Resident Evil 5 doesn't load profiles with Twin USB Joypad

If you're willing to get your hands dirty and learn. YMMV. (Read the video description).


How To Turn Generic Gamepad Into an Xbox Controller - YouTube

mulambo said:

well then how come Tony Hawk HD and Saints Row 3 (not remastered) both also require an xbox 360 controller to be played? THHD with a different controller has 1st stick y-axis reversed (same goes for the d-pad)... while Saints Row 3 button layout for a generic USB controller is... just "drunk" is the correct word I can use to describe it (in fact, I think I'll just play it with keyboard). For both of them the only solution I've found on the internet was x360ce ... which didn't help because such program didn't even recognize c++ libraries correctly (or maybe it's coded for w10 ? )

Because you are missing the point. Games lean either to supporting XInnput controllers or Direct Input or both but its not uncommon for games to be one or the other. Generally many older PC games like from the last 30 years on wards will be Direct Input where as games made after 2005 can be either Xinput or Direct where Xinput is the more common and more supported of the two.

If your Dinput controllers work on these games you mentioned great i guess but also poorly then they obvs handled them poorly for those ports. I know Saints row was a bad port on the PC.

So if any game already supports both XInput and Direct Input then good for people that want to play with non Xbox Controllers otherwise bad luck.

Again XInput is the dominate standard now on PC some games support Direct Input but its not as common.

- - - Updated - - -

You also have some amalgamation of a controller tbh these cheap Chinese Direct input controllers can be all kinds of messed up. Looking at that photo of the controller tbh you got what you payed for imo and it looks like Frankenstein the controller.

Malneb said:

Because you are missing the point. Games lean either to supporting XInnput controllers or Direct Input or both but its not uncommon for games to be one or the other. Generally many older PC games like from the last 30 years on wards will be Direct Input where as games made after 2005 can be either Xinput or Direct where Xinput is the more common and more supported of the two. If your Dinput controllers work on these games you mentioned great i guess but also poorly then they obvs handled them poorly for those ports. I know Saints row was a bad port on the PC. So if any game already supports both XInput and Direct Input then good for people that want to play with non Xbox Controllers otherwise bad luck. Again XInput is the dominate standard now on PC some games support Direct Input but its not as common. - - - Updated - - - You also have some amalgamation of a controller tbh these cheap Chinese Direct input controllers can be all kinds of messed up. Looking at that photo of the controller tbh you got what you payed for imo and it looks like Frankenstein the controller.

I see... then all I need is an Xinput emulator. Anyway, how can this "interpreters" fragmentation be explained? I mean it didn't happen for joypads only, but obviously for video stuff like.... Directx, OpenGl, Vulcan... what else? How come, for example, there isn't just one video plugin for all games? Wouldn't it be simpler and less troubling for all PC gamers? And why only certain OS can support newer versions of such plugins, even if the video card supports them? I mean: what drives developers into relying on certain plugins instead of others? Sorry for these extra questions, but since I went missing the point about joypads, I think I miss the point about video stuff too

Questions like that are not easily answered as the scope is to dynamic. Code base becomes depreciated over time for several reasons.
Technology can evolve to a point where it needs new code and updating old code is not always a good idea, as tech innovates we see features we did not see in the past so old code works well up until it doesn't and should probably be rewritten for new tech.

For example you mentione OpenGL and Vulkan. OpenGL and Vulkan are directly related as OpenGL is Vulkan predecessor which is a good example here.

Vulkan is lower level API than OpenGL meaning it can work more closly with hardware in a more optimized manner it was the step forward in that sense that it was probably a lot easier for them to start fresh with Vulkan then to try and redesign years of work of OpenGL from the ground up which would take a long time and compromise OpenGL in all its integrity. Tech has evolved to a point where new API is warranted. Coding practices and infrastructure has also evolved considerably since 1992 also.

Computers and hardware change over time its not static if you were computing in the 90s or earlier then you would know that these were some strange times. There was no one standard for many things but it is also due to the fact that some computer nerds somewhere thought they could implement their vision better than someone else or one group better than the other group.

Like anything that is currently being invented/reinvented we have seen some pretty odd ball things in computing. the 90s is a good example of this as they were trying all sorts of weird things with computer tech because they didn't know unless they tried to innovate. I would say we have hit the pinnacle atm until quantum computing fully happens we don't have much further we ca go on our current trajectory its all just old or established tech/standards getting faster.

