bit digitial ones)

 

And yes, you can stumble your way through some 3D games to some extent with all digital control, and acceptably well in a few very limited ones, but analog (or wide range) control is absolutely necessary for acceptable gameplay on modern systems.

 

Now you have some 2D games (including polygonal rendered 2D PoV) that will be just fine with 8-way digital, but even then others that will not: ie you want more sensitive run/walk speed control, or aiming than 8-directions could ever do.

 

But if we're talking the A8/5200 specifically, yes digital control would eb acceptable or preferable in 99% of cases, more often then analog... except maybe very accurate analog with short through and springy self centering. (and obviously a well programmed polling routine)

 

 

Could you be more specific in what you mean in terms of modern machines? (I'm talking 1996 onward, or especially 1998 onward)

 

 

D-pads are superior to joysticks in a wide array of cases, but it also depends on the game and on the d-pad/digital thumbstick design vs joystick design. (sloppy control will be bad either way)

You also have cases where a long-throw analog flight stick is preferable to an analog thumbstick and vice versa, it depends on the case.

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting that while I have been speaking about the analog joystick's issues, gameport itself is inconsistent regarding noise, timing, etc. that affects reading the joystick. I just read the same joystick (Gravis) on Gateway 2000 90Mhz machine and range is 0..1300 and it reads 0..798 on another machine. The value represent ticks of 1.19318Mhz timer so processor speed isn't affecting things.

That's why DOS games had you calibrate the stick at the beginning of every game and why windows stuff had you calibrate in the device driver settings of the control panel. (pretty much unnecessary for USB stuff though as that's all digital)

You can't calibrate noise, resisitance, etc. They vary with temperature, how long your machine is on, the phase of the moon, etc. If the USB joystick isn't doing some sort of automated calibration on the analog joystick, I would be surprised.

You can calibrate for all those things, but you recalibrate every time the system boots, etc. Temperature change inside the controller during active use should be insignifcant and you might not even be using resistance based variable control (magnetic proximity or mechano-optical), but the self-contained, tiny pot modules used are very consistent in any case.

 

Of course the controllers recalibrate every time they plug in or the system is booted, the onboard ADC would have no reference point otherwise. But you needn't go through the whole "top left, bottom right, center" nonsense as it calibrates based on the neutral position and has enough consistency to manage fine with that alone. (you need to unplug an dplug back in a controller if you're pushing the stick when initiated as it will be calibrated wrong )

Temperature of the console itself would not matter one bit as there's never anything analog going on outside the casing of the controller, everything is digitized internally. However the same is true even with pushing normal analog voltages for the most part as resistance of the traces should vary very little. (temperature of the pots themselves would matter more, but you're only goign to deal with the relatively small temperature change from your body heat)

Edited November 18, 2010 by kool kitty89

[ledzep]

(Excuse me, I had to make a side trip to JFK...)

 

 

And you misinterpreted it. As far as the A8 is concerned, it only sees the signals at the DB9 connector. So that also makes sense along with post #315. Next time instead of looking for fault, try to understand the context. And by the way, post #1 comes before post #310. If I replace the joystick with a PC that is sending those signals via CTRL/ARROW keys, A8 game/software wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

 

So now you're claiming that an Atari 8-bit computer reads arrow keys + ctrl key at the DB9 connector?!?

As I said, you are inept at understanding clearly stated arguments and facts (which all of my replies to you are). The post #1 is in reference to the CTRL/ARROW keys. I listed them separately. If I say I have a disk simulator and you complain about not having a way to insert a physical disk, then you have the problem understanding. I never said arrow keys/ctrl key are read by A8 computer in a joystick simulator. Don't blame your own inabilities on others. That's like stating that the Calculus book is written badly because you can't figure out why they put those funny looking elongated "S" type symbols. You keep repeating the samething over and over again because you are living in self-denial of reality. You think just denying everything repeatedly is going to either help you win the debate (at the cost of the truth) or perhaps I'll let you go. According to your flawed style of arguing, if you didn't hear about F=ma and I gave you data for F=ma, you would be denying it.

 

The only thing you have clearly stated is -

 

"Digital Joysticks provide better control than Analog Joysticks. It's a scientific fact; let's see who can refute it."

 

Everything after that has been very vague statements that have been cut apart by everyone else on this forum (minus your relief pitcher, of course) and then followed by you attempting to explain yourself with progressively worse-stated rebuttals.

 

When you (in Post # 350) state the following -

 

"As far as the A8 is concerned, it only sees the signals at the DB9 connector."

 

and fail to elaborate about what signals are seen at the DB9 connector you open the interpretation to mean all signals. All of them. Unless you are specific, something you are incapable of being. if you had written, instead -

 

"As far as the A8 is concerned, it only sees the signals from the game controllers at the DB9 connector."

 

then there would be no question of what you meant. But I challenged your assertion that arrow keys + ctrl key "perfectly simulates" a digital joystick by pointing out that keyboard signals take a different path through the computer and are read at a different place. It was up to you to be specific about which signals are seen at the DB9 connector. You failed there (see, another fault) and in correcting yourself confirmed that game controller signals take a different path than keyboard key signals, thus showing that a joystick simulator is incapable of "perfectly simulating" a digital joystick. Well done.

 

I find fault where there is fault. If you do not specify whether you're simulating a physical or simulated joystick (and who would waste time simulating a simulated joystick?) then "simulating a joystick" is interpreted as the common definition of a joystick. What is the common definition of a joystick?

If I simulated a physical joystick, it would be REAL joystick. If someone simulated a physical 1050 Atari disk drive, it would be a real disk drive not a simulated one. A simulated disk drive does not use physical disks neither does a simulated joystick use a real lever. And you are arguing the wrong point anyways as I stated. Arrow keys/Ctrl key are not what was used in the data generated that was posted for you earlier. You are purposely arguing with useless meaningless incoherent remarks just to make people think you know something when in fact you are complete ignorance. I have been lenient with you, but I already dismissed your gibberish drivel as Chewbacca Defense/strawman earlier for good reason. Here's your logic summed up:

 

(1) It's okay to mix-up paddles and analog joysticks because they are both POTs. Construction does not matter.

(2) It's not okay to mix-up arrow keys+ctrl key with a digital joystick since there's a lever there. Construction does matter.

P and NOT P. Inconsistent, incoherent, self-contradictory. QED.

 

No, if you simulated a physical joystick using a program it would then be a simulation of a physical joystick. If you built your own copy of a digital joystick so that you could read actual joystick signals coming out of it (instead of what a simulator program fakes) then it would be an actual physical joystick. If you attempted to simulate a physical joystick using arrow keys then you would fail due to the extra signal combinations that arrow keys can output that joysticks cannot. This is how English works.

 

How can anyone know whether arrow keys/ctrl key were or weren't used in the data generated that was posted earlier when you refuse to present all the data and describe in detail the specifics of your supposed experiment? This thread is up to 16 pages now. Due to you delaying communicating your results as any real experimenter who claimed to have run a controlled experiment would be expected to do.

 

As for my logic that you attempted to sum up, you got that wrong, too (another fault, tsk tsk). It goes like this -

 

(1) It is ok to include paddles in a discussion that compares analog and digital joysticks because most analog joysticks are in essence two POTs combined to read movements in the X and Y axes and a paddle is a single POT reading movement in one axis even though paddles use a knob for control and analog joysticks use a stick for control. So they are not identical but similar enough for the purposes of discussing analog game control.

 

(2) It is ok to include arrow keys in a discussion that compares digital and analog joysticks because most digital joysticks are in essence four buttons (or switches) used to read 4 or 8 directions and arrow keys are in actuality four buttons even though it is possible to press arrow keys in combinations that digital joystick buttons cannot (unless broken or poorly made) and arrow keys on a keyboard are not read in the same way as joystick outputs. So they are not identical but similar enough for the purposes of discussing digital game control.

 

(3) Since you included arrow keys in your comparison of digital and analog joysticks you must therefore also allow paddles in the same discussion. If you disallow paddles you must disallow arrow keys as well and restrict your poll and your false claim of scientific fact to only digital and analog joysticks.

 

I would not have mentioned paddles if you hadn't first included arrow keys. Too late now, though.

 

So, when are you going to address the joystick that totally disproves your theory? Analog and digital in the same physical device, no differences in game play that a gamer can perceive.

 

You refuse to address your lack of data and this fantastic joystick? Why did you even start this poll, then? It would have been simpler for you to post a poll where there's only one choice - digital joysticks. Thus gathering only the data that supports your theory vs. all data.

[ledzep]

No, if there's one thing you have failed to do it is clearly spelling out anything. I don't doubt that it's clear to you what you meant but your poor English skills have turned this thread into a (so far) 15 page quagmire of people poking holes in your incomplete, vague theory and you avoiding all opportunities to correct that.

You have a problem understanding English and blame it on others. Or is it that you are purposely trying to find fault. Either way, it's not good for you as this will not lead you to the truth. It's clearly spelled out. Run both programs and try to guess the state of the joysticks. I have megabytes of data, but you have yet to show that you understood the few kilobytes. You can't learn calculus if you can't do simple algebra.

 

Wrong again (See? Your thinking is littered with faults).

 

First, someone who claims to have run a controlled experiment and collected data for that experiment is required to present the details of the experiment along with the data gathered. This is the only way to evaluate the experiment (to see if it was conducted competently) and also to evaluate the data generated by that experiment. This is also the only way for anyone else to be expected to be able to correctly recreate the experiment to compare results and confirm that the experimenter's hypothesis and conclusions are supported by the data generated. You have done neither. And now you are denying everyone else access to your nonexistent data with a claim that I wouldn't understand it. Well, here's your chance to prove that. Release the data. All of it. If you're right then I won't understand any of it and you will have finally allowed others to recreate your experiment and prove your theory correct. Seriously, don't you want people to recreate your experiment and prove you correct? It would certainly silence any naysayers (and they are legion). Instead you delay and dodge and make excuses.

 

Second, your analogy was poorly worded in regards to this thread and your data secrecy. What you should have written was "You can't learn calculus if nobody will provide you the information that describes what calculus is and how it works." See? That compares much more favorably to you and how you want people to duplicate your experiment and come up with the same data when you refuse to give comprehensive details of your experiment and also refuse to release all the data.

 

If I find an argument, I'll address it. It's just you mocking things that are over your head.

 

Under my head, you mean. So why won't you address the argument? Is it your emotions?

[Divya16]

(Excuse me, I had to make a side trip to JFK...)

