controller

And another response about controllers. I just checked my post again, and I literally didn't mention ANYTHING about controllers.

I don't mind talking about controllers, but I'm genuinely curious. Why are so many people mentioning controllers, when I was only talking about mouse controls?

controller

Why do so many people keep responding with comments about controllers???

I am exclusively talking about mouse settings. Was that somehow not clear? I mean, I never said anything about controllers.

I'm not mad, I'm just really REALLY confused.

That's a really good point. I'm a full-palm-grip sort of mouse user, where I only use the fingers to click, and all the movement come from the arm itself. I suspect that means I'd get less utility out of changing the axis values.

I think I would actually lose my mind, trying to switch to inverted Y. Have you always rolled like that?

Wisdom.

As I've said to a couple of people, I definitely have seen people set different X and Y settings on joysticks/thumbsticks/tilt-controls. I'm specifically talking about the mouse version, which I've never actually encountered anybody using, up until the testimony of these people, in this thread.

And yeah, my experience is the same as yours. It's only been in the last six or seven years that I've really started to see games include options to set individual axis controls for the mouse.

In those most current years, though, it has been a very common option. The majority of medium-to-AAA budgeted games include the option. I did figure that meant some people were using it. I just wondered how common it really was. I'd never considered trying it myself, deliberately, until now.

The more people mention this, the more I'm almost starting to continue trying it. If you really get used to it, it probably does make it easier to adjust the Y axis for headshots, while you're turning through the X axis. Basically, if you have to cover more Y axis space on the mousepad to adjust the same amount of Y pixels on the screen, you'd theoretically be less likely to move too much in that axis, and overshoot where you want to place the crosshairs.

On the other hand, I've been using the same values for X and Y for decades. There's a lot of accumulated muscle memory to reprogram.

Now I wonder how many pro FPS players play with different X and Y settings...

I've definitely seen people use different X and Y settings, on all kinds of different joystick-style deices. I've even occasionally set different X and Y values on those, myself.

I'm specifically talking about the mouse situation.

Would be nice if you could lock them together, but that is a little more complex and requires more thought to do

I think the reverse is true. Up until a few years ago, it was VERY rare to see any games (or any other apps) give users separated control over each axis, for the mouse. Back in the day, there wasn't ALWAYS even a GUI-enabled setting for sensitivity, at all. You'd just type a console command, and it would adjust the overall mouse sensitivity, which would be applied to both the X and Y.

I'm sure there were some of those games, where you could indeed use a different console command to change each axis, separately.

At any rate, once you've implemented a setting in the graphical user interface menu system for changing the X and Y, it technically would involve a bit more effort to provide an option to lock them together, so I don't mind just adjusting X and Y to the same values, myself.

I was just curious whether anyone out there actually is setting their horizontal and vertical mouse movement to different values, at all, or if it's just an option with nobody making use of it.

I've been playing FPS games since Wolfenstein 3D (and most people didn't even use the mouse for those very early FPSes), and I have never considered trying that. As I said to a couple other people, I've accidentally set the X and Y to different values, and it just destroys my ability to aim.

But, ya know, I haven't practiced it. It could offer an objective advantage, of some kind.

At any rate, I'm just glad there are people using it. It would be weird if it was a very common option in modern games, with nobody putting it to use, at all.

I've never tried it deliberately, but every time I've accidentally set the X and Y to different values, it has just destroyed my accuracy and made me motion-sick, into the bargain.

But I guess you could get used to it, and then it could give some kind of objective advantage.

It’s probably useful in fps or with ultrawide/span monitor setups.

That might be the case, but I still think it would just give me motion sickness. That's what has happened, every time I've accidentally had one axis set to a larger value than the other. It just makes me feel like my hands and eyes are disconnected.

But if some people dig it, that's cool.

Cuban sandwiches are the perfect example of something that invokes a feeling of "it CAN'T be that Earth-shatteringly good," when you first hear about it. In all innocence, you're like "it's just a pork sandwich, right? How can it be this big of a deal to people?"

But then you have a well-made one, and you want to build a time-machine, just so you can go back in time and slap yourself in the fucking face for thinking that dumb shit. Because they're absolutely the best sandwich, and you WILL fight anyone who says different.

Fuck banks and fuck the banking system.

I'm sorry to be so blunt about this, but you're kind of being a willing sucker. Inviting people to hate the banks has been the most underrated, under-the-radar, flawlessly effective political smoke-and-mirrors distraction, for generations. And here you go, just buying right into it.