Malneb said:

Questions like that are not easily answered as the scope is to dynamic. Code base becomes depreciated over time for several reasons. Technology can evolve to a point where it needs new code and updating old code is not always a good idea, as tech innovates we see features we did not see in the past so old code works well up until it doesn't and should probably be rewritten for new tech. For example you mentione OpenGL and Vulkan. OpenGL and Vulkan are directly related as OpenGL is Vulkan predecessor which is a good example here. Vulkan is lower level API than OpenGL meaning it can work more closly with hardware in a more optimized manner it was the step forward in that sense that it was probably a lot easier for them to start fresh with Vulkan then to try and redesign years of work of OpenGL from the ground up which would take a long time and compromise OpenGL in all its integrity. Tech has evolved to a point where new API is warranted. Coding practices and infrastructure has also evolved considerably since 1992 also. Computers and hardware change over time its not static if you were computing in the 90s or earlier then you would know that these were some strange times. There was no one standard for many things but it is also due to the fact that some computer nerds somewhere thought they could implement their vision better than someone else or one group better than the other group. Like anything that is currently being invented/reinvented we have seen some pretty odd ball things in computing. the 90s is a good example of this as they were trying all sorts of weird things with computer tech because they didn't know unless they tried to innovate. I would say we have hit the pinnacle atm until quantum computing fully happens we don't have much further we ca go on our current trajectory its all just old or established tech/standards getting faster.

All I see is those nerds turned into corporations, but the competition in "standards-definition" is still there. If it was for a matter of vision or ego before, now it's a simple matter of greed. I mean, compatibility issues existed in the 00's (when I had my first PC) and still exist nowadays. All I see as a very strange fact is that, if a particular joypad "had" to be promoted as a standard... why a console joypad? Because it was "versatile" enough?

Speaking on the subject of the Xbox controller. U.S. Navy swapping $38,000 periscope joysticks for $30 Xbox controllers on high-tech submarines – GeekWire

F22 Simpilot said:

Speaking on the subject of the Xbox controller. U.S. Navy swapping $38,000 periscope joysticks for $30 Xbox controllers on high-tech submarines – GeekWire

Interesting, but somehow not really shocking. I've seen "simple" gaming controllers being used in any part of science, from robotics to surgery... yes, the shocking factor is that using them for a game is normal, but for an open-heart surgery (or a military operations where thousands of people can be involved) is a whole different level, where the "game over" or "mission failed" is way more serious than the one on the screen... Technically, with a mapper like joytokey, anything that's originally supposed to be done with a keyboard can be done with a joypad... so technically if a world leader maps a joypad to the password of a nuclear bomb launch, it would be like enter a cheat code in a videogame.

HAHAHA "Technically", launching a nuclear missile or calling out the B-2s, etc is a little bit more complex than that. At least in the United States. You'll note that the U.S. Navy only uses the controller for the periscope... Extreme crucial things that could cause WWIII or a global conflict of some kind are not going to be hinged on the apparatus of subpar untested mechanics and whatnot. There's all kinds of testing that has to be done just for the simplest of things. It's pretty much why the U.S company Fluke and their testing equipment is so relied upon for bona fide testing and certification purposes. There's a bit to that story but I don't feel like typing it out.

F22 Simpilot said:

HAHAHA "Technically", launching a nuclear missile or calling out the B-2s, etc is a little bit more complex than that. At least in the United States. You'll note that the U.S. Navy only uses the controller for the periscope... Extreme crucial things that could cause WWIII or a global conflict of some kind are not going to be hinged on the apparatus of subpar untested mechanics and whatnot. There's all kinds of testing that has to be done just for the simplest of things. It's pretty much why the U.S company Fluke and their testing equipment is so relied upon for bona fide testing and certification purposes. There's a bit to that story but I don't feel like typing it out.

Seen the diplomatic disasters Trump made by just using Twitter, I wouldn't be surprised if some other president would make it worse by just using a joypad. "Anything goes", seems the way to go. But /offtopic... I may be just overly pessimistic.

Yep, total diplomatic disaster that no president ever achieved....


https://www.lowyinstitute.org/sites/...b8899c9c_k.jpg