you can't. only thing I can do is use swap the actual buttons themselves outside the game which fricks up the on screen qte buttons. I don't know which is worse
you can't. only thing I can do is use swap the actual buttons themselves outside the game which fricks up the on screen qte buttons. I don't know which is worse
I mean...okay, wait what? You're mad that the interact/action button is X instead of A? I mean, I'll agree it's bullshit that they didn't make the controls completely mappable but if that's your biggest complaint, it seems like a pretty good solution overall.
I just find it super annoying, and none of the other options work without other annoying trade offs.
8 months ago
Anonymous
But that's the only tradeoff in Type 2. It's fine if it bugs you, but you adjust very quickly. It honestly makes sense with Run placed on A, so you can just roll your thumb to interact.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I've adjusted to shooting with square. I'm really just b***hing because it's an option in the fricking RE1 remake to swap the action button alone but not here
8 months ago
Anonymous
action button is still x in type 2 or am i tripping?
8 months ago
Anonymous
Actually you're right. Just checked and it's X in Type 1 as well.
I've adjusted to shooting with square. I'm really just b***hing because it's an option in the fricking RE1 remake to swap the action button alone but not here
Anon what's your fricking deal? You're just mad that this specific game doesn't let you pick which button is interact? I thought you were mad that control types change it but it doesn't even do that. Type 2 gives you shoulder button controls with no downsides.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I just haven't loaded the game to check alternate control types to confirm if any of them change the action button or not. but remember that if one does, it makes something else moronic. it's a low effort thread sure but a legitimate source of annoyance for me.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I mean, I've posted two of the control schemes, and the third only changes which stick you use to aim in case you want it to act like more modern shooters that use right stick. Nothing is "made moronic" between Type 1 and Type 2; the controls are almost entirely the same except when your weapon is raised, at which point instead of using the face buttons to fire, you use the shoulder buttons, which is the whole point of the alternate scheme.
I think you imagined and issue and misremembered it, then made a whole thread about it. Which, more RE4 discussion is always good but man, weird thing not to just check before posting.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>I think you imagined and issue and misremembered it,
ok so which control scheme do I use to make A the action button while changing nothing else? That is my issue. Still valid
8 months ago
Anonymous
There is none, and if your complaint is "there's no free button mapping in this game," sure, it's a fair complaint, I think every game should have it as a feature.
I guess your initial complaint, "why is the action/shoot button square, and why can't I change that?," was confusing for a lot of folks (me included,) who assumed your issue was that shoot was on Square/X, which CAN be changed, but your issue seems to just be that you can't freely map buttons in general, and thus Action is stuck on Square.
Because it originated on the GameCube where shoot was the big giant A Button which was always used for the primary action of the game. Shooting on the shoulder buttons is actually really unnatural for action games and is pretty much just a side effect of shitty dual analog controls meaning your thumb has to always be on the stick.
RE4 literally uses dual analog controls; when not aiming, the camera is controlled by the right analog (C) stick. However since you can't move while aiming, it places the aim and movement control on the same stick. The reason modern games don't do this is because you can move while aiming, so those controls have to be separated.
Are you saying that it's better, in all cases, to be unable to move while aiming, or do you maybe have another solution for moving while aiming that doesn't require two sticks? I'd love to know what solution you'd have as an alternative to "shitty dual analog controls" that:
1. Allows movement while aiming
2. Allows access to the face buttons while moving and aiming
3. Isn't just using a mouse and keyboard
I'd also be curious as to why you feel that shooting using shoulder buttons is "unnatural" for action games. For many people, it emulates pulling a trigger (or literally is on modern consoles,) so it feels very natural for shooters.
>RE4 literally uses dual analog controls; when not aiming, the camera is controlled by the right analog (C) stick
The C-stick will only look hard left or hard right, you don't have a free camera and never did. Its use is to look around corners when you're going down hallways. It has nothing in common with a generic free camera at all.
>Are you saying that it's better, in all cases, to be unable to move while aiming
No, but it's better in the case of RE4, because that's how the game was designed. It's better in the case of an action shooting game, which is the lineage it came from. Play more Japanese games and arcade games, RE has nothing to do with FPS games and giving it those controls makes no fricking sense.
>Shooting on the shoulder buttons is actually really unnatural
Ah yes, the unnatural sensation of using trigger buttons with your index finger to simulate pulling a trigger with your index finger.
That's a gimmick, on a controller it makes far more sense for the primary action to be used with your thumb (that would be the X and Square buttons on a PS controller).
It looks eight directions, not left or right. It's just coded to follow the octagon of the physical controller. No free cam though, that's true.
