| Main > Main Forum |
| In what ways will I be hurt if I use a Gamepad encoder rather than keyboard? |
| << < (2/5) > >> |
| Chris:
Some front ends and cabinet-related software like jukeboxes may not be happy with gamepad input, or may have limited gamepad options. DOSCab/WinCab Jukebox, for example, will accept input from the first 4 gamepads on the system, but will only read the two main axes and the first 14 buttons on each controller. I know MAMEWah supports gamepad input, but it may have similar restrictions on which parts of the pads are actually usable. There are emulators which will turn gamepad input into keypresses, but emulators may not work with all software. --Chris |
| RandyT:
--- Quote from: AndyWarne on April 11, 2005, 09:55:38 am ---Randy's answer is correct when talking about USB keyboards but incorrect in context because the poster mentioned encoders not keyboards. The limit of 6 pressed keys and 6 keys per transaction is not fixed and does not apply to encoders because the device can set it's own limits in USB. --- End quote --- This is patently false. The USB specification cannot be circumvented, nor can the limitations of the device. The Cypress CY7C63413 microcontroller is a Low-Speed USB controller and as such must conform to low-speed USB specifications. As you have stated yourself, the I-PAC uses this processor, and is therefore a Low-Speed USB device. Low-Speed USB devices must use "Interrupt" transfer types, and therefore can send a maximum of 8-bytes (keypresses) every 10 milliseconds. USB Gamepads are also Low-Speed USB devices, however they can send the status of 64 switch closures in the space of those same 8-bytes. While you may be able to use the second endpoint on that processor to send 8 additional keypresses in the following transfer, the first can send only 6, as 2 bytes of that transfer are reserved, per the HID specification, and cannot be used. Also, I did not state that the limit on simultaneous pressed keys was 6, only that there was a limit and that it varied with the keys selected for use. Andy, why don't you come right out and say what the capabilities of the USB side of the I-PAC are, instead of just saying "it's not a keyboard." --- Quote ---Keyboard and Gamepad encoders have similar speeds in Windows XP. In earlier OS'es , gamepads were slowed by the OS reading the "heritage" game port as well. --- End quote --- Poppycock. We aren't talking about OS influence here, we are talking about USB Specification and report structures. Being able to monitor 64 controls in the same time frame as 6 (or even 8 ) is a huge difference in "speed" as it would take 8x the time to monitor the status of those same inputs using Keyboard technology. And, why in heck would the OS be concerned with reading the "heritage" game port" if no gameport devices were seen to be installed on the system? The OS services only those devices that are seen in the "Gaming Options" area of the OS and could care less about the gameport unless you actually had something installed on it. --- Quote ---USB support in general in Windows 98 is not nearly as fast as in XP. --- End quote --- This is probably true, but we aren't talking about "general". It's plenty fast for gaming controls. --- Quote ---Gamepads do have limits with software support which in some cases need the use of software which converts gamepad buttons into keypresses. In these cases a real keyboard emulator makes more sense. But MAME is just fine with gamepads under XP. --- End quote --- It's also more than fine under 98 and other OS'es RandyT |
| Grasshopper:
Sigh, here we go. I feel a nit-picking thread brewing..... My understanding is that the Ipac has a limit of 15 simultaneous keypresses in USB mode. I would concede that this might be a problem with a four player panel but for a two player panel it's not really an issue. And none of the timing issues really matter either. Any modern electronic communications protocol is always going to be far faster than any human finger. I've used my Ipac in both USB and ps/2 mode and through a Dreamcast converter, and I honestly can't tell the difference. |
| RandyT:
--- Quote from: Grasshopper on April 11, 2005, 02:41:58 pm ---Sigh, here we go. I feel a nit-picking thread brewing..... --- End quote --- No offense intended, but I have to believe that if you understood some of the differences, you probably wouldn't consider them "nit-picking." However, I'm sure other readers can or are willing to try to understand these facts, and might be interested in hearing them. --- Quote ---My understanding is that the Ipac has a limit of 15 simultaneous keypresses in USB mode. I would concede that this might be a problem with a four player panel but for a two player panel it's not really an issue. --- End quote --- Well, if you have one, you shouldn't have to "understand" what the limitations are from what you hear. Fire yours up and conduct some tests and you will "know" (even as out of vogue this may be to some.) --- Quote ---And none of the timing issues really matter either. Any modern electronic communications protocol is always going to be far faster than any human finger. I've used my Ipac in both USB and ps/2 mode and through a Dreamcast converter, and I honestly can't tell the difference. --- End quote --- Well, that's an opinion. One can say that the human eye/brain can't discern greater than 24 frames of video per second, yet there has always been a push to higher frame rates to get rid of "choppy" animation. There are also those that are greatly impacted by 60hz flicker in lighting, while others can't see a twitch. I can honestly tell you that when I went from a Keyboard hack to a KeyWiz, the difference was palpable. Same "modern electronic communications protocol", completely different implementations. This can also be sensed when using cheapo USB gamepads, compared to a dedicated USB gamepad encoder. Same protocol, but the end results are not even close. RandyT |
| Chris:
--- Quote from: RandyT on April 12, 2005, 01:23:29 pm ---I can honestly tell you that when I went from a Keyboard hack to a KeyWiz, the difference was palpable. --- End quote --- |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |