Mouse vs touch pad/screen

Lets debate mouse vs touch pad (or screen) shall we?

In my opinion, the mouse wasn't really ment for gaming. It was ment for a way to simplify (yes, "dumb down" in other words :P ) the computer interface without the need for using millions of keys. Since it got popular, game devs on home computers (the IBM compatible PC as we know it today in particular) started using it and got good results with it. Modern mice are consequently much more suitable for gaming.

However, I do not think they're optimal for everything. For example you need to mark your units in a RTS game and make many turns and twists while marking units on a touch pad/screen is much more intuitive. Basically you're the one who gives commands and not some mouse pointer.

And then there's FPSes which might have a slight advantage with the mouse, but the mouse is a far cry from the real thing anyway (namely a VR environment and a gun model as the BF3 simulator shows). In my opinion, a joystick is the better choice anyway.

Adventure games are another genre which would greatly benefit from touch controls. Yet again there's no need to bother with a boring mouse pointer but just click away yourself, like it was ment to be.

And finaly, the touch screen allows you to be part of the action yourself and not just passively "click away".

Discuss.

Here is WarCraft III played on a touch screen:

Link

Keep in mind this game is optimized for mouse control.

I used to have an ipod touch...I sold it for a reason.

I don't like touch screens/pads, and I shiver at the thought of playing a FPS with a joystick... I like my mouse.spittis

That's a better controller for FPS than a mouse and keyboard combo imo:

Here is WarCraft III played on a touch screen:

Link

Keep in mind this game is optimized for mouse control.

nameless12345

Wow that makes the game so slow...

Touch pad can be good in something like Plants vs Zombies, but I pick a mouse 99% of the time for any other type of game.

Mouse was created to give you a more intuitive, fast and precise way of interacting with a GUI, simple as that.

With a mouse, you know exactly where your pointer is and how fast it moves at any given time.

Current touch screens have weaker precision, (especially when movement is involved) because you can't tell exactly where you're pointing and the technology has a ways to go before it becomes anywhere near as responsive.

Edit:

It's funny that RTS are mentioned in the OP, touch screens are VASTLY inferior for that purpose and I have'nt even touched upon the difference betweeen a customizable device, (in terms of speed, sensitivity and functionality), that gives you several buttons along with fine precision and taking up an entire hand to weakly emulate the mouse pointer alone.

I don't see the reason to comment on fps because you're not going to consider controllers better if you bothered becoming comfortable with a mouse. Controllers have a learning curve too by the way, believe it or not.

Game controllers are better!

Lol at mice,

Covering the screen with your hands - not a good idea.

Not to mention that it would be incredibly tiring for a large screen.

I have an HP Touchsmart tm2t convertible laptop PC.

It has a touchscreen, a standard laptop touchpad, and a Wacom magnetic pen-input system. I have used all of them and they all have their pros and cons.

A touchscreen has no "hover" or "mouse-over" capabilities. Everything requires the text to constantly be displayed because a touch screen has to either be in a state of "touch" or "not touching." The lack of multiple "buttons" requires gestures which dont always work well when you also need high precision.

A mouse has a surprising number of states "mouse into object", "mouse over object", "mouse out of object", "mouse click", "mouse click lift", etc. Most touch screens have less since pressure sensitive touchscreens are still very expensive to make and still cannot resolve the "mouse over" state in any elegant fashion.

The magnetic pen input allows for hovering and works perfectly fine even up to about an inch and a half lifted from the screen. This counts as hovering. It also has 512 levels of pressure, which is overkill for typical pen scenarios, but a little low for professional art purposes. However the pen has only 2 buttons and an "eraser" button on the back, which is less than a mouse. My buttons are mapped to "right click" for one and "left click" for the other. Using something like a scroll bar is really, really annoying with a pen.

In short, i've used all forms of inputs you've suggested, including a proper magnetic pen (not that stylus crap), and i can personally tell you there are scenarios where one shines and the other fails.

Touch screens are only better for point and click adventure games and some puzzle games (SpaceChem for example.)

Oh and it is not better for RTS or FPS games. You just can't get the level of precision or speed with a touch screen.

I have an HP Touchsmart tm2t convertible laptop PC.

It has a touchscreen, a standard laptop touchpad, and a Wacom magnetic pen-input system. I have used all of them and they all have their pros and cons.

A touchscreen has no "hover" or "mouse-over" capabilities. Everything requires the text to constantly be displayed because a touch screen has to either be in a state of "touch" or "not touching." The lack of multiple "buttons" requires gestures which dont always work well when you also need high precision.

A mouse has a surprising number of states "mouse into object", "mouse over object", "mouse out of object", "mouse click", "mouse click lift", etc. Most touch screens have less since pressure sensitive touchscreens are still very expensive to make and still cannot resolve the "mouse over" state in any elegant fashion.

The magnetic pen input allows for hovering and works perfectly fine even up to about an inch and a half lifted from the screen. This counts as hovering. It also has 512 levels of pressure, which is overkill for typical pen scenarios, but a little low for professional art purposes. However the pen has only 2 buttons and an "eraser" button on the back, which is less than a mouse. My buttons are mapped to "right click" for one and "left click" for the other. Using something like a scroll bar is really, really annoying with a pen.

In short, i've used all forms of inputs you've suggested, including a proper magnetic pen (not that stylus crap), and i can personally tell you there are scenarios where one shines and the other fails.

XaosII

I use to own a HP Touchsmart TX2 :D

Touch screens are only better for point and click adventure games and some puzzle games (SpaceChem for example.)

Oh and it is not better for RTS or FPS games. You just can't get the level of precision or speed with a touch screen.

cain006

They're not better for point and click adventure games either, unless they're specifically made for touch screens that is. You lack awareness of pointing focus, mouse states (such as hover, button functionality) the sheer limitation of the "one button functionality" of touch.

[QUOTE="cain006"]

Touch screens are only better for point and click adventure games and some puzzle games (SpaceChem for example.)

Oh and it is not better for RTS or FPS games. You just can't get the level of precision or speed with a touch screen.

MlauTheDaft

They're not better for point and click adventure games either, unless they're specifically made for touch screens that is. You lack awareness of pointing focus, mouse states (such as hover, button functionality) the sheer limitation of the "one button functionality" of touch.

Here is WarCraft III played on a touch screen:

Link

Keep in mind this game is optimized for mouse control.

nameless12345

That looks like fun but I really don't see the major advantage over a mouse.