Main > Main Forum

Happ Optical rotary joysticks

Pages: << < (11/15) > >>

TopJimmyCooks:

setting aside for a quick second whether optical rotaries are any good for 12 click or spinner games -

could someone make a rubber sleeve like a kid's pencil gripper to go over the bat and give an octagon, grippy tactile surface?  Seems like I saw somewhere that those were able to be prototyped fairly cheaply.   Could somebody do a one off by putting on that Sculpey clay and molding it around a bat top?  If it were me prototyping it I would make an octagon grip out of hardwood, demo the bat top plastic and glue it on more or less permanently as Xiao2 mentioned. 

spitballing some ideas for the OP here.

RandyT:


--- Quote from: gamuhar on June 06, 2012, 07:53:47 pm ---So there could be some "transmission" and 24 notches in Happ optical rotary does not really define its resolution.

--- End quote ---

There is no "transmission" in a Happ optical rotary.  It is 1:1.


--- Quote ---Anyway, we all understand how mechanical transmission works with larger and smaller gears/rollers/balls changing rotation ratio, but how does software "transmission" work, what about "multiplier" thing? Would it be possible then to have 25x multiplier built in optical board and get higher resolution than Arkanoid even if with only 24 notches encoder wheel?

How did you arrive at 96 counts, is that "at least"?

--- End quote ---

No, that is the maximum.  You could get 24, 48 or 96, depending on the decoding scheme, from that encoder wheel.


--- Quote ---I never disagreed about "tactile feedback", that's a part of personal preferences and out of the scope of what I wish to discuss. Only if you mean to suggest it can impact the score, only then it is worth discussion, but otherwise it's for everyone to figure out for themselves. Do you agree?

--- End quote ---

It certainly can impact the score.  If you concede that detents are helpful, then you must also concede that the lack of them places a certain disadvantage on the player.  How much will depend on the players themselves, but less effort concentrating on the control will almost always mean a better ability to concentrate on actually playing the game.


--- Quote ---Have you actually tried playing any mechanical rotary games with optical rotary? I don't have any such problems as you describe. Do you think that's how it is to play Caliber .50 this joystick was made for and has 24 positions? Do you believe there would be twice as much "erroneous movement" than with Ikari Warriors, or half as much? If you can properly play Caliber .50 with it, then surely it would be even more suitable for those mechanical rotary games with half the precision, yes?

--- End quote ---

Yes, I have played these games, with both types of controls.  If not, I would not be commenting.  I've also played them with an up down spinner, where the fire button was mapped to the down switch.  There are a number of ways to get the input the game expects, but there are always compromises without the actual control.  A game with finer granularity in positioning will benefit from the optical approach, more so than one where fewer positions are used.  This is simple to explain; The greater the distance between the points at which your movement of the control actually results in a change in the game, the more difficult it is to judge where that change occurs, or where in that zone you currently are.


--- Quote ---Why did you say that? If you mean to imply I took that absurd position then please quote me as you seem to be misinterpreting something. I repeated several times and was very clear what my position is, please:

--- End quote ---


--- Quote ---Oh, I have plenty of resolution on my optical rotary, playing Tempest or Arkanoid is much better than with a mouse, almost as good as with a spinner, I really enjoy it and I don't feel the playability is compromised at all
--- End quote ---

While you may not "feel the playability is compromised at all", it most certainly is with those titles.  If you enjoy playing them with the additional hampering added by the control, that's fine.  It's not for me to judge what makes folks happy.  However, if you want to promote the notion that there is little difference, then that is just misleading to folks who may not have the experience to know otherwise.  Those who do have that experience, are attempting to temper your enthusiasm for poor controls with some facts about the originals, in order to stem the flow of misinformation and to help prevent disappointment for folks who are looking for the most enjoyable ways to play the games.



--- Quote from: Xiaou2 on June 07, 2012, 09:10:54 am --- - Resolution = Not sure if this is correct. Not sure if Randy is calculating the diameter of the wheel.  However, so what.  The game will never play well with a stick, even With the res.

