Digital Joysticks provide better control than Analog Joysticks

[atariksi]

I'm only giving you another chance to state something factual. I can just put you on ignore (and may soon).

This thread should pretty much guarantee the entire forum will have you on ignore. At the very least, no one will ever take anything you say even remotely seriously. Congratulations for showing your true colors as human being.

I've had him on ignore for about a year now. I only look at what he posts if something's particularly lulzy, or if I find out he responded to something I said through someone else.

Keep poking long enough, and one's true colors will come out. Everything he accuses others of doing, he does in abundance. This wonderful karma he believes in will no doubt come back to bite him squarely in the ass.

 

One good reason to stop with the name-calling for you-- karma.

[+Stephen]

Hey Mr. MyShitDoesn'tStink

[+Stephen]

One good reason to stop with the name-calling for you-- karma.

We stop but you don't have to? Who exactly do you think you are?

[+Stephen]

 

Speak for yourself. He is not understanding a word of what I wrote and keeps doing his personal attack spewing out venom like an envious snake-- what do you expect me to do with him.

Do you not see the irony in how you act? In the tiniest of ways perhaps? You spew more venom than the rest of us, but go ballistic when someone else does it.

 

Put your money where your mouth is. Prove it. I just proved the opposite just a few posts ago. And you are also doing personal attacks and have been for quite some time. It's not just Apolloboy and Mirage.

DUMB IDIOT, envious snake. Only thing that has been said about you is truth. You are a delusional arrogant fool. Go put your dress on and come back in ten minutes as divya.

[atariksi]

One good reason to stop with the name-calling for you-- karma.

We stop but you don't have to? Who exactly do you think you are?

 

Don't speak for others. You may have stopped but you can't control what others will do.

 

Who am I exactly-- Atariksi.

[atariksi]

 

Speak for yourself. He is not understanding a word of what I wrote and keeps doing his personal attack spewing out venom like an envious snake-- what do you expect me to do with him.

Do you not see the irony in how you act? In the tiniest of ways perhaps? You spew more venom than the rest of us, but go ballistic when someone else does it.

 

Put your money where your mouth is. Prove it. I just proved the opposite just a few posts ago. And you are also doing personal attacks and have been for quite some time. It's not just Apolloboy and Mirage.

DUMB IDIOT, envious snake. Only thing that has been said about you is truth. You are a delusional arrogant fool. Go put your dress on and come back in ten minutes as divya.

 

I guess you haven't stopped. So you can't even speak for yourself.

[+Stephen]

One good reason to stop with the name-calling for you-- karma.

We stop but you don't have to? Who exactly do you think you are?

 

Don't speak for others. You may have stopped but you can't control what others will do.

 

Who am I exactly-- Atariksi.

Well now we have that nice intro out of the way, care to explain why you carry yourself the way you do? Why you never admit to fault? Why you feel your opinions carry more weight than anyone else's here?

[sloopy]

 

*SNIP*

 

Who am I exactly-- Atariksi.

 

Hello atariksi, i am sloopy... umm... it was interesting to meet you...

 

 

sloopy.

 

also i am trying to be a rep ho, so please click the + down there ->

thanks.

Edited December 31, 2010 by sloopy

[potatohead]

*BAM!!* *POW!!!* **ZOLNGK!!**

 

(cue cool "Batman series graphics and music)

 

Atariksi, your initial post IS refuted. You didn't qualify "BETTER", and because of that your whole argument is still born. Everybody knows this. You might sucker a few newbies to the discussion, maybe even a chump or two into believing your bull shit, but the "smart enough" crowd totally knows better and is just rubbing your face in it, BECAUSE YOU ASKED THEM TO.

 

Do you want to reconsider that? You got the shit you did, BECAUSE YOU ASKED FOR IT, so don't go bitching about how it gets ugly when you dig your (maybe high) heels in such denial. Not our problem. Yours, to be perfectly clear about it.

 

Re: KARMA.

 

Ok, so let's talk some karma. I don't share the same faith you do, however I do know, if you practice it and are devout, then you must accept that there are many paths to God, and that no one path is THE path, only that there is a path, and we all walk it as we will.

 

Given that, here is how it works for the potatohead.

 

I'm all about what goes around, comes around. That's kind of cyclic, so I think we've got some common ground there. Not much, but enough to have this karma discussion.

 

Most of my life, I've thought about two buckets. There is the good karma bucket, and the bad karma bucket, and what happens to us, more importantly, the CONSIDERATION we are given in life, comes down to how we fill those buckets!

 

Frankly, it works even when there is no faith at all. Ask your average athiest about the importance of deportment, conduct, protocol, and other "good citizen", good will kinds of things, and they will tell you the humble people, who have a genuine interest in adding value to experiences, are the ones that will get the help, because most other people appreciate that, and will go to the mat for somebody selfless enough to actually live their lives that way.

 

Back to the buckets then. I like to keep the good karma bucket fairly full. That means, more often than not, taking the time to see it from where others stand, granting people consideration, BECAUSE THE WORLD IS A BETTER PLACE FOR THAT SIMPLE ACTION, and generally taking the higher road when possible, because one never knows how life twists and turns, who we might be working for, what we might need, and so on.

 

Better safe than sorry.

 

A coupla "Church of the spud" truisms:

 

(A truism is a common sense thing, while not scientifically provable, has a strong resonance with ordinary experience, and is not so easily dismissed by casual argument)

 

If you want to live in a polite, considerate world, it all starts with who you see in the mirror each day.

 

Consideration due, is consideration given. There are no real entitlements in this world, beyond the very basic freedoms we are allowed under whatever government we happen to live under. Beyond that, we exist at the pleasure of others, and that brings me to...

 

We are all equal under the law, and as peers. Some of us might have money, some of us might be beautiful, but all in all, we are just people, and the nature of people has not changed in any material way since we've been able to record our history.

 

As people, we operate in some very basic ways, and self-serving people are generally seen, in any culture, as just shitty people, and know what?

 

Nobody likes shitty people Atariksi. Nobody.

 

You are being really fucking shitty right now, and for that you expect consideration??

 

Now you understand the karma bucket idea. I don't think your good karma bucket is all that full. Your self-serving bad karma bucket is packing quite a load!!! In short, your balance is poor, and...

 

We grant deference to those people we see are worth it, not that it is expected. Respect is something earned by mutual admiration of one's peers, not something bought, sold, or entitled by formal contract or covenant.

 

You are getting the shitty treatment, because you've been shitty. End of story!

 

Handing out some free Atari computer cables, once in a while, doesn't make up for the stench you are otherwise credited for.

 

Karma. What a bitch, huh?

[potatohead]

I've experienced some of this same thing. IMHO, it has a lot to do with engaging more of the mechanical structure of the hand. With sticks, one can tap it, and combine digits to get things happening in sequences. With the little pads, some combinations of things are difficult. There isn't as much "throughput" possible on the pad, at least that's been my experience.

 

Everybody likes them though. I still remember the very first time I picked up the NES pad. Felt lost, hated it. End up gaming on the things huge...

 

Some of that has got to be impressions and how well the game dynamics match up to the controller mechanical attributes.

 

I'm confused over the comparisons because there was no qualifier. All games, some games, old games, new games, analog non-center, auto centering, short throw, pot based, grey code encoder, what??

 

(I threw the last one in because kool_kitty highlighted it as a contradictory case early on, as it's digital, yet has enough states to be analog like)

 

With a qualifier, the discussion can be resolved to the various attributes and preferences in a productive way. As it is right now... broken.

 

 

 

 

 

The big confusion in this thread is what are we really comparing?

 

If someone says that a traditional more compliant long-throw analog stick is harder to control action games with than a less compliant short-throw digital stick, then I'd agree. Give me the simple digital stick unless the game calls for analog control.

 

But, to say that analog sticks serve no useful purpose because we have digital sticks is silly. They're different controllers. Digital sticks are lousy at some things and sometimes the best controller is an analog stick, paddle, trackball, mouse, keyboard, etc...

 

Also, there are all kinds of devices which could be classified as "analog sticks" and not all of them have 3 inches of loosely spring throw in all directions.

 

Anyway, you know what is a better debate to me is sticks vs. pads. I can never maneuver as well with a joypad as a stick, but the pad has certainly won the day.

[+poobah]

 

 

Interesting approach... change the statement from people in atariksi's experiment to people with experience with joysticks.

 

Not gonna fly.

 

# of people in atariksi's experiment: 1

# of people who have set foot on the moon: 12

 

12 > 1

 

repeat after me... REFUTED

 

There's no evidence of any person going on the moon. Experience of some people is the only evidence you have to go by as there's no experiment any person can perform. # of people who have set foot on the moon: unknown. # of people performing my experiment-- 4 that I already witnessed. All those companies that chose digital over analog. As I said, your #12 is just you speculation.

 

Well, I'm torn. Clearly this is the "move the discussion off topic" atariksi defense mechanism, but the moon landing denial is Soooooooooo hard to resist.....

 

Suffice to say the we bounce lasers off the reflectors left behind all the time, and can image the landing sites.

[+poobah]

 

So atariski actually believes we didn't go to the moon? He's way more delusional than I thought.

 

 

You mean your wackometer wasn't already pegged on full-tilt?

 

LEARN TO READ dumb idiot. The original argument is that there's more evidence that people haven't been to the moon than there is that analog joysticks are superior in control. You completely screwed up. Go back and read more slowly.

 

Er, no... it was more people have been to the moon than were in YOUR experiment

[svenski]

 

 

Interesting approach... change the statement from people in atariksi's experiment to people with experience with joysticks.

 

Not gonna fly.

 

# of people in atariksi's experiment: 1

# of people who have set foot on the moon: 12

 

12 > 1

 

repeat after me... REFUTED

 

There's no evidence of any person going on the moon. Experience of some people is the only evidence you have to go by as there's no experiment any person can perform. # of people who have set foot on the moon: unknown. # of people performing my experiment-- 4 that I already witnessed. All those companies that chose digital over analog. As I said, your #12 is just you speculation.

