Geez, get a little defensive why don't you. FWIW it wasn't (and isn't) my intention to somehow piss you off or otherwise get under your skin. If I did, I apologize.

And as far as realism is concerned, playing a shooter with a controller is much, much, MUCH more realistic than a mouse. IRL, as a lifelong hunter AND US Army veteran, I can tell you that even the best marksman in the history of the world (Lee Harvey Oswald) can't move and instantaneously have pinpoint aim like you can with a mouse. The controller's "wobbliness" and inability to be that precise is exactly how it is IRL.

For strategy games they are very inefficient. You can do with a controller, but then you can also play TIE-fighter with a mouse as well. Have done both! ;-)

You can get used to everything, and things improve to a certain degree, but it is just better to have the right tool. For work, the productivity increases; when playing, more comfort and a faster response are things to be glad for.

Also: some PC games in GOG do beg for a controller: Rebel Galaxy, BattleChasers: Nightwar, to name two.

Also, Darkest Dungeon does not play badly with a controlller because of the linearity and simplicity of the movement in the dungeons.

Of couorse, game designers are thinking in placing their games in different platforms, so this is a thrend in modern games.It is different from having a direct console port, often with interface conventions that with a regular keyboard and mouse may be ackward.

I've heard this argument before and it makes some sense. I used to shoot guns with my dad as a teen and it definitely wasn't as easy as mouse control is. The problem though is most console games don't just give you the stick, call it a day and balance for that. They add a lot of aim assistance or even snap-to aiming, which is far from realistic as well. I've been watching a lot of Hitman 2 videos lately and on consoles you literally just press a button and he targets the head of whoever is in front of you automatically. That's not realistic, that's taking away the gameplay. Same with Call of Duty's aiming down the sights snapping to enemies.

In the end there's no real perfect solution, realism wise. Also crosshairs and quicksave and everything else isn't realistic either, obviously. So I think what is best for actual gameplay is better, and in my opinion for any shooter that's a mouse.

Many console shooters do allow you to disable snap-to-target though.

Depends on how old you are and what games you have played in your life.
I've played strategy games with a two button joystick.
No problems.

In the end it all boils down to two questions:

1) how complex is the game?
2) Is the controller able to match that complexity?

Goldeneye N64 let you do that and people were aiming with their left hand.


Its features improve on whats out at the moment but the shape doesn't look good for holding it in different positions.

Most FPS are designed for the mouse and keyboard that's why their flaws aren't obvious. They are if you have a FPS game where you can move your head separate from your aim,where you can freely move a gun around separate from your view or some other advanced gameplay.

Someone should get to work on making a VR adapter so you can use those stick controllers/ VR gloves and headtracking without having a full VR setup.

I'm waiting for a full Lawnmower Man haptic suit with autonomic I/O.