[QUOTE=itisjuly;39068621]Why is this kb/mouse vs touch? It's like kb/m vs gamepad. This is really stupid. They're different input methods for different purposes. You can't compare them, there is no better or worse one.[/QUOTE]
To be fair, the gamepad is far from safe from this argument. It's by far one of the worst things to grace PC input (At least if you're looking for precision and speed -- IE For use in an FPS game). It's only savior is that it's easier to wield from a distance/on a couch than a wireless mouse and keyboard (Which means it actually has some merit on the desktop unlike touch screens).
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;39069862]To be fair, the gamepad is far from safe from this argument. It's by far one of the worst things to grace PC input (At least if you're looking for precision and speed -- IE For use in an FPS game). It's only savior is that it's easier to wield from a distance/on a couch than a wireless mouse and keyboard (Which means it actually has some merit on the desktop unlike touch screens).[/QUOTE]
I heartily disagree. Yes, RTS, FPS, Turn Based games, most TPSs, RPGs and whatnot are simply put made for the mouse+keyboard. But you can't seriously convince me that racing games, sports games, fighter game or even some action games (Assassin's Creed, Batman, etc.) aren't better with a controller.
[QUOTE=Stopper;39069989]I heartily disagree. Yes, RTS, FPS, Turn Based games, most TPSs, RPGs and whatnot are simply put made for the mouse+keyboard. But you can't seriously convince me that racing games, sports games, fighter game or even some action games (Assassin's Creed, Batman, etc.) aren't better with a controller.[/QUOTE]
I can't see myself playing batman or assassin's creed with a controller, no.
As for racing games; no, controllers are fucking terrible for them, as are keyboards. I'd only play them with a steering wheel of some kind.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39069600]
Now, have a nice day.[/QUOTE]
When will your arguments stop flopping around between
"Touchscreens are the best"
"Touchscreens are pretty good"
"Touchscreens aren't worse than mice"
"Touchscreens are better when complimenting another input device"
"Touchscreens are better because they're more interactive/fun/whatever"
"Touchscreens are an acquired taste"
and please... What the fuck is this?
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39069600]
And now I think I know why you're still arguing with me, even though I'm sure anyone with a brain would say I'm right.
[/QUOTE]
Nobody says this unless they want to sound like an asshole.
While I definitely agree about any at all FPS games in existence, and any strategy game... I must say that Super Meat Boy is just fucking painful to play with a keyboard, as is any fighting game. I like Just Cause 2 with the controller as well, but I think I prefer mouse and keyboard for the GTA series. I think I also prefer keyboard for racing games, but that might depend on what game I'm playing too.
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;39070004]I can't see myself playing batman or assassin's creed with a controller, no.
As for racing games; no, controllers are fucking terrible for them, as are keyboards. I'd only play them with a steering wheel of some kind.[/QUOTE]
It's a matter of preference, but saying that it's "by far one of the worst things to grace PC input" is just stupid and nothing else.
[QUOTE=Simski;39070038]While I definitely agree about any at all FPS games in existence, and any strategy game... I must say that Super Meat Boy is just fucking painful to play with a keyboard, as is any fighting game. I like Just Cause 2 with the controller as well, but I think I prefer mouse and keyboard for the GTA series. I think I also prefer keyboard for racing games, but that might depend on what game I'm playing too.[/QUOTE]
I don't know; I didn't have a problem with any of those games. I played through SMB and never really found myself fighting the controls, but admittedly I've never tried that game with a gamepad either. Usually SMB warrants doing speedruns and NOT slowing down, so the digital nature of a keyboard button press isn't a huge problem. Fighting games are definitely a lot comfier on a controller though, I'll give you that. They could be adapted for keyboard controls; but nobody does it.
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;39070058]I don't know; I didn't have a problem with any of those games. I played through SMB and never really found myself fighting the controls, but admittedly I've never tried that game with a gamepad either.[/QUOTE]
It's playable, but the layout and the speed and precision you have to press the buttons are simply not as comfortable and easy as with a gamepad. I tried that game a long time with the keyboard, and then I tried the gamepad... things quickly became much easier and hurt my hands a lot less.
i'm behind like six or seven pages but whatever
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39058550]Ehhhhhh.......[/QUOTE]
Facepunch's reason for a lack of mass adoption is more along the lines of "i think metro is ugly". There are other reasons of course ("I already have Win7 and don't see the point in upgrading", "I'm poor", "if it ain't broke"), but that's the main one.