Sorry, but all of your arguments are wrong and full of fault (sound familiar). You did not address my argument in post #376: "That's all folks". Your time was up to reply. I.e., I though movie was over but you are claiming it was a long intermission.

 

Everything after that has been very vague statements that have been cut apart by everyone else on this forum (minus your relief pitcher, of course) and then followed by you attempting to explain yourself with progressively worse-stated rebuttals.

You haven't even addressed the arguments. You concocted some nonsense and have to say no because your life was a mistake. As far as majority goes, just substitute geocentric with "analog joystickism" and heliocentric with "digital joysticksm" in the following and perhaps you won't keep making that point again and again:

 

Quote: "Galileo's championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime, when a large majority of philosophers and astronomers still subscribed to the geocentric view that the Earth is at the centre of the universe. After 1610, when he began publicly supporting the heliocentric view, which placed the Sun at the centre of the universe, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615. In February 1616, although he had been cleared of any offence, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture",[10] and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest."

 

As someone said: blind leading the blind.

[Divya16]

All d-pads do that, though on modern consoles they've taken a back seat (that started ~1996/97 with analog sticks being clearly superior for almost anything to do with 3D, though you had many more options with the PC anyway)

 

That's where they are mistaken if they think analog is required for 3D or perhaps you're mistaken as I do see modern systems using digital controllers-- not as easy to use as a stick-based joystick but digital nonetheless. And Atari also has 3D stuff using digital joystick like Choplifter, Flip Flop, Star wars, etc. Creativity helps in implementing digital joysticks in some games rather than take the inferior analog approach.

Nope, all analog (or at least variable -I'm almost positive it's pots, but some might use magnetic proximity or the mechano-optical mechanism of the Nintendo brand N64 pads).

 

Sure you have D-pads, but all are fairly poor (everything post N64 has been that way more or less -dreamcast was boarderline), the primary control scheme is 2-axis analog, or often dual 2-axis analog sticks and 2 more analog triggers. (analog or variable, same results)

 

Of course the output is all digital, but that's the same as older systems, it's just that the older systems had internal ADCs so the controllers were simpler. (POKEY takes analog values and outputs 8-bit digitial ones)

 

And yes, you can stumble your way through some 3D games to some extent with all digital control, and acceptably well in a few very limited ones, but analog (or wide range) control is absolutely necessary for acceptable gameplay on modern systems.

What do you mean stumble? Nintendo DSi mentioned above is all digital and has a ton of 3D games. I would take the digital joystick over keyboard type set-up, but still 100% accurate in both cases compared to analog joystick uncertainties.

 

Now you have some 2D games (including polygonal rendered 2D PoV) that will be just fine with 8-way digital, but even then others that will not: ie you want more sensitive run/walk speed control, or aiming than 8-directions could ever do.

 

But if we're talking the A8/5200 specifically, yes digital control would eb acceptable or preferable in 99% of cases, more often then analog... except maybe very accurate analog with short through and springy self centering. (and obviously a well programmed polling routine)

Well, we agree here 99% of cases for A8/5200, digital joystick would be preferable. If you have analog with short throw, you have harder time with the in-between states like are needed in a 5200 game like Star Wars, Missile Command, Super Breakout, etc.

 

Could you be more specific in what you mean in terms of modern machines? (I'm talking 1996 onward, or especially 1998 onward)

Nintendo Dsi mentioned and many other handhelds. The games are fudged with the analogicity. There's no exact control requirements in modern games since the controllers can't handle it. Hook up a modern analog joystick and see how good you do in an Atari 8-bit game like Hero.

 

D-pads are superior to joysticks in a wide array of cases, but it also depends on the game and on the d-pad/digital thumbstick design vs joystick design. (sloppy control will be bad either way)

You also have cases where a long-throw analog flight stick is preferable to an analog thumbstick and vice versa, it depends on the case.

Not "wide array" but some cases. Still better than analog joystick.

 

Of course the controllers recalibrate every time they plug in or the system is booted, the onboard ADC would have no reference point otherwise. But you needn't go through the whole "top left, bottom right, center" nonsense as it calibrates based on the neutral position and has enough consistency to manage fine with that alone. (you need to unplug an dplug back in a controller if you're pushing the stick when initiated as it will be calibrated wrong )

Temperature of the console itself would not matter one bit as there's never anything analog going on outside the casing of the controller, everything is digitized internally. However the same is true even with pushing normal analog voltages for the most part as resistance of the traces should vary very little. (temperature of the pots themselves would matter more, but you're only goign to deal with the relatively small temperature change from your body heat)

 

Noise can't be calibrated as it's factors are unknown. If you play around with analog joysticks, you will see how the values change depending on time of day you play because maybe your home's electricity usage is different or weather changed and who knows what other factors. Phase of the moon is known to effect vegetation and high tides so that has an effect to.

[+poobah]

Noise can't be calibrated as it's factors are unknown. If you play around with analog joysticks, you will see how the values change depending on time of day you play because maybe your home's electricity usage is different or weather changed and who knows what other factors. Phase of the moon is known to effect vegetation and high tides so that has an effect to.

 

Every flight out of JFK relies on calibrations of noise.

[RevEng]

What do you mean stumble? Nintendo DSi mentioned above is all digital and has a ton of 3D games. I would take the digital joystick over keyboard type set-up, but still 100% accurate in both cases compared to analog joystick uncertainties.

Many 3D games suffer for the digital-only controls, to the point that they implement an analog control through the capacitive touchscreen, like StarFox Command, Mario64, Ridge Racer, etc.

 

Nintendo has acknowledged this shortcoming by including an analog joystick-nub with the the 3DS.

[atariksi]

Interesting that while I have been speaking about the analog joystick's issues, gameport itself is inconsistent regarding noise, timing, etc. that affects reading the joystick. I just read the same joystick (Gravis) on Gateway 2000 90Mhz machine and range is 0..1300 and it reads 0..798 on another machine. The value represent ticks of 1.19318Mhz timer so processor speed isn't affecting things.

That's why DOS games had you calibrate the stick at the beginning of every game and why windows stuff had you calibrate in the device driver settings of the control panel. (pretty much unnecessary for USB stuff though as that's all digital)

You can't calibrate noise, resisitance, etc. They vary with temperature, how long your machine is on, the phase of the moon, etc. If the USB joystick isn't doing some sort of automated calibration on the analog joystick, I would be surprised.

Yes you can.

Be surprised.

 

Don't confuse a poor method of reading joysticks (waiting for 555's to timeout) with analog sticks in general.

 

I think the topic drifted a bit. I was talking about gameports being noisy, varying in implemenation, etc. to koolkitty (if you look back). It doesn't matter if joystick calibrates or not as there's no mechanism to calibrate the gameport internals.

[atariksi]

(Excuse me, I had to make a side trip to JFK...)

Given the time you spent there, I hope you noticed that they rely on feedback for their controls and do not know the state of their controls AND their controls aren't the same as an analog joystick in construction.

 

 

And you misinterpreted it. As far as the A8 is concerned, it only sees the signals at the DB9 connector. So that also makes sense along with post #315. Next time instead of looking for fault, try to understand the context. And by the way, post #1 comes before post #310. If I replace the joystick with a PC that is sending those signals via CTRL/ARROW keys, A8 game/software wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

 

So now you're claiming that an Atari 8-bit computer reads arrow keys + ctrl key at the DB9 connector?!?

As I said, you are inept at understanding clearly stated arguments and facts (which all of my replies to you are). The post #1 is in reference to the CTRL/ARROW keys. I listed them separately. If I say I have a disk simulator and you complain about not having a way to insert a physical disk, then you have the problem understanding. I never said arrow keys/ctrl key are read by A8 computer in a joystick simulator. Don't blame your own inabilities on others. That's like stating that the Calculus book is written badly because you can't figure out why they put those funny looking elongated "S" type symbols. You keep repeating the samething over and over again because you are living in self-denial of reality. You think just denying everything repeatedly is going to either help you win the debate (at the cost of the truth) or perhaps I'll let you go. According to your flawed style of arguing, if you didn't hear about F=ma and I gave you data for F=ma, you would be denying it.

 

The only thing you have clearly stated is -

 

"Digital Joysticks provide better control than Analog Joysticks. It's a scientific fact; let's see who can refute it."

The above is also quite clear. It wasn't an insult that you keep throwing at me but a fact.

 

Everything after that has been very vague statements that have been cut apart by everyone else on this forum (minus your relief pitcher, of course) and then followed by you attempting to explain yourself with progressively worse-stated rebuttals.

If everyone else on this forum has cut apart my "vague" statements, then why are you bothering replying to things written a week ago. You refuted your own statement. Also, if the statement is vague, you can't refute it since you need more information. You statement is an example of drivel (no insult here). My rebuttals are all clear, logical and similar and mostly repetitive since you can't understand them.

 

"As far as the A8 is concerned, it only sees the signals from the game controllers at the DB9 connector."

 

then there would be no question of what you meant. But I challenged your assertion that arrow keys + ctrl key "perfectly simulates" a digital joystick by pointing out that keyboard signals take a different path through the computer and are read at a different place. It was up to you to be specific about which signals are seen at the DB9 connector. You failed there (see, another fault) and in correcting yourself confirmed that game controller signals take a different path than keyboard key signals, thus showing that a joystick simulator is incapable of "perfectly simulating" a digital joystick. Well done.

 

I am speaking about a joystick simulator so obviously it counts as a game controller. So the signals the A8 sees at the DB9 connector are from an external source not from its own keyboard. You see faults because you don't understand. You can't find fault with things you don't understand. You are incapable of refuting things that you don't understand. Thus, my statement that were getting emotional was not unfounded.

 

(1) It's okay to mix-up paddles and analog joysticks because they are both POTs. Construction does not matter.

(2) It's not okay to mix-up arrow keys+ctrl key with a digital joystick since there's a lever there. Construction does matter.

P and NOT P. Inconsistent, incoherent, self-contradictory. QED.

 

No, if you simulated a physical joystick using a program it would then be a simulation of a physical joystick. If you built your own copy of a digital joystick so that you could read actual joystick signals coming out of it (instead of what a simulator program fakes) then it would be an actual physical joystick. If you attempted to simulate a physical joystick using arrow keys then you would fail due to the extra signal combinations that arrow keys can output that joysticks cannot. This is how English works.

Unfortunately for you, you are still wrong (completely). If you simulate a physical joystick, you end up with a real joystick. I already refuted your extra combinations theory since a superset of the signals can simulate the subset.

 

How can anyone know whether arrow keys/ctrl key were or weren't used in the data generated that was posted earlier when you refuse to present all the data and describe in detail the specifics of your supposed experiment? This thread is up to 16 pages now. Due to you delaying communicating your results as any real experimenter who claimed to have run a controlled experiment would be expected to do.

The above contradiction of P and NOT P stands and you just added another one to your list. If you are refuting that the joystick simulator cannot produce the same signals as a real joystick then you can't ask for data. Don't be duplicitous. It's one or the other. Stick to a position. I already described what the joystick simulator does and also were allowing you to use it. Once again, it can remap any input device to signals for the DB9 joystick port of A8 (also other machines but that's irrelevant here). You can take an analog joystick's input and map it to DB9 signals for digital joystick. You can take a digital joystick's input and map it to DB9 signals for digital joystick. You can take CTRL/ARROW/Spacebar keys and map them to DB9 signals for A8 joystick. Etc. Etc.

 

As for my logic that you attempted to sum up, you got that wrong, too (another fault, tsk tsk). It goes like this -

 

(1) It is ok to include paddles in a discussion that compares analog and digital joysticks because most analog joysticks are in essence two POTs combined to read movements in the X and Y axes and a paddle is a single POT reading movement in one axis even though paddles use a knob for control and analog joysticks use a stick for control. So they are not identical but similar enough for the purposes of discussing analog game control.

You are wrong. I never said I was discussing analog controllers in general with digital controllers in general. In the beginning of this thread, I wrote that construction make a big difference. If I wanted to get to say 100 states out of a steering wheel, the probability is much higher to get at the right state than it is with an analog joystick. That example of steering wheel/paddles is in the first post.

 

(2) It is ok to include arrow keys in a discussion that compares digital and analog joysticks because most digital joysticks are in essence four buttons (or switches) used to read 4 or 8 directions and arrow keys are in actuality four buttons even though it is possible to press arrow keys in combinations that digital joystick buttons cannot (unless broken or poorly made) and arrow keys on a keyboard are not read in the same way as joystick outputs. So they are not identical but similar enough for the purposes of discussing digital game control.

You were arguing against using arrow keys/ctrl keys above and more than a week ago. The lever and higher force helps with a stick so construction matters here as well. But the same signals as a digital joystick can be generated as both essentially would hit on the similar buttons-- may get harder to do in the long run or in situations requiring fast switching with diagonals.

 

(3) Since you included arrow keys in your comparison of digital and analog joysticks you must therefore also allow paddles in the same discussion. If you disallow paddles you must disallow arrow keys as well and restrict your poll and your false claim of scientific fact to only digital and analog joysticks.

 

I would not have mentioned paddles if you hadn't first included arrow keys. Too late now, though.

The arrow keys are separately listed in the poll. I am sticking to my position that construction makes a difference. I don't see any reason to list paddles as those comprise a small percentage of games and don't allow mapping of the main directions which the other 3 items do. If I play Hero, Pac-man, Mr. Robot, Miner 2049er, Donkey Kong, etc. I only have choice from those 3 in the poll. And so on for majority of the games. I put paddles in a specialized controller catagory like a flight throttle controller or foot pedal.

 

So, when are you going to address the joystick that totally disproves your theory? Analog and digital in the same physical device, no differences in game play that a gamer can perceive.

I already addressed it. If the hardware construction is changed, then it's operating as either one or the other. If it's software based emulation of the digital joystick, then it has same flaws as an analog joystick.

 

You refuse to address your lack of data and this fantastic joystick? Why did you even start this poll, then? It would have been simpler for you to post a poll where there's only one choice - digital joysticks. Thus gathering only the data that supports your theory vs. all data.

 

Nope, I played the hundreds of games with the 3 types of controllers listed in my poll so data applies to all three. And the logic presented in this thread also applies to all 3.

[atariksi]

First, someone who claims to have run a controlled experiment and collected data for that experiment is required to present the details of the experiment along with the data gathered.

I pictures I posted and explained is also DATA. I could have put it in hex. The REC files are also data. I can present more of the same but you haven't made up your mind whether you want to argue against the data genearted by the joystick simulator or want more of it. If latter, then you first need to understand the REC files and images given.

 

"You can't learn calculus if nobody will provide you the information that describes what calculus is and how it works." See? That compares much more favorably to you and how you want people to duplicate your experiment and come up with the same data when you refuse to give comprehensive details of your experiment and also refuse to release all the data.

 

No, my analogy is correct as stated: "You cannot learn calculus if you don't understand algebra." One is a prerequisite for the other.

[+5-11under]

(Excuse me, I had to make a side trip to JFK...)

Given the time you spent there, I hope you noticed that they rely on feedback for their controls and do not know the state of their controls AND their controls aren't the same as an analog joystick in construction.

ledzep, I'm surprised you made it home alive, with the pilot not knowing the exact state of their controls.

[atariksi]

(Excuse me, I had to make a side trip to JFK...)

Given the time you spent there, I hope you noticed that they rely on feedback for their controls and do not know the state of their controls AND their controls aren't the same as an analog joystick in construction.

ledzep, I'm surprised you made it home alive, with the pilot not knowing the exact state of their controls.

 

If they had let him be the pilot and allowed him to hook up an analog joystick for the controls, yeah I would be surprised too that he made it home alive.

 

And if it were a game and where you couldn't rely on feedback, then even those controls would be inferior to knowing the states of the controls.