>No, but it's better in the case of RE4, because that's how the game was designed.
I mean, yeah. Obviously.
>It's better in the case of an action shooting game, which is the lineage it came from.
That's gonna need more backing up. Why should TPS or shooting games be limited in movement when aiming?
>RE has nothing to do with FPS games and giving it those controls makes no fricking sense.
I mean, people said similar stuff about what RE4 did when it came out. The series evolved and has included more gameplay styles into what makes RE what it is. Hell, Code Veronica had a First Person mode in Battle Mode, I believe. The game has moved steadily toward action horror since RE2.
And, again, we're talking about TPS, not FPS. Dual analog isn't a point of view thing, it's about level of control of your character. If you can move and shoot at the same time, dual analog is necessary. That's all there is to it.
>Why should TPS or shooting games be limited in movement when aiming?
It depends entirely on the game you're trying to design and whether free aim is conducive to that design. It's not conducive to RE4 because RE4 isn't a generic TPS.
>If you can move and shoot at the same time, dual analog is necessary.
True, but being able to move and shoot at the same time isn't necessary for a TPS, and not all video games should have the same controllers, something zoomers can't seem to comprehend.
y=triangle
x=circle
a=x
b=square
that's the only logical way
A = X
Y = Square
B = Circle
X = Triangle
This makes more sense because on Gamecube your thumb can hit Y and A at the same time without moving positions, while B and X are off to the sides. For example, in F-Zero GX you hit Y to boost because it's right above A and you don't have to let go of the accelerator. If you map Y to Triangle on a PS controller you have to take your thumb off X to hit it.
>It depends entirely on the game you're trying to design and whether free aim is conducive to that design. It's not conducive to RE4 because RE4 isn't a generic TPS.
Cool, no argument.
>True, but being able to move and shoot at the same time isn't necessary for a TPS, and not all video games should have the same controllers, something zoomers can't seem to comprehend.
Again, agree here.
No one's trying to make RE4 use dual analog, so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about here. OP was wrong about what control options are available, as demonstrated here
[...]
Why must you lie on the internet?
, so they can use left or right stick to aim. You implied there was some issue with "shitty" dual analog controls, but you're acknowledging there's not if the game was designed around them, so I don't really understand what your initial point was.
The Remake WAS designed around dual analog, so I hope that's not what you're getting at.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Cool, no argument.
If you think that's not an argument, you don't understand game design at all.
>No one's trying to make RE4 use dual analog, so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about here
The only reason to put shoot on the shoulder buttons instead of where your thumb naturally rests is if you're used to playing dual analog shooters, which only do it out of necessity. Putting the primary actions under your thumb will always be better if it's possible.
>The Remake WAS designed around dual analog, so I hope that's not what you're getting at.
And the remake plays completely differently, and makes a lot of tradeoffs to allow for the free camera. It's a pretty good game, but opting for a generic camera has drawbacks that make it feel less responsive and limit what they're able to do with its design in a way the original didn't, because the original's camera system was designed for the game specifically rather than dropping in a one-size-fits-all, off-the-shelf solution.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>If you think that's not an argument, you don't understand game design at all.
Sorry, didn't mean "you're not offering an argument," I meant "no argument from me."
>The only reason to put shoot on the shoulder buttons instead of where your thumb naturally rests is if you're used to playing dual analog shooters, which only do it out of necessity. Putting the primary actions under your thumb will always be better if it's possible.
Okay. Again, I agree with you here. What OP was talking about is an optional control scheme added to the HD Edition, and even then was wrong since it's an alternate-alternate control scheme that's specifically to emulate modern dual analog controls. I guess in the end...you don't really have an issue and are just annoyed that some modern players can't adapt to the old control method?
>And the remake plays completely differently, and makes a lot of tradeoffs to allow for the free camera. It's a pretty good game, but opting for a generic camera has drawbacks that make it feel less responsive and limit what they're able to do with its design in a way the original didn't, because the original's camera system was designed for the game specifically rather than dropping in a one-size-fits-all, off-the-shelf solution.
I mean, the OG had plenty of tradeoffs and limitations around its more limited camera system as well, in terms of what they allowed enemies to do, etc. Comparing them directly though is a bit apples and oranges, since RE4 is much more arcadey than RE4R, and is designed, in my opinion, with fun in mind more than RE4R is, which is meant to be more "grounded." Both have their appeals, and while I agree RE4 is more responsive, there's more "weight" to RE4R's combat.
Personally, I'm glad we have both. They're very different, complimentary experiences.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>I guess in the end...you don't really have an issue and are just annoyed that some modern players can't adapt to the old control method?