[QUOTE=lavacano;39070100]i'm behind like six or seven pages but whatever
Facepunch's reason for a lack of mass adoption is more along the lines of "i think metro is ugly". There are other reasons of course ("I already have Win7 and don't see the point in upgrading", "I'm poor", "if it ain't broke"), but that's the main one.[/QUOTE]
I don't get the appeal of these Flat UIs. I can never find anything because it makes everything look the same
[QUOTE=Stopper;39070037]When will your arguments stop flopping around between
"Touchscreens are the best"
"Touchscreens are pretty good"
"Touchscreens aren't worse than mice"
"Touchscreens are better when complimenting another input device"
"Touchscreens are better because they're more interactive/fun/whatever"
"Touchscreens are an acquired taste"
and please... What the fuck is this?
Nobody says this unless they want to sound like an asshole.[/QUOTE]
Would you please read the quotes once more? I've never implied that touchscreens are superior to mice. If you think I ever did, I'm sorry, you've deceived yourself.
Ever wondered why I'm praising hybrids? Saying "Why can't we have all?"? You see, there's this post at the top:
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39067072]There's a difference between "I need" and "It's pretty nice, I'd like one". I don't [I]need[/I] a mouse, but it's damn nice addition. I don't [I]need[/I] anything faster than a Pentium II, but it's a damn nice addition. I could go on.[/QUOTE]
A mouse is essential to me, and I wouldn't live without it if I could help it, but that doesn't mean a touchscreen is useless, it isn't - it's not essential by any stretch, but it's nice to have. I don't expect that much of you, but if you read last page, you'd know my stand on this:
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39066448]Well, the difference is that I never argued that the mouse is useless in any way - I'm arguing that without the right advancements in GUIs it would be. On the other hand you're arguing that touchscreens are totally useless, no matter how much time we give them. That's where we differ, I'd never say that the mouse isn't one of - or the - most important developement in user input since ever. Stop acting like I'm at the total opposite of the spectrum just to make me seem silly, because it's not true at all.
[/QUOTE]
Now when will your arguments stop flopping around between
"Misreading my posts"
"Putting words in my mouth"
"Saying I'm dodging questions"
Zephyr actually did a decent take on it with his first large post, but he still misunderstood everything I ever posted.
[B][I]Actually, try finding just one post in this thread where I'm claiming that touchscreens are better in every way possible.[/I][/B] This is in bold to make sure you read it, you're quite good a missing stuff completely. Actually I'll get you a sub-10$ game on Steam if you can find it anywhere that isn't just semantics.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;39070124]I don't get the appeal of these Flat UIs. I can never find anything because it makes everything look the same[/QUOTE]
"Flat" UIs shouldn't be what you are blaming, poor UI design is what you should be blaming. The modern, flat design for UIs is a lot nicer on the eyes than the Fisher-Price My First Computer we call XP, and is a hell of a lot cleaner than say, Vista and its reliance on gloss. But when it comes to actually using the UI, if you are getting confused or having a hard time finding things, there are two answers;
1) The UI design itself is horrendous
2) You need to get your eyes tested
The only time Metro becomes a problem from being "flat" is that the generic tiles aren't very nice, they are all the same colour and all feature a tiny icon. They just suck. The actual tiles for Metro friendly apps, and Metro apps themselves on the other hand, all feature colours, large noticeable icons, and are a good size. Buttons inside these apps are also, large, easy to read and placed in sensible places for the most part (some of the default apps are fucking awful, the "People" app sucks ass in terms of usability).
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39070159]
[B][I]Actually, try finding just one post in this thread where I'm claiming that touchscreens are better in every way possible.[/I][/B] This is in bold to make sure you read it, you're quite good a missing stuff completely. Actually I'll get you a sub-10$ game on Steam if you can find it anywhere that isn't just semantics.[/QUOTE]
I gave up at page 10.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39066805]You've been asking this question forever and I even stated it in my post. I really can't do much more to help you with it, just go try it out and tell me it's not natural. How about games like Angry Birds? You may say that it's a typical touch screen and that's why it doesn't work well on the desktop/laptop, but in reality games like it have existed on the desktop for years, they're just not nearly as enjoyable. And before you belittle this, you said you wanted an example, and if zooming and scrolling don't do it for you, this is a bit more palpable.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39066392]I don't personally own a touchscreen thank you. I've used it loads down in the microsoft showroom, though. And what are you trying to prove? My point? That a touchscreen is better for some kinds of navigation? Because you'd be right.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39066196]Stop talking about desktops all the time - most machines running Windows 8 will be laptops, not desktops. What would you rather use, a touchpad or a touchscreen? It's like you subjectively pick out part of my argument, when I've already stated that I'm not talking about desktops, and don't really see the point of a touchscreen on one of those. I may not be able to use my brain, but you're apparently incapable of reading.
And I updated my other post 1/4 life after you edited yours. Try reading it.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39066127]What has most screen estate: the metro version of IE10 or the desktop version? Yep, that's right, the desktop version. How about scrolling? Zooming? Isn't that infinitely more natural on a touchscreen?
I'm not dodging the question, I'm assuming you're capable of using your brain. Have you seriously never used a touchscreen? Because it sure seems like it.
Since you updated your post, I'll just elaborate a bit more. Was the mouse useful in itself? No, not really - without the right software it was damn near useless. Without the right software a touchscreen is useless as well, but if the software matches, it's a natural extension, just like the mouse is now.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=lavacano;39070100]
Facepunch's reason for a lack of mass adoption is more along the lines of "i think metro is ugly". There are other reasons of course ("I already have Win7 and don't see the point in upgrading", "I'm poor", "if it ain't broke"), but that's the main one.[/QUOTE]
I was referring to the smarter than this part.
I had the same problem both the changes to Youtube and Gmail. They both almost looked like somebody just typed the whole thing out in notepad.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;39070339]I had the same problem both the changes to Youtube and Gmail. They both almost looked like somebody just typed the whole thing out in notepad.[/QUOTE]
You have no idea what you are talking about. It's quite possible to create something that looks like Facepunch in notepad. What's your argument here? That Google used a tool you don't like to write their websites?
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39070159]Zephyr actually did a decent take on it with his first large post, but he still misunderstood everything I ever posted.
[B][I]Actually, try finding just one post in this thread where I'm claiming that touchscreens are better in every way possible.[/I][/B] This is in bold to make sure you read it, you're quite good a missing stuff completely. Actually I'll get you a sub-10$ game on Steam if you can find it anywhere that isn't just semantics.[/QUOTE]
I'm asking how is a touchscreen better. Because I fail to see why you should have it [b]at all[/b] when you have a keyboard and mouse.
If you can explain why it is better, then you have a case for including it in your hybrid. By wanting a hybrid, you are implicitly saying that it does something as well as or better than a keyboard and mouse setup alone. Otherwise it serves no use.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;39070384]You have no idea what you are talking about. It's quite possible to create something that looks like Facepunch in notepad. What's your argument here? That Google used a tool you don't like to write their websites?[/QUOTE]
I meant that ithey pretty much just looked like a wall of text because everything was the same format and color, and there was barely any borders or boxes separating things.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;39070384]You have no idea what you are talking about. It's quite possible to create something that looks like Facepunch in notepad. What's your argument here? That Google used a tool you don't like to write their websites?[/QUOTE]
Relax - he meant that the new minimalist designs look like Notepad text, not that the code was written in notepad.
[QUOTE=Stopper;39070277]I gave up at page 10.[/QUOTE]
And you still didn't succeed.
He said [b][i]in [u]every way possible[/u][/i][/b]. You only gave examples of "certain ways", which is NOT "every way possible".
[editline]2nd January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39070419]I'm asking how is a touchscreen better. Because I fail to see why you should have it [b]at all[/b] when you have a keyboard and mouse.
If you can explain why it is better, then you have a case for including it in your hybrid. By wanting a hybrid, you are implicitly saying that it does something as well as or better than a keyboard and mouse setup alone. Otherwise it serves no use.[/QUOTE]
Why does something have to be better in order to have it?
Stop asking "why" and start asking "why not".
[QUOTE=Stopper;39070277]I gave up at page 10.[/QUOTE]
3 of those posts are about touch pads (and really, most of those suck), and none of those imply that it's better in every way possible.I stand by those points, and I think most people would agree on zooming, panning and scrolling, but I won't force it on you guys. I said "in some ways", "I don't see the point of a touchscreen on a desktop" and I even went ahead and mentioned the mouse as "a natural extension". I stand by those points. Sorry, but I never said anything about the mouse being worse than a touchscreen by any stretch. I chose to point out some situations in which I find the touchscreen superior, but that's what I've been doing all along, and as such you're in no position to accuse me of flip-flopping.
Actually I find it funny that you you argued about 20" screens while quoting the post where I'm saying [I]explicitly[/I] that I'm not talking about desktops. If that doesn't show that you guys are just trying to frame me as a "touchscreen extremist" to further your argument, I don't know what's going on.
[QUOTE=lavacano;39070459]And you still didn't succeed.
He said [B][I]in [U]every way possible[/U][/I][/B]. You only gave examples of "certain ways", which is NOT "every way possible".[/QUOTE]
That's mainly because I never said he said that they were better... [I]In every way possible.[/I]
[QUOTE=Mingebox;39070449]I meant that ithey pretty much just looked like a wall of text because everything was the same format and color, and there was barely any borders or boxes separating things.[/QUOTE]
The lack of borders is kind of annoying, but the sites are still in fairly clearly defined sections, the use of pretty much one colour is also slightly annoying at times, but not massively detrimental to use of the website.
Is everyone here afraid of change or something? Until they try something they aren't going to know if it works. If you don't like it, let them know but don't be a howling retard about it.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39070474][B]3 of those posts are about touch pads[/B] (and really, most of those suck), and none of those imply that it's better in every way possible.I stand by those points, and I think most people would agree on zooming, panning and scrolling, but I won't force it on you guys. I said "in some ways", "I don't see the point of a touchscreen on a desktop" and I even went ahead and mentioned the mouse as "a natural extension". I stand by those points. Sorry, but I never said anything about the mouse being worse than a touchscreen by any stretch. I chose to point out some situations in which I find the touchscreen superior, but that's what I've been doing all along, and as such you're in no position to accuse me of flip-flopping.
Actually I find it funny that you you argued about 20" screens while quoting the post where I'm saying [I]explicitly[/I] that I'm not talking about desktops. If that doesn't show that you guys are just trying to frame me as a "touchscreen extremist" to further your argument, I don't know what's going on.[/QUOTE]
Which is mainly why I said that you're changing between how good a touchpad is to suit your argument and not that you never said one should compliment the other.
And - no they're not (on the bolded part)
[QUOTE=Stopper;39070458]Relax - he meant that the new minimalist designs look like Notepad text, not that the code was written in notepad.[/QUOTE]
Well, seeing as it doesn't look remotely like Notepad text, I took the point to the only other logical conclusion, that he thinks it looks like something a beginner would have written in Notepad.
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;39070419]I'm asking how is a touchscreen better. Because I fail to see why you should have it [b]at all[/b] when you have a keyboard and mouse.
If you can explain why it is better, then you have a case for including it in your hybrid. By wanting a hybrid, you are implicitly saying that it does something as well as or better than a keyboard and mouse setup alone. Otherwise it serves no use.[/QUOTE]
I already said that it's fun? That's my whole point - I find it nice. It's an opinion. I don't have to prove anything to you beyond saying "I like it, let me have it". But if you want a situation where I can "objectively" say that a hybrid is superior, try standing up while using your laptop. Go around using it for 30 minutes like that. Then tell if it wouldn't have been easier if you could just have flipped the screen and used it as a tablet.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;39069557]Hmm, this is true that there would be a delay. From my experience with various touch devices, I've never really felt off-put by it, sure it's made typing a bit worse, but that was going to happen after years of keyboards. A lot of this feedback is coming from where we have been conditioned to expect a response such as clicking of the keys, we just expect it now. I'm sure we'll find some ways around it in future generations of the technology, but right now I think the vibration thing is as close as we can get. Especially if we can reduce the delay.[/QUOTE]
I do not believe it comes from conditioning. People who have never used a mechanical keyboard before will generally absolutely love them once they find one with the right kind of switches for them. There's enough testimonies to write a series of novels, and they overwhelmingly say that typing errors are reduced, speeds go up, and experienced users get extra comfort because they don't bottom out on strokes.
Tactile response is an enormous part of input, and this is ignoring that a touchscreen doesn't have a texture to keep your fingers in place.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;39070522]I already said that it's fun? That's my whole point - I find it nice. It's an opinion. I don't have to prove anything to you beyond saying "I like it, let me have it". But if you want a situation where I can "objectively" say that a hybrid is superior, try standing up while using your laptop. Go around using it for 30 minutes like that. Then tell if it wouldn't have been easier if you could just have flipped the screen and used it as a tablet.[/QUOTE]
WHICH IS WHY THERE SHOULD BE CLEARLY DEFINED OPTIONS IN OPERATING SYSTEMS FOR PERSONAL COMPUTERS AND HYBRIDS/TABLETS. Which is the original fucking point.
The thing i dislike from Windows 8 is that the Start scrolls horizontaly. It may look like a trivial thing, but it isn't visually coherent with the usual desktop experience, especially when using it with a mouse.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;39070503]The lack of borders is kind of annoying, but the sites are still in fairly clearly defined sections, the use of pretty much one colour is also slightly annoying at times, but not massively detrimental to use of the website.
Is everyone here afraid of change or something? Until they try something they aren't going to know if it works. [B]If you don't like it, let them know but don't be a howling retard about it.[/B][/QUOTE]
You must have missed the giant outcry at Youtube's new layout and design. And the lack of reaction on Google's part.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
