Controversial Star Wars Opinion: Blasters Are Innacurate

Stormtroopers are bad shots.  You’ve seen the jokes; it’s one of the most prominent elements of Star Wars humor.  Even people who haven’t seen Star Wars make jokes about it.  It’s even a trope.  You’ve seen explanations in Star Wars novels and comics – the clones are imperfect or the troops are trained too quickly, blah blah blah. 

Now, I don’t care about Expanded Universe explanations.  The original EU is no more, and the Disney EU is only temporarily canon until it contradicts something in a future film.  The movies themselves give better explanations anyway.  Two of the biggest scenes of Stormtrooper ineptitude are already explained in-universe.  While escaping the Death Star in ANH, and on Cloud City in ESB, the Stormtroopers are on orders to miss.  Also, Luke says he can’t see a thing when he tries on a Stormtrooper helmet.  And let’s be honest, the nameless rebels aren’t much better shots.  This is a series where only named characters are competent.  (Except Greedo, apparently, who can’t even hit a guy across a table.)

But for me, I think Obi-Wan was on to something when he called blasters “clumsy and random”.  I think that perhaps Star Wars blasters simply aren’t very accurate.  It’s not a design flaw, it’s a fundamental problem with how energy weapons work in that universe.  Perhaps – and hear me out here – blaster fire tends to drift randomly.  Perhaps the moving bolts of energy are naturally attracted to static electricity in the air, and no weapons designer has been able to compensate for this.  It doesn’t matter what targeting system you use, energy drift can’t be predicted. 

So why do the heroes miss less?  Well, you can always blame The Force, but that’s too easy.  Maybe there’s something about Stormtrooper armor that attracts blaster fire.  Maybe they build up static electricity, so for the same reason blaster fire drifts, it drifts in the direction of Stormtrooper armor.  That would be a serious design flaw, but we already knew Stormtrooper armor was badly designed.  Not only does blaster fire go right through it, but it won’t even protect you from a rock thrown by a teddy bear.  But let’s be fair – they had to mass produce millions of these outfits for Stormtroopers all over the galaxy, how expensive did you expect this armor to be?

Do I get a No-Prize?

Control Freak

Nothing to see here, just a trip down Joystick Memory Lane...

My first console was the Atari 2600.  The Atari’s joystick was iconic – you still see pictures of it today used to represent the history of video games.  However, it was a horrible controller.  Despite being covered by a rubber sleeve, the joystick was easily broken.  

Or maybe we kids were just too rough on them.  But regardless, everyone I knew had at least one joystick they didn’t use any more, because one of the directions didn’t work.  Some of the third party controllers were more durable and controlled better.  I had this one:

Atari’s competitor, Intellivision, had even worse controllers.  The number pad was occasionally useful, but that control disc was just awful.  They made little joysticks you could stick onto the control discs, which helped, but really it was just a bad design all around.  

The Colecovision used similar controllers, but with squat little joysticks instead of discs.  It was slightly better, but still, yuck.

My first computer was the TRS-80.  It had some odd controllers – square plastic bases with thin metal joysticks.  Unlike most joysticks, these were not spring-loaded, so they didn’t center themselves.  If you pressed right, the joystick stayed right, until you moved it back to the center.  Not good.  

My next computer was a Commodore 64.  It used the same controller ports as the Atari, so I just used the third party Atari sticks that we still had lying around. 

When the 8-bit Nintendo was released, I was surprised that its default controllers weren’t joysticks.  It seemed like a step backwards somehow.  And yet, those control pads were possibly the first good controllers made for a video game console.  They were the most durable controllers to be released so far – there were no parts jutting up far enough to break off, and the plastic was far sturdier than the controllers on older consoles.  I quickly adapted to them.  Of course, I did get the NES Advantage joystick later, but by then I was so used to joypads, that the stick actually felt less precise.

When the SNES came out, I loved its controllers even more.  It had everything I loved about the NES controller, only now it had more buttons, a more pleasing curved shape, and a nice gray/purple color scheme.  

But this is where my friends and I started to disagree.  Some people felt that the SNES controllers were too small, but they were the right size for me.  Some of my friends preferred the Genesis controller.  Now, I might be a little biased, because I was a SNES fan during the early 90s console wars.  But to this day I can’t stand the Genesis controller.  They felt cheap and airy and the buttons just didn’t click right.  With the SNES, I could rest my thumb across all four buttons, and sort of lean it in the direction I wanted to press.  But the Genesis had bigger buttons, spaced farther apart, so I had to actually lift my thumb from the A button to hit the C button, like some sort of neanderthal.

The six-button version that came later was a slight improvement, but I still didn’t care for it.

The Nintendo 64 was a mess all around.  First off, it had one of the most fragile-feeling analog sticks I’ve ever seen.  Second, they stuck it awkwardly in the middle.  This was supposed to give you the freedom to control different games in different ways.  But the result was a controller that just felt “wrong” no matter which way you held it.  Not wanting to trash anybody’s memories here.  I liked Ocarina of Time just as much as you did.  But that was one of the worst controller designs in history.

The original Playstation controller was great, but that’s because it was just a glorified SNES controller with a more ergonomic shape.  I had an unusual problem with the original PS controllers – they kept dying on me from static shock.  You know, you walk across carpet in the winter, touch something and ZAP!  Whenever I got a shock from a PS controller, one of the buttons would stop working.  After two or three controllers, I learned to touch something metal before touching the PS controllers. 

The Playstation DualShock controller was the best controller design of all time, and it just keeps improving with every new Sony console.  The symmetry of the two analog sticks is aesthetically pleasing, and it feels good on the thumbs.  The controller is the right weight, the button configuration is familiar, and all the buttons are easy to reach.  I'm glad Sony hasn't messed with the basic design much.

I know I’m kind of jumping around a bit here…  The Sega Dreamcast was kind of neat because of the little removable Gameboy-like memory card.  I never really understood why controllers with screens never caught on; it would be great for inventory screens and multiplayer games.  Sure it’s expensive, but it’s cheaper than buying multiple Gameboy Advances to plug into your Gamecube.  Anyway, Dreamcast had some neat ideas, but the controller was a little bulky for my tastes.

The original XBox controllers were just too big.  The XBox 360 controllers were an improvement, but I hated the buttons.  The best controller designs either make the buttons out of rubber, or make the buttons concave so your thumbs rest in the little divots.  The 360 buttons were both rounded and hard as rocks, so after a few hours of gaming I had little divots in my thumbs.  The XBox One controllers are a little better, but I still prefer the PS4’s.  

Since so many games come out for both systems, controller style is one of the bigger factors in which console I buy.  I wish third party manufacturers would make PS-shaped controllers for XBox systems and vice versa, but there’s probably legal reasons why they don’t.

Unpopular opinion time, but I think the greatest video game configuration for first-person shooters was the Wii’s “Wiimote/Nunchuck” combo.  In one hand, you basically held a gun, and you aimed by pointing at the screen.  The other hand had your joystick for moving around.  I honestly can’t imagine a more intuitive controller setup.  

I mean, when I play Metroid Prime with that controller setup, I am Samus Aran, and the Wiimote is my arm cannon.  The only thing that would make it more immersive is a VR helmet.

And yet, the Wii wasn’t known for first-person shooters.  It’s insane.  It would be like packing your console with a steering wheel controller, then never releasing any driving games.  Unfortunately the Wii came out in 2006, a good five years after Halo.  Of course Halo wasn’t the first FPS to use dual analog sticks, but its popularity taught an entire generation to control shooters that way.  This is just how FPS games control now, and there’s probably no going back.  I honestly believe that in an alternate universe, a Wii-style gun/joystick combo could have become the default way to play FPS games. 

So anyway, here’s my top 10 console controllers of all time:

1. Playstation DualShock (any generation)

2. Wii Classic Controller (and similar DualShock knock-offs)

3. SNES

4. Wiimote/Nunchuk

5. NES

6. That’s it.

7. No, seriously.

8. No other controllers matter.

9. Why are you still reading this?

10. It’s settled.  Go home.

Star Wars: The Next Generation

Fun fact: In a few months, Star Wars Episode 1 will be old enough to drink. 