Yes. Most games play the same now in terms of control and I think that's because modern audiences have an expectation that there is one "best way" that all games need to adopt, even when it doesn't fit with their design. Putting shoot on a shoulder button for RE4 doesn't really make any sense because there's never an instance where your thumb isn't going to be free to hit the action button in a fight.
>Both have their appeals, and while I agree RE4 is more responsive, there's more "weight" to RE4R's combat.
There's a fine line between "weight" and "sluggishness". Personally I find RE4R to be "weighty" in the same way moving around in a modern Rockstar game is "weighty"; as in, sluggish and unrepsonsive, with the character lumbering around because it's not "realistic" to be able to instantly turn on a dime. Games that do weightiness well for me would be old-school Castlevania, or Shadow of the Colossus, or the Souls games. But RE4R's movement doesn't really make sense for the kind of game it is, and it'd be better with snappier movement.
Like, in your mind maybe yeah, but in practice, It usually worked more like:
A=X
B=Circle
Y=Triangle
X=Square
B was always the "Back" or "Cancel" button, which was Circle 99% of the time. X and Y could be interchangeable depending on how the dev felt, but A being X and B being Circle was true almost always.
Personally I do this thing where I will be annoyed by the control setup for a game for like an hour, but then when I change it, I will keep going for the default setup on accident
I could swear that it was X not Square, unless you changed to another preset or something, if that is even a thing, I don't think I ever changed the RE4 controls on PS2
What I really want to know is if on ps4 it's the same or not, because (in ps controller terms) I believe RE5 has this same issue where square is the action button on pc, but on ps3 it was X. Anyway, this whole conversation is unnecessarily complicated by every controller having an X button in a different fricking place
Yeah. While I love the iconography of the Playstation shapes, I wish controllers would move to a unified letter placement so it's ubiquitous across consoles.
Sometimes I feel like we should use Fighting Game notation style shit all the time.
why does it matter
Because it feels unnatural and it's annoying. Even the RE1 remake has an option to change the action button on pc. Don't defend this.
Stop crying you literal baby.
kys etc etc
My guy are really playing on PC and don't know how to remap controls outside of the game?
see
>playing FPS games on controller
>re4
>fps
???
moron
>not gamecube
You're not playing the real version
No, I'm playing the hd project because I sold my gamecube in the early 2000s
Sorry to hear that
I've come to terms with it.
Are you playing the HD Edition? I think you can change it.
you can't. only thing I can do is use swap the actual buttons themselves outside the game which fricks up the on screen qte buttons. I don't know which is worse
Why must you lie on the internet?
so I can only have a as the action button if I change aiming from RT to LT? Sounds like fricking bullshit to me
I mean...okay, wait what? You're mad that the interact/action button is X instead of A? I mean, I'll agree it's bullshit that they didn't make the controls completely mappable but if that's your biggest complaint, it seems like a pretty good solution overall.
I just find it super annoying, and none of the other options work without other annoying trade offs.
But that's the only tradeoff in Type 2. It's fine if it bugs you, but you adjust very quickly. It honestly makes sense with Run placed on A, so you can just roll your thumb to interact.
I've adjusted to shooting with square. I'm really just b***hing because it's an option in the fricking RE1 remake to swap the action button alone but not here
action button is still x in type 2 or am i tripping?
Actually you're right. Just checked and it's X in Type 1 as well.
Anon what's your fricking deal? You're just mad that this specific game doesn't let you pick which button is interact? I thought you were mad that control types change it but it doesn't even do that. Type 2 gives you shoulder button controls with no downsides.
I just haven't loaded the game to check alternate control types to confirm if any of them change the action button or not. but remember that if one does, it makes something else moronic. it's a low effort thread sure but a legitimate source of annoyance for me.
I mean, I've posted two of the control schemes, and the third only changes which stick you use to aim in case you want it to act like more modern shooters that use right stick. Nothing is "made moronic" between Type 1 and Type 2; the controls are almost entirely the same except when your weapon is raised, at which point instead of using the face buttons to fire, you use the shoulder buttons, which is the whole point of the alternate scheme.
I think you imagined and issue and misremembered it, then made a whole thread about it. Which, more RE4 discussion is always good but man, weird thing not to just check before posting.
>I think you imagined and issue and misremembered it,
ok so which control scheme do I use to make A the action button while changing nothing else? That is my issue. Still valid
There is none, and if your complaint is "there's no free button mapping in this game," sure, it's a fair complaint, I think every game should have it as a feature.
I guess your initial complaint, "why is the action/shoot button square, and why can't I change that?," was confusing for a lot of folks (me included,) who assumed your issue was that shoot was on Square/X, which CAN be changed, but your issue seems to just be that you can't freely map buttons in general, and thus Action is stuck on Square.
