New interview with Mac from GI. 30 mins long.

I'm hearing the part where he talks about control scheme for PC, and I just don't get it. He portray the control scheme as a "more complicated thing than you may know" Like how much complicated it can get? I'm no game dev, but of all the difficult things they have to achieve, I doubt control scheme is one of them.

One key that does everything it's bound to have issues, I'm sure they can agree on that looking at ME3. 100+ keys on a keyboard and you're saying that it's "complicated" , how exactly?
One melee button, one cover button, one run button, one use button. It's not that hard. If people can't find where the "F" key is on their KBs then add a "customize key bindings" option in the menus and be done with it. That's how 95% of the games do it, and that's how it works.

Complicated control scheme is when a game has 4 different melees and 2 alternative "run" keys or 4+ weird "alternative fire" buttons with the mouse; like some sort super complex MMO, and even then people make do. In this game controls are pretty straight forward if you ask me.
I really do hope they do a decent job with mouse+kb support this time.

Well that was encouraging to watch given just how many of the DAI elements I despise...and the hope I have those elements are either fixed or scrubbed entirely from MEA. Of course, the pessimist in me wonders if that is just damage control to calm people such as myself. Here's hoping he's being straight with us.

The whole controller/keyboard+mouse thing he was talking about doesn't really make much sense to me. I'd think keybinding would be a relatively simple and straight forward thing to do. Then again I know less than nothing about making these games, so maybe it is not so simple.

AKA they are still making changes.

Yes, but he could have still specifically talked about mouse and keyboard than to refer to the controller options. Also Gameinformer writes in their coverage article that they saw the M&K interface and it was clearly under development with certain interface items not really being interactible with the mouse etc.

I am, and yes, control schemes can often be quite difficult. I think the complexity can be more readily perceived when dealing with a controller because it's a very compact device with a limited set of buttons which have a number of discrete tactile operations.

It's obvious that the shooting command shouldn't be bound to the D-pad, but does it feel awkward when the jump command is bound to clicking in the thumbstick? I suppose it matters how often you have to jump. What happens when you have two abilities used with similar frequency and the only buttons left unbound are the A button and clicking the left tumbstick? It's basically a game of trial and error musical chairs. What happens when you have more actions than buttons? What button combinations work well together? How many combinations is it reasonable to expect the player to remember?

However, the same thing can be said about PC. How many actions can we place near the movement keys? Is it reasonable to expect most players to quickly reach the 'Y' key from WASD? How many functions will the player need to access simultaneously to moving? Is a combo key more effective than far away hotkeys?

Mass Effect has possibly one of the most annoying control schemes of any game because it's a real time TPS trying to accommodate a bunch of RPG actions. Just finding space for all those binds is difficult enough, but getting them optimized for real time action? Torturous. Andromeda probably has the worst of it too because, as Mac said, BioWare were frequently adding new mechanics for exploration like the jetpack and the scanner.

This so much this!
And there will be still plenty of free keys like Q (for melee?) V (for scanning?), Z (for closer aiming?) X, G, C, B and even TAB for whatever will be needed. 
P.S. I don't ''mind'' bad controls, as long as I can customize them and / or assign second one if needed.

I never have. It's an awkward grip for me to reach accurately in the middle of a fight, but that's besides the point. Andromeda could have any number of actions, potentially more than what can be reasonably accommodated by individual keys.
This has been my point the whole time. Control schemes require a lot of trial and error to get right, and that's just for a static code base. New features constantly need to be accommodated.
I've never been against rebinding, but Inquisition had rebinding IIRC, so I don't know what the problem is. I was clarifying the fact that making control schemes isn't as straight forward as many may believe.

I wouldn't say so. It's like saying the door handle is merely a minor component of a door. Sure, it has nothing to do with a door's primary function of blocking a threshold, but it's your only means of interaction. I would hope that it's simple, straightforward, and lets you know whether you need to push or pull.

Yes, the standard WASD control scheme takes care of basic movement and interaction, but that still leaves a number of choices. How many actions (and which) should be bound to a single key? Should we maintain standards set by other games (e.g. 'g' for grenade) even if it makes the control scheme a little more awkward? What does the average gamer think is a comfortable position? Games are an interactive medium. The tuning the hardware facilitating that interaction is rather important.

The code may amount to a Hash Map or something, but the process is more than trivial. It's common practice nowadays to log button presses during QA testing so that when developers go to review the footage, they can see exactly what the tester pressed in real time. If players are accidentally hitting something too many times or are instinctively pressing the wrong button, developers need to adjust. 

The vehicle designer for Oblivion & Tron is working on Mass Effect?

Yes!




Tron Light Cycles

That's the only news in there? I'm not a fan of watching 30 min long videos only to hear "can't tell yet"/"you're gonna like it"/"still being polished".

There's some of that indeed, but I have to give him credit that he does his best to answer the questions without giving out much. He also talks a bit about the codex (bigger, no voiced narration) and how the relationship between the MW species stand and how it could tie to the plot. Not much else though, it's not like it's a critical, must-heard interview.