[kool kitty89]

(Excuse me, I had to make a side trip to JFK...)

Given the time you spent there, I hope you noticed that they rely on feedback for their controls and do not know the state of their controls AND their controls aren't the same as an analog joystick in construction.

ledzep, I'm surprised you made it home alive, with the pilot not knowing the exact state of their controls.

Heh, simple digital controls would be worthless, that's why Analog controls are used specifically for such purposes when done electronically (decades ago they were all direct hydraulic based or even some still using direct push tube or cable controls -in WWII everything was push tube or cable based until the very late stages of the war -the late model P38s used hydraulic aileron boost- and to this day there are a few examples of combat aircraft using physical control for backup -the A-10 has double redundant hydraulic and direct manual push tube based control as a back-up if both of those fail). For modern FBW combat aircraft the control is sort of analog in the sense of variable, but the range of motion is virtually nonexistent (initially on the F-16 it was totally nonexistent but pilots complained about the total lack of feel) and use purely pressure sensitive controls as high G maneuvers don't allow easy use of long-throw movements. (so it's closer to the pressure sensitive buttons on the dual shock 2 -many people don't know it, but every single button and I think even the d-pad uses fully variable pressure sensitive control though few games used it and relied heavily on the analog sticks for most variable control needs -the PS3 added actual analog triggers of course)

 

Again, there's a reason the analog joysticks were invented decades before simple 8-way 4-switch joysticks and are still used exclusively in far more applications than simple digital controls. (the end interfacing is not all digital, but the internal workings are still analog -or in some cases using magnetic proximity to control variable position)

But for a long time it was fully analog with analog input and an analog transmission. (though for radio control you would usually have some level of digital circuitry in the form of vacuum tubes, but not so with direct wired control)

 

 

 

 

What do you mean stumble? Nintendo DSi mentioned above is all digital and has a ton of 3D games. I would take the digital joystick over keyboard type set-up, but still 100% accurate in both cases compared to analog joystick uncertainties.

Many 3D games suffer for the digital-only controls, to the point that they implement an analog control through the capacitive touchscreen, like StarFox Command, Mario64, Ridge Racer, etc.

 

Nintendo has acknowledged this shortcoming by including an analog joystick-nub with the the 3DS.

Yes, but unfortunately the touch screen is even worse for most purposes than a limited d-pad (and unfortunately Nintendo went down hill with D-pads on all handhelds after the original GBA). Star Fox command was ruined that way... I'd prefer an analog stick (or pressure sensitive d-pad even), but a plain 4-switch digital pad would be good enough (it was for Star Fox and Star Fox 2)... that touch screen ruined it though, way, way too awkward to use.

 

N64 ports and such may not control nearly as well as with a real analog stick, but at least most give the option of touch screen and/or d-pad use. And note the directional control wasn't the only problem with Star Fox Command, but more the fact that ALL control was touch screen based and all the buttons did was fire no matter which you pushed. (all they had to do was provide an alternate control mode)

If they have a star fox wii game I hope to god they don't force pointer/motion controls (pointer has its uses but doesn't belong in a flying game any more than a mouse does and tilt/motion controls are just wrong for that -no matter how much Sony pushed that gimmick with the PS3's launch games), I hope they include GC controller support if they do such a game... preferably wii+GC+CC for flexibility. (the vast majority of games should offer all controls IMO, especially the multiplatform ones that would match the GC or CC better) A shame the CC's D-pad isn't anywhere near as good as the N64's. (ironic given hoe little the N64's was used and how the CC was aimed at meshing with the 2D games abound in virtual console)

Edited November 19, 2010 by kool kitty89

[+Stephen]

Atariski, Atariski Jr (Divya) - you never responded at all to my Post 367 where it was said:

I guess it would have to be a highly customized / specialized controller. But we can take my Logitech steering wheel with pedal setup as an example. It has gas & brake pedals (both analog) with pretty realistic amount of travel. The steering wheel is 10" diameter and analog (exactly the same size as the custom wheel I installed in my last car). However, it has digital buttons on the steering wheel and digital paddles buttons for shifting up and down.

 

It is a very nice blend of digital and analog, and IMHO it is by far the most realistic way to play a driving game. By using the identical set of controls as found in a real car, it beats the heck out of just an analog joystick, or just a digital joystick. It beats XBox style controllers and keyboard+mouse control. However, it would be absolutely useless for attempting to play PacMan or Space Invaders! Might be good as a Breakout controller

 

Just like I wouldn't use a screwdriver to pound in a nail or a hammer to loosen a bolt, I wouldn't use an analog stick to play games where digital is better suited. Nor would I use a digital stick to play a game where some form of analog control is better suited. Use the right tool for the right job. There is absolutely nothing else that can be said. Everyone here is now just arguing to see who can get the most words in and thereby "win".

 

What's the problem with the controllers I mentioned and the analog vs digital and control due to said controllers?

[kool kitty89]

What do you mean stumble? Nintendo DSi mentioned above is all digital and has a ton of 3D games. I would take the digital joystick over keyboard type set-up, but still 100% accurate in both cases compared to analog joystick uncertainties.

Yes, and the DS is much weaker because of that... and the touch screen doesn't make up for it unfortunately though in some cases it's a decent alternative. (PSP has the nice analog nub of course)

They could have gone with pressure sensitive buttons or d-pad like the PS2 and still avoided the bulk of an analog stick. (but added to cost)

 

Many games are reasonably playable with simple 8-way control, but almost none in most/all 3D genres play nearly as well as with full variable control.

 

Well, we agree here 99% of cases for A8/5200, digital joystick would be preferable. If you have analog with short throw, you have harder time with the in-between states like are needed in a 5200 game like Star Wars, Missile Command, Super Breakout, etc.

No, that's wrong. As long as the analog stick is precise enough, length of throw matters not, only the player's own fine motor skills in managing the shorter throw it's fine or even preferable as you can make quicker movements. (or no throw at all in the case of pressure sensitive controls, but that's pushing it for some things but necessary in others -as with the FBW example in fighter jets)

That's the difference between gamepad/vectrex analog sticks and long throw flight type sticks. There are some cases of crap controllers with poor precision, but that's not even related to throw as it would be just as bad regardless.

Now for some games where paddles were intended, long throw feels more normal, or rather a lack of self centering more so, and in those cases it could be preferable to not use position tracking paddle type control but speed sensitive control more like the digital joystick versions of such games but with actual variable speed sensitivity (push further move faster), but for Star Wars a plain (high precision) stick like the vectrex or modern consoles is preferable due to the high speed response needed. (the game cube controller works quite well for that)

 

And for games like missile command (ie originally tracball based) they should NEVER, EVER be position tracking, they did it all wrong for the 5200... those should ALL be speed sensitive, again like the A8/VCS missile command (centipede, etc) but with variable directional speed rather than fixed. Those are the sort of games that a short throw self centering thumbstick is excellent for. (aside from flight sims and 3D/pseudo 3D games in general)

Even games like Doom or Wolf3D benefit, at very least for the horizontal axis. (playing with arrow keys or a d-pad is much more sluggish than a mouse or analog stick) And in spite my force of habit of using a keyboard+mouse, I know that using an analog stick for movement is superior. (ideally you'd want an analog stick and mouse... though that doesn't address the keyboard type commands some games take advantage of and mapped weapons -for games allowing a full armament)

 

 

Nintendo Dsi mentioned and many other handhelds. The games are fudged with the analogicity. There's no exact control requirements in modern games since the controllers can't handle it. Hook up a modern analog joystick and see how good you do in an Atari 8-bit game like Hero.

Analog works OK for such games as I've played in emulators, but it depends on the controller used and the game. Obviously games only reading 8 directions really won't ever benefit from variable control and only suffer from it. Many, maybe games benefit considerably from not being stuck with a piddly 8 states. (you might not need dual 256 state precision all the time, granted, but at very least you'd want something like 16 states per axis or 7-8 states per direction)

 

There's far, far too many applications that demand proper analog control, and if you can't see that you're either inexperienced in modern genres using such, or simply stubborn and narrow minded.

Even sidescrolling games can use it or need it at times... old mario games may simply use 1 added button to control speed, but platformers using analog control properly can make significant use of it. (super smash bros does and you really need it in some cases... I've got a couple cheap GC controllers that force very few states and make you run practically all the time, which can be very annoying)

But it's the 3D flying games, platformers, FPSs, action adventures, etc that really need precise control to navigate some areas. (you even have some cases of position tracking control more like star wars, though I generally don't like those cases -Star Fox Adventures forced that when aiming with the staff)

D-pads are superior to joysticks in a wide array of cases, but it also depends on the game and on the d-pad/digital thumbstick design vs joystick design. (sloppy control will be bad either way)

You also have cases where a long-throw analog flight stick is preferable to an analog thumbstick and vice versa, it depends on the case.

Not "wide array" but some cases. Still better than analog joystick.

Very few games on the NES, SMS, Genesis, or SNES would be preferable with a plain joystick... some with the arcade sticks for those consoles, but only a real precision switch based arcade stick would really offer the necessary control to be advantageous in some games (namely fighting games and some arcade games designed for such control), many benfit from gamepads not only due to the quick and simple action of the d-pad but from the use of the added buttons accessed more easily than a joystick practically can.

Plus the atari joysticks are rather funky and too small to properly use like arcade sticks while too large to really use as a thumbstick (albeit I often end up using it as the latter until my had gets sore -hence why I prefer one of my really loose/worn sticks, my uncle used it that way too when he first showed be his VCS some 10-11 years ago ), but the VCS controllers have the advantage not of the form factor so much as the build quality and use of metal dome switches rather than carbon+rubber (the original CX-10 even uses spring centering), and hence why the same form factor fails compared to d-pads when using the newer construction method (ie in the Flashback II) while gamepads vary a lot in d-pad quality and wear resistance on their own and a few even use actual microswitches or metal dome switches and address the "sloppy" control issues of others. (though rubber dome switch construction itself can be quite good in some cases while poor in others and also depend on how the d-pad pivots and such -many prefer the Sega gamepads for fighting games, especially the Japanese Saturn controller and the Genesis 6-button controller)

[kool kitty89]

I think the topic drifted a bit. I was talking about gameports being noisy, varying in implemenation, etc. to koolkitty (if you look back). It doesn't matter if joystick calibrates or not as there's no mechanism to calibrate the gameport internals.

Yes, but if the noise is taken into account (compensated for or filtered -even in software routines) that shouldn't matter, it would lower the precision a bit and add to overhead (if software managed), but address the problem.