The other day I was watching some people on Twitter argue about Star Wars.  Actually, I do that most days.  One person said that he can’t wait until twenty years goes by, and the new trilogy is just another part of the series.  I remember saying the same thing about the Prequel trilogy a few years ago. 

Of course, there were a ton of responses to the tweet, some complaining about all the new films, some praising this film over that film, and so on.  But I noticed something interesting.  The younger tweeters kept saying things like, “Episodes 1-6 are timeless classics.  These new movies will never be as accepted as the original six.”  Gee, that sounds familiar.  Judging by their profile pics, these tweeters were probably about the same age when they saw The Phantom Menace as I was when I first saw A New Hope.  The cycle continues, and I love it.  But still, that phrase – “the original six” – hit me hard.  Twenty years from now, another generation will be referring to the current movies as “the original nine” while complaining about the newest entries. 

If it takes twenty years.  The latest rumors seem to indicate that the next trilogy will take place 400 years earlier, during the New Republic era.  What I’m wondering is if these movies will be called “Episodes 10-12”, or if they’ll have their own numbers.  I hope it’s the latter.  I don’t want the main series to jump back and forth in time.  I say keep the main series generational, with a new trilogy every couple of decades.

Anyway, it’s neat that the kids who grew up on the prequels are adults now, criticizing the next generation.  If you’re exactly the right age to appreciate one trilogy, it means you’ll be exactly the wrong age to appreciate the next trilogy.  I just don’t think adults get how Star Wars movies are supposed to be written.  George Lucas conceived Star Wars as an homage to the Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers serials from the 30s and 40s.  They were never supposed to be serious dramas.  They were supposed to capture the imaginations of children, and make silver screen buffs misty-eyed with nostalgia.

Star Wars isn’t bad when it’s serious, but it’s at its best when it’s cheesy.  People had lots of complaints about The Last Jedi, but I wonder if it’s biggest flaw may have been that it was too good to be a Star Wars movie.  Maybe it was deeper than Star Wars fans expect, in ways that didn’t fit the “space opera” genre.  I don’t know, it’s just a thought.  For me, out of the new trilogy, The Force Awakens feels the most like a Star Wars movie.  The Last Jedi went a little too far trying to subvert expectations, and Rise of Skywalker went a little too far with the fan service, but both are fun movies in their own way.

Unrelated, but I think it’s neat that each trilogy consists of one stand-alone movie, followed by two movies that complement each other.  A New Hope?  Perfect stand-alone movie, with a valid beginning, middle, and end.  But Empire Strikes Back is useless without the other movies.  You won’t know what’s happening if you haven’t seen A New Hope, and you don’t get any resolution if you don’t see Return of the Jedi.  A New Hope can be enjoyed by itself, but ESB and ROJ need each other. 

The Prequels even more so.  The Phantom Menace is a cute (if sometimes boring) story introducing the characters and showing us Anakin’s roots.  It’s not a great movie, but it’s a complete one.  Episodes 2 and 3 are a two-part story showing the rise and fall of the Clone Wars.  It’s nice to see that the newest trilogy keeps the tradition alive.  The Force Awakens is a solid one-shot movie, if a little derivative of A New Hope.  Its sequels are a bonded pair, even if the fans are too stubborn to recognize it.

This is why I hate all the fighting between Last Jedi and Rise of Skywalker fans.  The two movies complement each other just fine, just not in the ways some fans hoped for.  Empire Strikes Back had you asking questions that Return of the Jedi answered.  But the new trilogy has a slightly different relationship:  The Last Jedi starts rumors that The Rise of Skywalker debunks.  It’s less like the teacher/student relationship of earlier trilogies, and instead Rise of Skywalker is like Snopes, and Last Jedi is like that geriatric aunt of yours who only watches Fox News.  You didn’t get the answers you wanted, but you got the answers you needed.  It’s a somewhat rocky relationship, but it’s still a relationship.

Anyway, here’s a video I made about the whole “Last Jedi” vs “Rise of Skywalker” civil war: