Digital Joysticks provide better control than Analog Joysticks

[atariksi]

Which joystick do you prefer when playing games? See the picture which contains what you are choosing from (or similar ones). Arrow keys are not pictured because they are front of you as you read this. Only one digital joystick is in the picture. Now my argument:

 

Digital joysticks provide better control than Analog joysticks. They are easier from programming point of view since you only read on/off states for the directions and fire button(s). They are easier to use-- you don't have to worry about in-between states-- whether you have pressed sufficiently in a particular direction. Instant change in direction. I accept there are few games that can do better with the analogicity as in Paddle type games like Super Breakout or car racing where you need a steering wheel. I have played hundreds of games using both types of joysticks and always get better results with Digital joystick. Leaving out subjectivity like "I like the looks of the analog one", "I'm more used to the analog one", or "That one looks like my neighbor or reminds me of old times" please select in an objective manner according to your own experience with both. I will provide more arguments as needed and later.

 

I'm in a rush right now.

[+Stephen]

Depends entirely on the game. PacMan is definitely better with a digital stick, but a flight-simulator is much better with analog control.

[Divya16]

Depends entirely on the game. PacMan is definitely better with a digital stick, but a flight-simulator is much better with analog control.

 

I think there are flight type games that also work with digital joysticks. And going by title of the thread, digital joysticks provide better control even for the few analog based flight simulator games since you have no way of telling how far you pressed the joystick-- maybe approximately.

[RevEng]

Generally speaking, digital controls are less accurate when you have a games where you need to move at less than full speed at times.

 

While you don't have precise control over your speed, it's more precise (and pleasant) than tapping a digital joystick a bunch of times per second.

Edited October 22, 2010 by RevEng

[ledzep]

It's a ridiculous argument. Analog is better for analog and digital is better for digital. Who cares which one is better from a programming standpoint if you're arguing about control? As for flight sims or driving games, when's the last time you saw a plane or car that allowed you to steer with buttons that said Left, Right, Up or Down? Flight yokes and steering wheels have partial positions. Infinite partial positions. Just like analog sticks. So what if it's hard to figure out where exactly an analog stick is in a sim. It's called feedback and everyone who has ever learned to drive a car or fly a plane has figured that out. Agreed, analog sticks are infuriating when dealing with a game like Pac-Man. But then so are paddles. Nothing sucks worse than having to use a digital joystick or a trackball in joystick mode when playing a native trackball game. It's just the way it is. The Atari 5200 should definitely come out with a digital joystick at some point but then games that were trackball or analog joystick arcade games (Missile Command, Tail Gunner) suffer when converted to digital joysticks.

[atariksi]

It's a ridiculous argument. Analog is better for analog and digital is better for digital. Who cares which one is better from a programming standpoint if you're arguing about control?

No, my argument is not just programming perspective. It's also from user perspective (see first post). From logical point of view, user has more control if he/she KNOWS the state of the device he has in his hand (and the computer program also knows it as fast as possible once the state changes). You do not know the state of the analog joystick (except fire button(s) which are usually digital). A surgical glove that you put on, you have complete control over but if it had two fingers or was some baseball glove, you have less control. Without any experimentation, you can draw this conclusion. Most of the software in the world can do without analogicity. Some software basically forces it because they assume an analog joystick.

 

As for flight sims or driving games, when's the last time you saw a plane or car that allowed you to steer with buttons that said Left, Right, Up or Down? Flight yokes and steering wheels have partial positions. Infinite partial positions. Just like analog sticks. So what if it's hard to figure out where exactly an analog stick is in a sim. It's called feedback and everyone who has ever learned to drive a car or fly a plane has figured that out.

I never argued against Paddles. The choice you are making in the poll is between joysticks (and for the general case not for <1% case where a paddle would be better). Paddles are more accurate than analog joysticks (assuming jitter free). For analog joysticks (they don't really compare to real flight yokes), I used the tick counter on the PC (840 ns/tick) and calibrated several dozen analog joysticks. The range I get is 0..500 for some; 0..900 for some, 0..1200 for many; and some 0..2000. So you got the issue of calibration to worry about. Then you have some that reach their minimum/maximum without you having to take them to the extreme in the left/right/up/down direction. So lack of control right there before you even use the joystick.

 

Agreed, analog sticks are infuriating when dealing with a game like Pac-Man.

Nope. The general case is digital joysticks are better controls. You can't think of thousands of others like Donkey Kong, Miner 2049er, River Raid, Space Invaders, Galaxian, etc.