 

Aside from noise though, the inconsistent analog interfacing on a per computer/gameport as well as per controller basis (and even a day by day change/drift basis) is totally addressed by calibration: each game in DOS would require you to calibrate the controller by centering it, moving it through the maximum ranges, and centering it again. That calibration would thus allow a properly coded game to cater to the available range of the joystick and gameport interface currently in use unless somethign changed radically while playing the game itself.

Many older joysticks also had centering calibration knobs/wheels to adjust the range as well, but that sort of calibration is a separate issue though is one possible way to address any sort of serious in-game problem, though would more likely be a problem itself if yo bumped the know or it got loose. (happened to me on many occasions -and my old quickshot stick got a bit weird with that at times and would shift the centering wheel if I jerked it too rapidly -probably dust build up putting too much friction on it)

[atariksi]

(Excuse me, I had to make a side trip to JFK...)

Given the time you spent there, I hope you noticed that they rely on feedback for their controls and do not know the state of their controls AND their controls aren't the same as an analog joystick in construction.

ledzep, I'm surprised you made it home alive, with the pilot not knowing the exact state of their controls.

Heh, simple digital controls would be worthless, that's why Analog controls are used specifically for such purposes when done electronically (decades ago they were all direct hydraulic based or even some still using direct push tube or cable controls -in WWII everything was push tube or cable based until the very late stages of the war -the late model P38s used hydraulic aileron boost- and to this day there are a few examples of combat aircraft using physical control for backup -the A-10 has double redundant hydraulic and direct manual push tube based control as a back-up if both of those fail). For modern FBW combat aircraft the control is sort of analog in the sense of variable, but the range of motion is virtually nonexistent (initially on the F-16 it was totally nonexistent but pilots complained about the total lack of feel) and use purely pressure sensitive controls as high G maneuvers don't allow easy use of long-throw movements. (so it's closer to the pressure sensitive buttons on the dual shock 2 -many people don't know it, but every single button and I think even the d-pad uses fully variable pressure sensitive control though few games used it and relied heavily on the analog sticks for most variable control needs -the PS3 added actual analog triggers of course)

Correction: digital controls were never invented for such purposes NOT that they would be worthless. Previous to the digital age, only choice was analog. And the analog controls used are not analog joysticks to get to the point. So neither currently existing analog joysticks nor digital joysticks serve the purpose.

 

Again, there's a reason the analog joysticks were invented decades before simple 8-way 4-switch joysticks and are still used exclusively in far more applications than simple digital controls. (the end interfacing is not all digital, but the internal workings are still analog -or in some cases using magnetic proximity to control variable position)

 

As far as computer interfaces go, EVEN the analog joystick was put in by IBM for use with PADDLES not analog joysticks. It got adapted for the analog joysticks. Also, the Atari's analog inputs are for PADDLES not analog joysticks -- again got distorted into joysticks on the 5200.

 

I think I'll rush to JFK airport again and continue later...[actually going elsewhere but everyone seems to have adopted that reason].

[+poobah]

Hook up a modern analog joystick and see how good you do in an Atari 8-bit game like Hero.

 

I was the season 5 champion in the 8-bit high score club.

 

Controller used for most games?

Logitech dual-action with (drum roll) ANALOG sticks.

[Divya16]

Hook up a modern analog joystick and see how good you do in an Atari 8-bit game like Hero.

 

I was the season 5 champion in the 8-bit high score club.

 

Controller used for most games?

Logitech dual-action with (drum roll) ANALOG sticks.

 

I just checked season 5 HSC games and you won 5 of them out of 25 and of those only two of them you are the record scorer-- pastfinder and Centipede. No Hero game (nor any others mentioned in this thread). I never heard of pastfinder but I bet you can do better at Centipede with a digital joystick. I think I should be able to top 104K although I can't mix your experience with certain games with my experience. There are some games you can get away with the flaws of the analog joystick because game is slow-paced or messing up a pixel or two here or there doesn't adversely affect gameplay.

[potatohead]

Refuted

[+Stephen]

Cool - since Atariski and his doppelganger don't want to refute my posts about steering wheels and joysticks, that makes me the winner by scientific fact.

[+poobah]

Hook up a modern analog joystick and see how good you do in an Atari 8-bit game like Hero.

 

I was the season 5 champion in the 8-bit high score club.

 

Controller used for most games?

Logitech dual-action with (drum roll) ANALOG sticks.

 

I just checked season 5 HSC games and you won 5 of them out of 25 and of those only two of them you are the record scorer-- pastfinder and Centipede. No Hero game (nor any others mentioned in this thread). I never heard of pastfinder but I bet you can do better at Centipede with a digital joystick. I think I should be able to top 104K although I can't mix your experience with certain games with my experience. There are some games you can get away with the flaws of the analog joystick because game is slow-paced or messing up a pixel or two here or there doesn't adversely affect gameplay.

 

Wow. just. wow.

 

If you dug just a tiny bit deeper, you'd see I didn't play the first 8 games, nor the last, so that's 6 (not 5) wins in 16 attempts

 

1st: 6 times

2nd: 7 times

3rd: 1 time

4th: 2 times

 

So being champion, and finishing 1st or 2nd in 13 of 16 games is not an indicative metric?

Surely, being so massively handicapped with a joystick where I have zero control should have prevented any wins.

 

(oh btw, this stuff here is called "data". it is used to evaluate an experiment and possibly draw conclusions)