--- End quote ---

The diameter of the encoder wheel has absolutely no bearing on the resolution or feel.  You turn the center of the wheel (more specifically, the knob attached to it), and everything else follows that, regardless of the distance between it and the outside edge.  Tempest used a 72 aperture encoder, decoded at 1x.  A 24 aperture encoder, decoded at 4x, is actually higher resolution than required by the game.  But you won't find any argument from me about the playability statement ;).



--- Quote from: TopJimmyCooks on June 07, 2012, 09:20:27 am ---could someone make a rubber sleeve like a kid's pencil gripper to go over the bat and give an octagon, grippy tactile surface?  Seems like I saw somewhere that those were able to be prototyped fairly cheaply.   Could somebody do a one off by putting on that Sculpey clay and molding it around a bat top?  If it were me prototyping it I would make an octagon grip out of hardwood, demo the bat top plastic and glue it on more or less permanently as Xiao2 mentioned. 

--- End quote ---

Honestly, I like the idea of milling the handle to have flats on it.  A 3-Axis mill, or Shopsmith type machine, could do this pretty easily.  Barring that, a short section (3/4 to 1" long) of soft silicone tubing, of the proper diameter and thickness, could be stretched over the knob to provide a more comfortable and less "slippy" grip.

One could also approach the problem by making a slip-on cover, held to the handle by nylon set screws.

RandyT

gamuhar:


--- Quote from: RandyT on June 07, 2012, 11:11:35 am ---There is no "transmission" in a Happ optical rotary.  It is 1:1.
No, that is the maximum.  You could get 24, 48 or 96, depending on the decoding scheme, from that encoder wheel. 

--- End quote ---


I'll call it "multiplier" then. Beside standard "multiplier" that is up to 4x, there is also "interpolation" multiplier that can go up to 20x or more, do you have any experience working with those, how does price/benefit compare?



--- Quote ---It certainly can impact the score.  If you concede that detents are helpful, then you must also concede that the lack of them places a certain disadvantage on the player.  How much will depend on the players themselves, but less effort concentrating on the control will almost always mean a better ability to concentrate on actually playing the game.

--- End quote ---

Looks like a trade off, good side and bad side. That's the thing with friction.



--- Quote ---
A game with finer granularity in positioning will benefit from the optical approach, more so than one where fewer positions are used.  This is simple to explain; The greater the distance between the points at which your movement of the control actually results in a change in the game, the more difficult it is to judge where that change occurs, or where in that zone you currently are.

--- End quote ---

Window for error also get proportionally larger, but you can set the distance to be just like on Caliber .50 if you like, and make a full character turn in only half the turn of the stick, so twice as fast, if not more since there is less resistance. You seem to only be thinking about moving one position, but for say 180 degrees turn, would bump-stops help make that move faster, easier and more precise as well? 

Having no bump-stops, do you have any similar problems with Arkanoid and Tempest spinners?



--- Quote ---
While you may not "feel the playability is compromised at all", it most certainly is with those titles.  If you enjoy playing them with the additional hampering added by the control, that's fine.  It's not for me to judge what makes folks happy.

--- End quote ---


Only a Sith deals in absolutes, people are different and that makes everything relative. What's hampering for you is not necessarily hampering for others, and what's helping you can be annoyance to others, which is the case we have here. This is what guy who started this thread said:

- "The reason i want to know is i already have the mechanical rotaries and they hurt my hand so i dont even bother playing those games im assuming if the Optical Rotaries spin smoother then click click mechanical stick that would be wonderful."



--- Quote ---
 However, if you want to promote the notion that there is little difference, then that is just misleading to folks who may not have the experience to know otherwise.  Those who do have that experience, are attempting to temper your enthusiasm for poor controls with some facts about the originals, in order to stem the flow of misinformation and to help prevent disappointment for folks who are looking for the most enjoyable ways to play the games. 