 

But then so are paddles. Nothing sucks worse than having to use a digital joystick or a trackball in joystick mode when playing a native trackball game. It's just the way it is. The Atari 5200 should definitely come out with a digital joystick at some point but then games that were trackball or analog joystick arcade games (Missile Command, Tail Gunner) suffer when converted to digital joysticks.

 

Well, leave out trackballs and paddles in this comparison. Trackballs are digital for most machines as they are just like mice. Even on Atari 5200, they are digital and then converted to analog because the joystick ports happen to only take analog input for directional control. They actually provide the better speed control (as someone mentioned earlier) than analog joysticks. So I think you mixed up too many things here. We are just comparing analog joysticks vs. digital joysticks. Paddles and trackballs are separate and also not your general case even if you include them. You can't say anything against digital joysticks in general by taking some specific example where paddles/trackballs work better.

 

P.S.: I get better Missile command scores using digital joystick than a trackball.

[ApolloBoy]

P.S.: I get better Missile command scores using digital joystick than a trackball.

...And some people get better scores using a Trak-Ball. I hate to say it, but your argument is a bit incoherent and doesn't make any sense.

[atariksi]

P.S.: I get better Missile command scores using digital joystick than a trackball.

...And some people get better scores using a Trak-Ball. I hate to say it, but your argument is a bit incoherent and doesn't make any sense.

 

You didn't address the argument.

[+wood_jl]

Digital is better for "Pac-man." Analog is better for "Jane's WWII Fighters." What's the argument about, again?

[Divya16]

Digital is better for "Pac-man." Analog is better for "Jane's WWII Fighters." What's the argument about, again?

 

I think that most titles fall into digital catagory and those that are analog could also have been done using digital joystick or Paddles/trackball which are all better than analog joysticks. It's one of the things I found repulsive about original PCs-- their analog joysticks. Atari 5200 analog joysticks were better though like the Wico ones. You may not give a dime about my 2 cents, but those flimsy non-rigid sticks add to the user's frustration of playing those games. I know some people who purposely account for the error in the analog joysticks by adjusting their timing and trying to get used to the game that way. Now what is Jane doing in WWII? Never heard of that one-- what makes it require an analog joystick?

[sloopy]

i prefer the right tool for the job... one size fits all doesnt work for all...

 

 

why am i even responding to this question? someone needs to get a hobby :'/

 

sloopy.

[ledzep]

No, my argument is not just programming perspective. It's also from user perspective (see first post). From logical point of view, user has more control if he/she KNOWS the state of the device he has in his hand (and the computer program also knows it as fast as possible once the state changes). You do not know the state of the analog joystick (except fire button(s) which are usually digital). A surgical glove that you put on, you have complete control over but if it had two fingers or was some baseball glove, you have less control. Without any experimentation, you can draw this conclusion. Most of the software in the world can do without analogicity. Some software basically forces it because they assume an analog joystick.

 

I know the state of the analog stick in my hand just fine when I play analog games. It's called feedback, you get used to it (at least I did). From a logical point of view this argument only matters if you are forced to choose only one controller to use for all games and your two final choices are analog or digital joysticks.

 

I never argued against Paddles. The choice you are making in the poll is between joysticks (and for the general case not for <1% case where a paddle would be better). Paddles are more accurate than analog joysticks (assuming jitter free). For analog joysticks (they don't really compare to real flight yokes), I used the tick counter on the PC (840 ns/tick) and calibrated several dozen analog joysticks. The range I get is 0..500 for some; 0..900 for some, 0..1200 for many; and some 0..2000. So you got the issue of calibration to worry about. Then you have some that reach their minimum/maximum without you having to take them to the extreme in the left/right/up/down direction. So lack of control right there before you even use the joystick.

 

You argued against analog controls (of which the analog joystick is one) by trying to convince the reader that in-between or half states are inferior. Paddles "suffer" from the same problem yet it's much easier to play Breakout or Pong with a paddle vs. a digital joystick or just two directional buttons. What do you think an analog stick is, anyway? Two POTs. A paddle is one POT. Or have you never seen an Atari 5200 joystick converted to a paddle controller? So, "logically", paddles can be included when forming a justification since they share the same supposed inferiority that analog joysticks suffer from, it is possible to be neither all left nor all right yet the user still manages to play the game.

 

And you didn't answer my question - where have you ever seen planes or cars that are steered with simple digital controls such as buttons for left, right, up or down? If digital controls are better then they're better, right? Should hold everywhere.

 

It doesn't matter how annoying it might be to program for analog sticks in terms of using them in actual games. That's like saying analog film is inferior because it's harder to produce a photographic print due to dark rooms, emulsions, etc. even if the final analog result is better than a comparable digital photo. The choice in the poll also wasn't discussing programming for analog and digital sticks, only using them, so why bring up that difficulty?