 

Well, I'm torn. Clearly this is the "move the discussion off topic" atariksi defense mechanism, but the moon landing denial is Soooooooooo hard to resist.....

 

Suffice to say the we bounce lasers off the reflectors left behind all the time, and can image the landing sites.

 

 

I use my Atari 800 with Atari Planetarium and a Laser pen from China to look for little green men. I have had no luck so far, although I did see a blue police telephone box zooming about

[+poobah]

For the analog joystick, the person is thinking in discrete terms but can't express it with that joystick in exact terms. But for the digital joystick, he can. Just like you can get to an exact bit of data on an audio CD but not to that exact spot in an analog recording like a tape.

You can get to any exact spot (easier too since the grooves are bigger) on an analog vinyl album.

Bigger than what? CD's don't have grooves...

well, actually, they do! (well, one long spiral)

[+Stephen]

For the analog joystick, the person is thinking in discrete terms but can't express it with that joystick in exact terms. But for the digital joystick, he can. Just like you can get to an exact bit of data on an audio CD but not to that exact spot in an analog recording like a tape.

You can get to any exact spot (easier too since the grooves are bigger) on an analog vinyl album.

Bigger than what? CD's don't have grooves...

well, actually, they do! (well, one long spiral)

Definitely not expecting a reply from denyksi on this one. He was 100% wrong, and since he can never admit to faults, this will be completely ignored.

[Cebus Capucinis]

So what you're saying is that in a CD, it is possible that a DIGITAL medium can have ANALOG control?

 

Or did I mess up in understanding since I'm such a dumb idiot?

[RevEng]

Who wants to take bets on which persona is going to show up next? I'm thinking the dress, though it would be nice if we got a third one for the new year!

[+Stephen]

Who wants to take bets on which persona is going to show up next? I'm thinking the dress, though it would be nice if we got a third one for the new year!

Well, given the fact that he is such a genius professor, I am sure hundreds of his "students" could potentially show up. Logic, you know

[+5-11under]

For the analog joystick, the person is thinking in discrete terms but can't express it with that joystick in exact terms. But for the digital joystick, he can. Just like you can get to an exact bit of data on an audio CD but not to that exact spot in an analog recording like a tape.

You can get to any exact spot (easier too since the grooves are bigger) on an analog vinyl album.

Bigger than what? CD's don't have grooves...

well, actually, they do! (well, one long spiral)

That reminds me... how many grooves does the average vinyl record have (20 minutes per side)?

[Bryan]

Bigger than what? CD's don't have grooves...

well, actually, they do! (well, one long spiral)

Not a groove, though. The surface is smooth polycarbonate plastic. The signal is encoded as a chain of pits in a thin, reflective aluminum layer. It's still read in a spiral fashion, but I don't think it qualifies as a groove.

[Bryan]

That reminds me... how many grooves does the average vinyl record have (20 minutes per side)?

The correct answer is 1 (although there are a few exceptions, mostly test and novelty records).

EDIT: 1 per side that is... my bad

 

How many revolutions does the groove have? Well, if it's a 20 minute side at 33.333333 rpm, then we have a spiral of 667 turns. The average record has an outer recorded radius of 5.75" and an inner recorded radius of about 2.625" So the average circumference of 1 turn is 26.34" ((36.19" + 16.49") / 2) so... the distance the stylus will travel per side is about 17569 inches or 1464 feet.

Edited December 31, 2010 by Bryan

[RevEng]

That reminds me... how many grooves does the average vinyl record have (20 minutes per side)?

The correct answer is 1 (although there are a few exceptions, mostly test and novelty records).

 

How many revolutions does the groove have? Well, if it's a 20 minute side at 33.333333 rpm, then we have a spiral of 667 turns. The average record has an outer recorded radius of 5.75" and an inner recorded radius of about 2.625" So the average circumference of 1 turn is 26.34" ((36.19" + 16.49") / 2) so... the distance the stylus will travel per side is about 17569 inches or 1464 feet.

Wouldn't it be 2 groves, one per side?

[+Stephen]

Bigger than what? CD's don't have grooves...

well, actually, they do! (well, one long spiral)

Not a groove, though. The surface is smooth polycarbonate plastic. The signal is encoded as a chain of pits in a thin, reflective aluminum layer. It's still read in a spiral fashion, but I don't think it qualifies as a groove.

In typical atariksi fashion, and in the spirit of the thread, I will change the argument. Old style original laser discs had a groove so the mechanism could track the disc.

[Bryan]

Wouldn't it be 2 groves, one per side?

No, and I will spend the next 50 pages attempting to refute you.

 

(actually, good catch!)

[Mirage]

Wouldn't it be 2 groves, one per side?

No, and I will spend the next 50 pages attempting to refute you.

 

(actually, good catch!)

 

Actually, there are no groves at all. You're both dumb idiots who can't read, and it's totally okay to say that since it's true. If you disagree, you mess up in understanding.