As a distraction, it's absolutely perfect, because it works from every possible political angle. If you're a liberal/progressive/socialist, the banks can be a stand-in for capitalism. You can scream about the evils of the banking system, without actually using the word "capitalism," and maybe get some people onto your side.

If you're a libertarian/fiscal-conservative/anti-globalist-right-winger, you can accuse the banks of being covertly or overtly controlled by <insert group that you hate> and you can feature them in all kinds of conspiracy theories about The Libs™ weakening your native nation by coupling it to the monetary systems of other nations that you dislike, etc.

If you're in the political middle (or claim to be), you can pick and choose from any of the above.

In reality, the banking system is going to be necessary for the next couple of centuries. Period. That's a fact. Nothing can change that, even if it was a good idea to change it. Which I'm not really sure of, because of all the political distraction that always surrounds the whole thing.

The fact remains: people getting all riled up about "the bankers" is music to the ears of every politician who doesn't actually have any intention of passing good laws, to help people's lives. Or repealing shitty laws that are fucking up people's lives.

If you think getting rid of the banking system would instantly solve all our problems, I've got an apparently very low-interest loan I can give you, to buy a bridge in Brooklyn.

Calling people "toxic" for telling the truth is the most annoying thing about Gen Z. You guys never would have launched any of the necessary revolutions and societal upheavals of history, because you'd just shoot the messenger.

"That Thomas Paine guy is so toxic. I don't have enough spoons to deal with his aggro bullshit."

As I mentioned to someone else, look at the world we're living in. Mood-altering drugs are for situations when nothing is wrong, but you're sad and numb anyway.

But, ya know, that's not the case. Look around. Everything is wrong. We all have good reasons to be sad, numb, furious, tired, etc. Therefore, it's inappropriate to drug ourselves into feeling slap-hap-fuckin'-happy.

That would be like getting into a motorcycle accident, noticing your leg is shattered, with bones sticking out of the skin, and saying "I guess I'll take morphine forever. As long as I'm feelin' fine, it's alllll good."

No. Not good. Pain and rage are the appropriate and logical responses to our situation. Medicating ourselves into not feeling those perfectly appropriate emotions would just be drug abuse. If I want to abuse drugs, I'll get them off the street, and pay a way more reasonable price than my health insurance would suck out of my wallet, for their approved happy-feel-good drugs.

solutions to your complaint

Read my question again. I was not asking for "solutions." I was not asking for tech support. I was asking for the REASON behind Microsoft specifically wanting people to agree to a free upgrade of their OS.

Read through my replies. I have been entirely receptive and cordial toward any speculation on that topic.

What I didn't want was advice. Or lectures. Or solutions. On the one hand, I was so clear about that point that you referred to my post as a "wall of indignant text." On the other hand, I guess my wall of text wasn't big enough, because you still didn't understand the question.

Again: I was asking about the whys and the hows of the situation. Not solutions to it. And plenty of people have provided good answers.

I disabled all the touchscreen nonsense the VERY DAY that was forced to install Windows 10. It's still bloated and inefficient and inferior to Windows 7. And 11 will be even worse, even if I can make it look mostly like the current version.

And yeah, I guess I was venting. I was also genuinely wondering if there was some specific benefit that Microsoft would gain from me upgrading, that I hadn't thought about. The answer seems to be "nah, they just want to be able to advertise to you more effectively, and suck up your data."

Whatever.

I honestly didn't 100 percent know the answer. I was seriously wondering if there was some direct, specific reason that I hadn't thought of. But it's just the boring speculation that I could have done. I agree I shouldn't have bothered.

As for toxicity, sure. I'm toxic. The world is toxic. It's the new fashion. I believe we are all bearing witness to the Great Filter that keeps all civilizations from achieving high technology and exploring the universe (read up on the concept). The "filter" is simply ourselves. We fucking suck.

In essence, intelligence itself was nature's greatest mistake. Awareness is a curse. All is vanity. We're cresting the peak of our achievements, as naked apes, and we will shortly begin the painful process of erasing all our gains, and returning to dust. Good riddance, and I mean that. We are not a good thing for the planet, nor for ourselves.

But I don't have to be all sweetness and light about any of it.

You seem a bit agitated

I have the misfortune to be living in 2024. If you are not agitated, you are not paying attention.

And I suppose I was looking for a more specific answer than really exists, for this situation. From Microsoft's perspective, they need me to upgrade, so that I can be part of the current version of their money-sucking system. Whatever. I'll do it. Who even cares.