I don't know what these control arguments are even defending or attacking anymore.
The camera snap in this game is okay for the ABXY movement + Circle Pad aiming scheme, but cranking up the sensitivity lets you spin the camera nearly as fast (possibly even faster?) without also making you have to readjust Pit's direction. I don't use the 180 camera snap that much at all; and I use 90 degree camera snaps even less often.
A 180 degree sudden run backwards for me is basically a double tap hold on B, camera snap button, and then double tap hold X just as Pit stutters to reorient himself to the new camera angle. That's something you would only do to escape because trying to aim while the camera is doing that will take precedence over the snap, just as it does with the stylus aiming if I'm not mistaken.
I know this is another stylus vs. dual analog war, but there are other people here besides me who prefer playing Uprising without a stylus. I firmly believe each control option has its pros and cons, but they ultimately appear to be more or less equal in terms of effectiveness. Maybe it's because I don't care for the stylus aiming that much that I'm not seeing what all this bitching is about. I find the controls I'm using 99% suited to doing what the game demands, only losing 1% because the flying sections feel a little clunkier with ABXY movement.
Technically, ABXY and dual analog will objectively never be as fast as the touchscreen or mouse set up simply because ABXY and a second stick will always be limited to riding off of the x and y axes for movement in a 3d space. What this means is that a second stick gives you INDIRECT control of a cursor/cross-hair which is why one would feel the need to max out the sensitivity in the first place. It is also the reason why auto-aim and aim-assist exist in the first place. On the other hand, touchscreen/stylus/mouse controls give you DIRECT cursor movement. Like others in this thread have already stated, dual analog is inherently gimped for the nervous and pinpoint nature of this game.
I'm have been playing with twin sticks since they were ushered in the game world during the PSX. I used be a hardcore gears of war 2 and 3 player, at one point in time I was in the top 1000 in annex (gears 2), so I know my way around the second stick pretty fucking well. The first time I got to experiment with touchscreen controls was when I got a dsi as a graduation gift and I played my brothers black ops ds. I was in fucking awe at how fast I was able to do a 180 degree turn. And how making fine adjustments were so direct and unconstricted. Right then and there I was a believer.
Trust me when I say mo matter how high you crank up the sensitivity, a second stick still doesn't compare. If you think it does, it's just a placebo effect from all the years of dual stick conditioning imo.
(Btw I use my thumb on the touchscreen exclusively instead of the stylus. The 3ds' screen is now sensitive enough that I can use this viably, thus eliminating discomfort as I hold the system normally.)
After playing this and Sin and Punishment 2, I'm a little disappointed that this game wasn't made for the Wii. That would also help fix the camera issue on the ground, since you could use the D-pad while walking.
Still love this game anyway, even if it makes me uncomfortable after too long.
I feel this is the perfect platform for a game like this because the touchscreen and even gyro (as seen in Resident Evil Revelations and Uncharted: Golden Abyss) are more accurate that the Wii's IR.
The difference is that the Wiimote makes for a fantastic control scheme where as the 3DS doesn't. You shouldn't emphasize an inferior control scheme just because your handheld lacks features.
See the above sentence. The 3ds has TWO fantastic control schemes to the Wii's (imo inferior) one.