 

I have never worried about analog joystick calibration when firing up a 5200 game.

 

Nope. The general case is digital joysticks are better controls. You can't think of thousands of others like Donkey Kong, Miner 2049er, River Raid, Space Invaders, Galaxian, etc.

 

For you, maybe. Again, analog is better for analog, digital is better for digital. You don't win any points by suggesting only games that started out with digital controls. Have you ever played the arcade version of Tail Gunner? Digital joysticks stink for that. It also doesn't matter that there are more games designed for digital joysticks. Again, unless what you're really asking is if you can only have one controller to play every conceivable video game, which one do you choose? I'd choose an analog stick in that case since it could get me most of the way to native paddle and trackball games whereas a digital joystick won't even try.

 

Or is your poll assuming a maximum degree of laziness and unadaptability for video game players? Least amount of effort?

 

Well, leave out trackballs and paddles in this comparison. Trackballs are digital for most machines as they are just like mice. Even on Atari 5200, they are digital and then converted to analog because the joystick ports happen to only take analog input for directional control. They actually provide the better speed control (as someone mentioned earlier) than analog joysticks. So I think you mixed up too many things here. We are just comparing analog joysticks vs. digital joysticks. Paddles and trackballs are separate and also not your general case even if you include them. You can't say anything against digital joysticks in general by taking some specific example where paddles/trackballs work better.

 

P.S.: I get better Missile command scores using digital joystick than a trackball.

 

I'm not trying to include other analog controls in the poll but they are fair game in terms of trying to explain why someone would prefer or welcome an analog joystick over a digital one. As I said before, a paddle is the single axis version of an Atari 5200 style analog joystick. And I included trackballs in trying to explain the usefulness of analog controls because they, too, have a speed component to position in video games, same as paddles and analog joysticks (if coded for that). It might be harder, initially, to get used to a native analog joystick game (Tail Gunner) but once you do, the digital joystick version pales in comparison. The Star Wars arcade game also would blow chunks with a digital joystick instead of the flight yoke.

 

You also can't say anything against analog joysticks in general by taking some specific examples where digital joysticks work better. Logic is a bitch!

 

P.S.: I get better Centipede and Missile Command scores using a trackball than a digital joystick. In fact I almost snap the stick off because I'm expecting the digital joystick to respond to how fast I move in a direction (as if it were an analog joystick or trackball). I also score higher more easily playing the Atari 5200 analog joystick version of Star Raiders vs. the Atari 800 digital joystick version. And I have no problem playing Vectrex games with its analog stick, either, even for those games that are supposed to have digital joysticks.

 

It boils down to personal preference and experience. Me, personally, I prefer analog-controlled games. But then I prefer vector games, too, so who knows what that means.

[carmel_andrews]

atariksi, you missed of a couple o' joysticks there....namely the atari prolines/europad and the competition pro (the first atari compatible joystick to feature microswitches)

[+wood_jl]

Digital is better for "Pac-man." Analog is better for "Jane's WWII Fighters." What's the argument about, again?

 

I think that most titles fall into digital catagory and those that are analog could also have been done using digital joystick or Paddles/trackball which are all better than analog joysticks. It's one of the things I found repulsive about original PCs-- their analog joysticks. Atari 5200 analog joysticks were better though like the Wico ones. You may not give a dime about my 2 cents, but those flimsy non-rigid sticks add to the user's frustration of playing those games. I know some people who purposely account for the error in the analog joysticks by adjusting their timing and trying to get used to the game that way. Now what is Jane doing in WWII? Never heard of that one-- what makes it require an analog joystick?

 

I'm with you on the criticism of the PC analog joystick, at least for arcade games.

 

Jane's WWI Fighters was a *fantastic* WWII flight/fighter game for the PC. It was *perfect* for the PC's analog stick. I'm not at all a PC gamer or a flight-sim buff, but this was an awesome game. Would suck with a digital stick.

 

Point was - as someone else alluded to above - "the right tool for the right job."

[+LS650]

It depends entirely on the type of game. I would have thought this was intuitively obvious.

[atariksi]

Digital is better for "Pac-man." Analog is better for "Jane's WWII Fighters." What's the argument about, again?

 

I think that most titles fall into digital catagory and those that are analog could also have been done using digital joystick or Paddles/trackball which are all better than analog joysticks. It's one of the things I found repulsive about original PCs-- their analog joysticks. Atari 5200 analog joysticks were better though like the Wico ones. You may not give a dime about my 2 cents, but those flimsy non-rigid sticks add to the user's frustration of playing those games. I know some people who purposely account for the error in the analog joysticks by adjusting their timing and trying to get used to the game that way. Now what is Jane doing in WWII? Never heard of that one-- what makes it require an analog joystick?

 

I'm with you on the criticism of the PC analog joystick, at least for arcade games.

 

Jane's WWI Fighters was a *fantastic* WWII flight/fighter game for the PC. It was *perfect* for the PC's analog stick. I'm not at all a PC gamer or a flight-sim buff, but this was an awesome game. Would suck with a digital stick.

 

Point was - as someone else alluded to above - "the right tool for the right job."

 

For those that are in an in-between state like analog joystick readings:

 

I never said there weren't any games that need analog, but to put in another way what you are voting for: imagine there's a 80-story building on fire and on the 79th floor there's a room full of digital joysticks (A2600 type), on the 80th floor there's a room full of analog joysticks (like ones in the picture not paddles/trackballs), and on the roof are the keyboards. Now you have enough time to pick up stuff from one floor before building collapses. So vote for the one you prefer.

 

Digital joysticks provide better control is my argument.

[atariksi]

No, my argument is not just programming perspective. It's also from user perspective (see first post). From logical point of view, user has more control if he/she KNOWS the state of the device he has in his hand (and the computer program also knows it as fast as possible once the state changes). You do not know the state of the analog joystick (except fire button(s) which are usually digital). A surgical glove that you put on, you have complete control over but if it had two fingers or was some baseball glove, you have less control. Without any experimentation, you can draw this conclusion. Most of the software in the world can do without analogicity. Some software basically forces it because they assume an analog joystick.

 

I know the state of the analog stick in my hand just fine when I play analog games. It's called feedback, you get used to it (at least I did). From a logical point of view this argument only matters if you are forced to choose only one controller to use for all games and your two final choices are analog or digital joysticks.

You are voting for one of the three joysticks. You can't vote for multiple ones since you have to decide which one you prefer. I thought you were joking about feedback earlier. But it's a lame excuse for not admitting the uncertainty of the state of analog joysticks. You already have game elements to worry about than to add to the user frustration of determining his joystick state by looking at feedback. Analog joysticks are giving less control if you have to rely on feedback rather than knowing a priori the state. You are ahead of the game with digital joysticks. When they made rotary phones and put those circular holes in it to try to minimize the uncertainty of the analog state of what you dial, that couldn't rely on feedback but had to know beforehand. Of course the touch tone phones (digital) were better.

 

I never argued against Paddles. The choice you are making in the poll is between joysticks (and for the general case not for <1% case where a paddle would be better). Paddles are more accurate than analog joysticks (assuming jitter free). For analog joysticks (they don't really compare to real flight yokes), I used the tick counter on the PC (840 ns/tick) and calibrated several dozen analog joysticks. The range I get is 0..500 for some; 0..900 for some, 0..1200 for many; and some 0..2000. So you got the issue of calibration to worry about. Then you have some that reach their minimum/maximum without you having to take them to the extreme in the left/right/up/down direction. So lack of control right there before you even use the joystick.

 

You argued against analog controls (of which the analog joystick is one) by trying to convince the reader that in-between or half states are inferior. Paddles "suffer" from the same problem yet it's much easier to play Breakout or Pong with a paddle vs. a digital joystick or just two directional buttons. What do you think an analog stick is, anyway? Two POTs. A paddle is one POT. Or have you never seen an Atari 5200 joystick converted to a paddle controller? So, "logically", paddles can be included when forming a justification since they share the same supposed inferiority that analog joysticks suffer from, it is possible to be neither all left nor all right yet the user still manages to play the game.

It's clearly stated in the first post that you are picking from the joysticks in the picture or similar NOT paddles. Yes, paddles do have uncertainty as well but not as much as analog joysticks. I know it's made of two POTs but the construction makes a big difference. I would never put arrow keys/ctrl key (digital) in a separate catagory if I didn't think the construction makes a difference. Heck, even piano keys are digital so that can also be modified to serve as a digital joystick but it would be much harder to use than a joystick with a stick and button(s). For one thing, going diagonally is easier with a stick like in a game like Topper. I think Archimedes said if he had a lever big enough, he can lift the earth. So less stress/strain using a stick-based digital joystick. Mouse is easier to use than a trackball although they are essentially the same circuit-wise. So NO, paddles are not the same as an analog joystick.

 

And you didn't answer my question - where have you ever seen planes or cars that are steered with simple digital controls such as buttons for left, right, up or down? If digital controls are better then they're better, right? Should hold everywhere.

It's in the first post. You don't see anyone driving cars with an analog joystick either but using a big paddle (not a small paddle either) since car steering require analogicity and both analog joystick and digital joystick would produce bad results. And FYI, even breakout is playable with digital joystick (see Flashback system) and they do provide better control, but you lack the fast motion from one side to the other that you get with a paddle so they sacrificed the better control for adding that analogicity so they get that extra speed feature.

 

It doesn't matter how annoying it might be to program for analog sticks in terms of using them in actual games. That's like saying analog film is inferior because it's harder to produce a photographic print due to dark rooms, emulsions, etc. even if the final analog result is better than a comparable digital photo. The choice in the poll also wasn't discussing programming for analog and digital sticks, only using them, so why bring up that difficulty?

 

I have never worried about analog joystick calibration when firing up a 5200 game.

Well, programming matters because the sampling/interpreting of the data plays a role. There's calibration needed with Wicos and even for A5200 sticks you get inconsistent values for center/left/right/etc. regardless of calibration.

 

Nope. The general case is digital joysticks are better controls. You can't think of thousands of others like Donkey Kong, Miner 2049er, River Raid, Space Invaders, Galaxian, etc.

 

For you, maybe. Again, analog is better for analog, digital is better for digital. You don't win any points by suggesting only games that started out with digital controls. Have you ever played the arcade version of Tail Gunner? Digital joysticks stink for that. It also doesn't matter that there are more games designed for digital joysticks. Again, unless what you're really asking is if you can only have one controller to play every conceivable video game, which one do you choose? I'd choose an analog stick in that case since it could get me most of the way to native paddle and trackball games whereas a digital joystick won't even try.

 

Or is your poll assuming a maximum degree of laziness and unadaptability for video game players? Least amount of effort?

You misunderstood. Just quoting one game requiring analog and one game from digital doesn't make the joysticks equally in demand. You are voting if you had to choose. You do better in games where you have more control so you choose the joystick that provides better control. Nothing to do with laziness. Controllers are meant for controlling so no sense in picking analog because it gives you some speed feature but which one provides better control. If only digital joysticks existed, the few games that need analogicity would get adapted for digital.

 

Well, leave out trackballs and paddles in this comparison. Trackballs are digital for most machines as they are just like mice. Even on Atari 5200, they are digital and then converted to analog because the joystick ports happen to only take analog input for directional control. They actually provide the better speed control (as someone mentioned earlier) than analog joysticks. So I think you mixed up too many things here. We are just comparing analog joysticks vs. digital joysticks. Paddles and trackballs are separate and also not your general case even if you include them. You can't say anything against digital joysticks in general by taking some specific example where paddles/trackballs work better.

 

P.S.: I get better Missile command scores using digital joystick than a trackball.

 

I'm not trying to include other analog controls in the poll but they are fair game in terms of trying to explain why someone would prefer or welcome an analog joystick over a digital one. As I said before, a paddle is the single axis version of an Atari 5200 style analog joystick. And I included trackballs in trying to explain the usefulness of analog controls because they, too, have a speed component to position in video games, same as paddles and analog joysticks (if coded for that). It might be harder, initially, to get used to a native analog joystick game (Tail Gunner) but once you do, the digital joystick version pales in comparison. The Star Wars arcade game also would blow chunks with a digital joystick instead of the flight yoke.

 

You also can't say anything against analog joysticks in general by taking some specific examples where digital joysticks work better. Logic is a bitch!

You didn't understand the logic. You were using Paddle/trackball examples to promote the analog joystick. But the two are different so rethink your logic.

 

 

P.S.: I get better Centipede and Missile Command scores using a trackball than a digital joystick. In fact I almost snap the stick off because I'm expecting the digital joystick to respond to how fast I move in a direction (as if it were an analog joystick or trackball). I also score higher more easily playing the Atari 5200 analog joystick version of Star Raiders vs. the Atari 800 digital joystick version. And I have no problem playing Vectrex games with its analog stick, either, even for those games that are supposed to have digital joysticks.

 

Your description shows you are not used to digital joysticks. In order to perform the experiment in an unbiased way, you have to be used to both controllers. Your experiment is biased and not controlled.

 

It boils down to personal preference and experience. Me, personally, I prefer analog-controlled games. But then I prefer vector games, too, so who knows what that means.

 

Nothing to do with personal preference in regards to which provides better control. You take longer time to turn a POT to switch directions than move a stick handle of a digital joystick (sampling wise and moving it). So in games like Pac-man, you end up turning upon yourself (instead of going into another row), find it harder to wiggle away the monsters, etc.

[ledzep]

You are voting for one of the three joysticks. You can't vote for multiple ones since you have to decide which one you prefer. I thought you were joking about feedback earlier. But it's a lame excuse for not admitting the uncertainty of the state of analog joysticks. You already have game elements to worry about than to add to the user frustration of determining his joystick state by looking at feedback. Analog joysticks are giving less control if you have to rely on feedback rather than knowing a priori the state. You are ahead of the game with digital joysticks. When they made rotary phones and put those circular holes in it to try to minimize the uncertainty of the analog state of what you dial, that couldn't rely on feedback but had to know beforehand. Of course the touch tone phones (digital) were better.

 

The subject line says "Digital Joysticks provide better control than Analog Joysticks (It's a scientific fact; let's see who can refute it)". That is what I was responding to. For you to make your case you have to prove (which you haven't) that it is actually a scientific fact (which it ain't). I didn't vote for multiple anything (I chose analog). But you put out a loaded, incorrect statement like that subject line and this is what you end up with.

 

It's clearly stated in the first post that you are picking from the joysticks in the picture or similar NOT paddles. Yes, paddles do have uncertainty as well but not as much as analog joysticks. I know it's made of two POTs but the construction makes a big difference. I would never put arrow keys/ctrl key (digital) in a separate catagory if I didn't think the construction makes a difference. Heck, even piano keys are digital so that can also be modified to serve as a digital joystick but it would be much harder to use than a joystick with a stick and button(s). For one thing, going diagonally is easier with a stick like in a game like Topper. I think Archimedes said if he had a lever big enough, he can lift the earth. So less stress/strain using a stick-based digital joystick. Mouse is easier to use than a trackball although they are essentially the same circuit-wise. So NO, paddles are not the same as an analog joystick.

 

It's clearly stated in your subject line that you are challenging people to refute your "scientific fact". You can't expect counter-arguments to be comprised solely of "nuh-uh" and "yuh-huh". I could quote Monty Python's Argument Sketch, specifically gainsaying, but I doubt you'd successfully follow that point, either.

 

And if you think piano keys are digital you've never played a piano and you really don't understand the advantages of analog controls. They, like analog joysticks, paddles and trackballs, have a speed or force component to their action, something that the simple on/off inputs from a digital joystick can never provide.

 

It's in the first post. You don't see anyone driving cars with an analog joystick either but using a big paddle (not a small paddle either) since car steering require analogicity and both analog joystick and digital joystick would produce bad results. And FYI, even breakout is playable with digital joystick (see Flashback system) and they do provide better control, but you lack the fast motion from one side to the other that you get with a paddle so they sacrificed the better control for adding that analogicity so they get that extra speed feature.

 

"Playable" doesn't equal "better control". Have you actually played Breakout? When it gets really fast you most definitely need the fast motion which you admit that digital joysticks don't provide while ignoring that analog joysticks do. Again, it depends on the game.

 

And why do you keep ignoring actual planes (I'm assuming single-seat fighter) with their (gasp!) analog joysticks? Do you really think a pilot can fly a plane with a digital joystick and get the same responsiveness? And what if you replaced the foot pedals with two giant digital buttons? When that poor bastard gets shot down at least he can die content that he knew, at every moment, what state his digital joystick was in, thank Odin, and wonder how he even got shot down by the other pilot with his worse-controlled analog joystick plane.

 

Well, programming matters because the sampling/interpreting of the data plays a role. There's calibration needed with Wicos and even for A5200 sticks you get inconsistent values for center/left/right/etc. regardless of calibration.

 

No, it doesn't matter when your position is that digital joysticks provide better control (vs. ease of programming) and it's a supposed scientific fact. That is a user evaluation, not a programmer evaluation. Maybe you're just not that good at programming for analog controls. You might as well include the extra difficulty in manufacturing and the extra components required for analog joysticks, like that would matter to the player using the joystick, either.

 

You misunderstood. Just quoting one game requiring analog and one game from digital doesn't make the joysticks equally in demand. You are voting if you had to choose. You do better in games where you have more control so you choose the joystick that provides better control. Nothing to do with laziness. Controllers are meant for controlling so no sense in picking analog because it gives you some speed feature but which one provides better control. If only digital joysticks existed, the few games that need analogicity would get adapted for digital.

 

If only analog joysticks existed, the games that didn't need your "analogicity" would continue to not benefit from it. Like 5200 Pac-Man.

 

You didn't understand the logic. You were using Paddle/trackball examples to promote the analog joystick. But the two are different so rethink your logic.

 

I am promoting analog controllers, of which the analog joystick is one. I understand the logic fine. As stated by you, you seem to believe that all users would be in controller bliss if only they were restricted to one option wherein they always knew the state of their digital joystick, that they were certain that left could only mean left and up could only mean up and there were no fears of in-between positioning or states. Because, ya, that's what everybody talks about, right? What state is the joystick in?

 

In order to argue against that narrow-minded view it is necessary to discuss the differences and preferences between analog and digital in general. Otherwise why would any user ever prefer an analog joystick? You seem to think that it's really really really difficult for anyone to use an analog joystick with a digital style game. It isn't. It's annoying to get used to at first but so what.

 

Analog provides infinite control. Digital provides limited (two states per) control. It is possible to argue that an analog stick provides too much input for a simple on/off requirement such as left, right, up, down, but it is absolutely wrong to claim that something that provides infinite results (through two analog POTs) provides worse control than something that provides limited results (through 4 or 8 on/off switches). It will be harder to master but if you want easy you should get someone else to play the game for you so you don't have to worry.

 

Your description shows you are not used to digital joysticks. In order to perform the experiment in an unbiased way, you have to be used to both controllers. Your experiment is biased and not controlled.

 

Your entire premise is biased and not controlled. Where do you get the idea that you know whether I'm used to digital joysticks or not? I have been playing video games and using digital and analog controls for them since arcade games and home consoles started. I'm used to all controllers, not just joysticks. You assume that because someone can prefer an analog stick and explain why that he must therefore be biased? How biased are you with this digital joysticks provide better control/it's a scientific fact crap?

 

I am used to the right controller for the job. Which has cost me lots of money because I have to own an actual arcade (tabletop) Tempest and Star Trek Strategic Operations Simulator in order to play my favorite games since using anything other than a spinner and buttons is a waste of my time. There is no way on Earth that you can convince me that Tempest would be just as good with a digital joystick. That's nuts. At least an analog joystick would get me close. Still terrible but not as useless as a digital joystick.

 

Nothing to do with personal preference in regards to which provides better control. You take longer time to turn a POT to switch directions than move a stick handle of a digital joystick (sampling wise and moving it). So in games like Pac-man, you end up turning upon yourself (instead of going into another row), find it harder to wiggle away the monsters, etc.

 

Maybe you suffer from arthritis and assume that everyone else does, too. Do you think that moving a joystick such that it stops contacting one leaf switch or button and then contacts a different leaf switch or button is instantaneous? Do you even know how an Atari 2600 physically operates? Do you believe it's impossible for a human being to be as fast left-to-right or up-and-down using an analog stick as he is with a digital stick? Just because you can't handle playing Pac-Man with an analog stick, just because it haunts your dreams and mocks your nervous system, doesn't mean that it's the case for everyone else. How fast do you think a game like Pac-Man is, anyway? It's not about speed, it's about accuracy, and once you figure out how to deal with an analog stick you can play digital controller games with analog controllers just fine. I know a game like Frogger is a pain to play on a 5200 initially but you get used to it. Now try Star Wars with a digital stick and see what a miserable experience that is.

[OldAtarian]

I'm voting analog because it's bound to annoy at least a few of the people who will be posting in this thread.

Edited October 25, 2010 by OldAtarian

[potatohead]

Well, go ahead and play "Tail Gunner" with a digital device. Won't be pretty.

 

Seems to me, "Choplifter" was way better with the Apple ][ analog stick too.

 

Lots of examples.

 

Personally, I prefer the auto-centering, spring loaded, with free movement option analog sticks, like the Tandy Deluxe Joystick. Those things are excellent, and when in spring loaded mode, allow for "roll over" between directional states much like a digital stick does. "PACMAN" works with a rolling ball kind of action I really like. Over extended play sessions, I found that rolling action "better" than the stress and strain of the digital device. In that same vein, if one can master "ROBOTRON" with keyboard, for example, they are going to rule big, over both the analog and digital joystick users.

 

The difference between a paddle and a joystick, in this discussion, comes down to being able to quickly access a position, with a high degree of accuracy. After a turn of the paddle or two, the human player gets the ratio of motion necessary to position the bat where needed, thought is action then. KABOOM cannot be played in the same way with a joystick, or even game pad, without significant help given to the player, in the form of controlled bucket movement, linked to the speed of the bombs.

 

In games featuring inertia, analog controls have a lot to offer. In "Twitch" games, they can be a disadvantage, though here again, "ROBOTRON" on the Apple ][ was a great experience on the analog stick, with two buttons, one for firing, another for rotating the direction of fire. I found detail movement much better on the Apple, with the analog stick...

 

Classic Atariski argument here where "Better" presented without a qualifier, which is necessary for a rational conclusion, by the way, as it stands right now, no conclusion can be made as the argument is incomplete.

 

If I had to choose one controller, it deffo would be auto-centring, spring loaded, analog stick, with free movement option and two buttons.

 

For FPS, Keyboard Mouse hands down.

 

I would enjoy this discussion much more, if we had a series of qualifiers. Which controller preference for a particular game dynamic is "better", probably would be a worthy read, just sayin'

Edited October 25, 2010 by potatohead

[AtariNerd]

Oh, great - more supremacists and zealots.

[jetset]

It's always about the right tool for the right job. Games that require precise control like Frogger or certain platform games a digital stick is the way to go. Centipede? Missile Command? No way do you go digital there.

Really, seems this topic is yet another in a long line of digs at the 5200 controllers. Maybe I'm reading into the OP's post too much but there's an awful lot of those popping up lately. Seems like it's a weak debate.

[atariksi]

It's always about the right tool for the right job. Games that require precise control like Frogger or certain platform games a digital stick is the way to go. Centipede? Missile Command? No way do you go digital there.

Really, seems this topic is yet another in a long line of digs at the 5200 controllers. Maybe I'm reading into the OP's post too much but there's an awful lot of those popping up lately. Seems like it's a weak debate.

 

No shot at specifically Atari 5200 controllers. You know very well I'm an Atari 5200 user and have been for a long time-- even built the digital joystick adapter for it. Just getting to the facts; not emotionally involved like some posters have become. You can do digital on Missile Command and Centipede. You can't look at it after the fact-- oh this game supports analog so it depends on the game. Analog introduces uncertainty which could have been avoided in most cases. Uncertainty means less control.

[atariksi]

You are voting for one of the three joysticks. You can't vote for multiple ones since you have to decide which one you prefer. I thought you were joking about feedback earlier. But it's a lame excuse for not admitting the uncertainty of the state of analog joysticks. You already have game elements to worry about than to add to the user frustration of determining his joystick state by looking at feedback. Analog joysticks are giving less control if you have to rely on feedback rather than knowing a priori the state. You are ahead of the game with digital joysticks. When they made rotary phones and put those circular holes in it to try to minimize the uncertainty of the analog state of what you dial, that couldn't rely on feedback but had to know beforehand. Of course the touch tone phones (digital) were better.

 

The subject line says "Digital Joysticks provide better control than Analog Joysticks (It's a scientific fact; let's see who can refute it)". That is what I was responding to. For you to make your case you have to prove (which you haven't) that it is actually a scientific fact (which it ain't). I didn't vote for multiple anything (I chose analog). But you put out a loaded, incorrect statement like that subject line and this is what you end up with.

...

I'm so sorry you have missed the points and are not even addressing the points in pretending it's a reply to my latest post. Subject is pretty clear and first post is the details for it. You want to argue something else other than what this topic is-- techincally called Chewbacca defense. If you just stick to analog joysticks vs. digital joysticks, your paddles/steering wheel example never would be argued over. Nor have you addressed the contruction issue I brought up and keep giving the same example of flight control. If you have a BIG ANALOG device vs. a small one (like an analog joystick at home), it MAKES A BIG difference. A steering wheel is less prone to error than a small paddle. I'm going to let you think about it and calm down before I answer the rest of your gibberish and drivel since they don't even address the points I made. Just to give an example of your gibberish and irrationality:

 

Your description shows you are not used to digital joysticks. In order to perform the experiment in an unbiased way, you have to be used to both controllers. Your experiment is biased and not controlled.

 

Your entire premise is biased and not controlled. Where do you get the idea that you know whether I'm used to digital joysticks or not?

 

You just blurted out something out of the blue. You wrote: "In fact I almost snap the stick off because I'm expecting the digital joystick to respond to how fast I move in a direction (as if it were an analog joystick or trackball)." Now my experiment, I can play the same exact game using any of the controllers discussed using a joystick simulator and even record and view the data from analog and digital joysticks in real-time game play (see picture). Before you blurt out any more crap and insults (which I will ignore), think about it and calm down.

[atariksi]

atariksi, you missed of a couple o' joysticks there....namely the atari prolines/europad and the competition pro (the first atari compatible joystick to feature microswitches)

 

The Atari 7800 type joystick would be in same catagory as the Atari 2600/Atari 800 joystick. Competition pro, there are both analog and digital types so they can go into either catagory of analog or digital joystick.