I think RE5 has the same problem on pc.
Third controller preset. Don't tell me you're emulating the meme version when PC is objectively the best? lmao
The other presets change aiming from the left stick to the right stick, which is dogshit, but technically I think you're right.
Archaic button layout, funny thing is that it's the same in demake.
Because it originated on the GameCube where shoot was the big giant A Button which was always used for the primary action of the game. Shooting on the shoulder buttons is actually really unnatural for action games and is pretty much just a side effect of shitty dual analog controls meaning your thumb has to always be on the stick.
RE4 literally uses dual analog controls; when not aiming, the camera is controlled by the right analog (C) stick. However since you can't move while aiming, it places the aim and movement control on the same stick. The reason modern games don't do this is because you can move while aiming, so those controls have to be separated.
Are you saying that it's better, in all cases, to be unable to move while aiming, or do you maybe have another solution for moving while aiming that doesn't require two sticks? I'd love to know what solution you'd have as an alternative to "shitty dual analog controls" that:
1. Allows movement while aiming
2. Allows access to the face buttons while moving and aiming
3. Isn't just using a mouse and keyboard
I'd also be curious as to why you feel that shooting using shoulder buttons is "unnatural" for action games. For many people, it emulates pulling a trigger (or literally is on modern consoles,) so it feels very natural for shooters.
>RE4 literally uses dual analog controls; when not aiming, the camera is controlled by the right analog (C) stick
The C-stick will only look hard left or hard right, you don't have a free camera and never did. Its use is to look around corners when you're going down hallways. It has nothing in common with a generic free camera at all.
>Are you saying that it's better, in all cases, to be unable to move while aiming
No, but it's better in the case of RE4, because that's how the game was designed. It's better in the case of an action shooting game, which is the lineage it came from. Play more Japanese games and arcade games, RE has nothing to do with FPS games and giving it those controls makes no fricking sense.
That's a gimmick, on a controller it makes far more sense for the primary action to be used with your thumb (that would be the X and Square buttons on a PS controller).
It looks eight directions, not left or right. It's just coded to follow the octagon of the physical controller. No free cam though, that's true.
>No, but it's better in the case of RE4, because that's how the game was designed.
I mean, yeah. Obviously.
>It's better in the case of an action shooting game, which is the lineage it came from.
That's gonna need more backing up. Why should TPS or shooting games be limited in movement when aiming?
>RE has nothing to do with FPS games and giving it those controls makes no fricking sense.
I mean, people said similar stuff about what RE4 did when it came out. The series evolved and has included more gameplay styles into what makes RE what it is. Hell, Code Veronica had a First Person mode in Battle Mode, I believe. The game has moved steadily toward action horror since RE2.
And, again, we're talking about TPS, not FPS. Dual analog isn't a point of view thing, it's about level of control of your character. If you can move and shoot at the same time, dual analog is necessary. That's all there is to it.
>Why should TPS or shooting games be limited in movement when aiming?
It depends entirely on the game you're trying to design and whether free aim is conducive to that design. It's not conducive to RE4 because RE4 isn't a generic TPS.
>If you can move and shoot at the same time, dual analog is necessary.
True, but being able to move and shoot at the same time isn't necessary for a TPS, and not all video games should have the same controllers, something zoomers can't seem to comprehend.
A = X
Y = Square
B = Circle
X = Triangle
This makes more sense because on Gamecube your thumb can hit Y and A at the same time without moving positions, while B and X are off to the sides. For example, in F-Zero GX you hit Y to boost because it's right above A and you don't have to let go of the accelerator. If you map Y to Triangle on a PS controller you have to take your thumb off X to hit it.
>It depends entirely on the game you're trying to design and whether free aim is conducive to that design. It's not conducive to RE4 because RE4 isn't a generic TPS.
Cool, no argument.
>True, but being able to move and shoot at the same time isn't necessary for a TPS, and not all video games should have the same controllers, something zoomers can't seem to comprehend.
Again, agree here.
No one's trying to make RE4 use dual analog, so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about here. OP was wrong about what control options are available, as demonstrated here
, so they can use left or right stick to aim. You implied there was some issue with "shitty" dual analog controls, but you're acknowledging there's not if the game was designed around them, so I don't really understand what your initial point was.
The Remake WAS designed around dual analog, so I hope that's not what you're getting at.
>Cool, no argument.
If you think that's not an argument, you don't understand game design at all.
>No one's trying to make RE4 use dual analog, so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about here
The only reason to put shoot on the shoulder buttons instead of where your thumb naturally rests is if you're used to playing dual analog shooters, which only do it out of necessity. Putting the primary actions under your thumb will always be better if it's possible.
>The Remake WAS designed around dual analog, so I hope that's not what you're getting at.
And the remake plays completely differently, and makes a lot of tradeoffs to allow for the free camera. It's a pretty good game, but opting for a generic camera has drawbacks that make it feel less responsive and limit what they're able to do with its design in a way the original didn't, because the original's camera system was designed for the game specifically rather than dropping in a one-size-fits-all, off-the-shelf solution.
>If you think that's not an argument, you don't understand game design at all.
Sorry, didn't mean "you're not offering an argument," I meant "no argument from me."
>The only reason to put shoot on the shoulder buttons instead of where your thumb naturally rests is if you're used to playing dual analog shooters, which only do it out of necessity. Putting the primary actions under your thumb will always be better if it's possible.
Okay. Again, I agree with you here. What OP was talking about is an optional control scheme added to the HD Edition, and even then was wrong since it's an alternate-alternate control scheme that's specifically to emulate modern dual analog controls. I guess in the end...you don't really have an issue and are just annoyed that some modern players can't adapt to the old control method?
>And the remake plays completely differently, and makes a lot of tradeoffs to allow for the free camera. It's a pretty good game, but opting for a generic camera has drawbacks that make it feel less responsive and limit what they're able to do with its design in a way the original didn't, because the original's camera system was designed for the game specifically rather than dropping in a one-size-fits-all, off-the-shelf solution.
I mean, the OG had plenty of tradeoffs and limitations around its more limited camera system as well, in terms of what they allowed enemies to do, etc. Comparing them directly though is a bit apples and oranges, since RE4 is much more arcadey than RE4R, and is designed, in my opinion, with fun in mind more than RE4R is, which is meant to be more "grounded." Both have their appeals, and while I agree RE4 is more responsive, there's more "weight" to RE4R's combat.
Personally, I'm glad we have both. They're very different, complimentary experiences.
>I guess in the end...you don't really have an issue and are just annoyed that some modern players can't adapt to the old control method?
Yes. Most games play the same now in terms of control and I think that's because modern audiences have an expectation that there is one "best way" that all games need to adopt, even when it doesn't fit with their design. Putting shoot on a shoulder button for RE4 doesn't really make any sense because there's never an instance where your thumb isn't going to be free to hit the action button in a fight.
>Both have their appeals, and while I agree RE4 is more responsive, there's more "weight" to RE4R's combat.
There's a fine line between "weight" and "sluggishness". Personally I find RE4R to be "weighty" in the same way moving around in a modern Rockstar game is "weighty"; as in, sluggish and unrepsonsive, with the character lumbering around because it's not "realistic" to be able to instantly turn on a dime. Games that do weightiness well for me would be old-school Castlevania, or Shadow of the Colossus, or the Souls games. But RE4R's movement doesn't really make sense for the kind of game it is, and it'd be better with snappier movement.
>Shooting on the shoulder buttons is actually really unnatural
Ah yes, the unnatural sensation of using trigger buttons with your index finger to simulate pulling a trigger with your index finger.
the reality is that square is the b button of the ps controller. not the fricking a button.
in gamecube terms
In Gamecube terms the square button is like the Y button.
y=triangle
x=circle
a=x
b=square
that's the only logical way
Like, in your mind maybe yeah, but in practice, It usually worked more like:
A=X
B=Circle
Y=Triangle
X=Square
B was always the "Back" or "Cancel" button, which was Circle 99% of the time. X and Y could be interchangeable depending on how the dev felt, but A being X and B being Circle was true almost always.
except here that would mean reloading with circle which is moronic
Any reason to use gamepad over keyboard/mouse in remake?
I just use it because kb&m gives you more free movement than what was initially intended
Black person, you get used to it after 30 minutes. Stop being a b***h and accept different games have different controls
Personally I do this thing where I will be annoyed by the control setup for a game for like an hour, but then when I change it, I will keep going for the default setup on accident
I could swear that it was X not Square, unless you changed to another preset or something, if that is even a thing, I don't think I ever changed the RE4 controls on PS2
What I really want to know is if on ps4 it's the same or not, because (in ps controller terms) I believe RE5 has this same issue where square is the action button on pc, but on ps3 it was X. Anyway, this whole conversation is unnecessarily complicated by every controller having an X button in a different fricking place
Yeah. While I love the iconography of the Playstation shapes, I wish controllers would move to a unified letter placement so it's ubiquitous across consoles.
Sometimes I feel like we should use Fighting Game notation style shit all the time.