--- End quote ---
 

Again, my point is not that you should replace mechanical rotary or Arkanoid spinner with optical rotary stick, but those are BONUS things you can do with optical rotary if you already have it. I'm just saying the same thing as this guy here: http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=118265.0

- "It's not a spinner by any means, but I did play tempest, and it worked great. Mad planets is a blast!! Smooth and fast."


gamuhar:


--- Quote from: Xiaou2 on June 07, 2012, 09:10:54 am ---The things I said were to do with Mechanics, feel, and proper gameplay.   You simply cant grasp it, as its way above your capacity.

 - Precision loss = Player cant find things accurately with FEEL
 - Delay = Player shoots past the intended zone to change, or barely into one section... then twice the distance to the next jump.
 - Resolution = Not sure if this is correct. Not sure if Randy is calculating the diameter of the wheel.  However, so what.  The game will never play well with a stick, even With the res.

--- End quote ---

You are talking about PLAYER, I am talking about JOYSTICK.

Optical rotary joystick itself has the ability to be just as accurate and fast as mechanical rotary and if there is any error, lack of precision, or delay it is ONLY due to a player and "human factor".

Can we agree on this, at least?



--- Quote --- Playing and spinner game with a stick, would be pathetic.

--- End quote ---

You think, and so you will not even try it out?



--- Quote --- The stick also sucks for pretty much everything else too.  Its pretty stiff, and not anywhere near as nice as the comps.  Its just not that great of a stick.

--- End quote ---

You can make it from any stick you want.

RandyT:


--- Quote from: gamuhar on June 07, 2012, 01:44:18 pm ---I'll call it "multiplier" then. Beside standard "multiplier" that is up to 4x, there is also "interpolation" multiplier that can go up to 20x or more, do you have any experience working with those, how does price/benefit compare?

--- End quote ---

You don't understand.  It is not a multiplier.  Decoding an aperture wheel is one of those "Sith" absolutes.  You can always tune it down to something less than the maximum possible, but "multiplying" it will not make it higher in resolution.  Interpolation is also of little value, as any attempt to use it simply results in a loss of accuracy.


--- Quote ---Looks like a trade off, good side and bad side. That's the thing with friction.

--- End quote ---

Friction <> positive stop.  A duck is a bird, but a bird is not necessarily a duck.


--- Quote ---
Window for error also get proportionally larger, but you can set the distance to be just like on Caliber .50 if you like, and make a full character turn in only half the turn of the stick, so twice as fast, if not more since there is less resistance. You seem to only be thinking about moving one position, but for say 180 degrees turn, would bump-stops help make that move faster, easier and more precise as well?  

--- End quote ---

Of course you can do that.  You can also set the sensitivity to 100% on a 24 spoke encoder wheel and play Arkanoid without the paddle jumping.  Of course, it will take more than a complete revolution of the control to get from one side of the screen to the other.  Most would choose not to play that way, given the option.  Your example is no different.  By increasing the speed of the turn, the position of the control is no longer relative to what is happening on-screen, which exacerbates the disconnect between player and game.  It will also make it more prone to positioning errors, by making the zones smaller.


--- Quote ---Only a Sith deals in absolutes, people are different and that makes everything relative. What's hampering for you is not necessarily hampering for others, and what's helping you can be annoyance to others, which is the case we have here. This is what guy who started this thread said:

- "The reason i want to know is i already have the mechanical rotaries and they hurt my hand so i dont even bother playing those games im assuming if the Optical Rotaries spin smoother then click click mechanical stick that would be wonderful."

--- End quote ---

That's fine.  People have different needs.  Obviously the ultimate solution for the OP would be a mechanical stick with less resistance.  Some will always be better than none for the games designed for those controls.

One can play Missile Command and Centipede with a joystick.  Is it unreasonable to claim that both of those games will always be better with a trackball than a joystick?  Or by tilting a cell phone?  If you believe the answer is "yes" then you have expectations much lower than most here.


Pages: << < (11/15) > >>

Go to full version