Cm device in comparison to brooks super converters!


#1

Ok I’m about to open a can of worms here but I want to know what all the hate is about. To start off I will say that I’m a controllermax staff member but I’m not beyond looking at aspects on both sides nor am i compensated in any way with cm devices. I do what I do in their forums for the community and nothing else, Basically I’m a member like everyone else. With this disclaimer said I’ll dive right in.

I know CM devices are banned by tournemts and brooks super converters are not. Now what I want is positive feedback why it is banned and why is theirso much animosity towards it?

With all the current updates cm can take ANY fightstick that registers it as a ps3, xbox360, Xbox 1 or ds4 and make it work on all these consoles. For one CM is not illegal as it uses stock conteoers to authentic the system then be crossed platformed to any other console while brook super converters use illegal hacked protocols to authenticate the system. CM device can also piggyback ds4 controllers using a usb hub to make the 8 min timeout obsolete. There is also very minimal lag. The cm device also has tournemt mode that applies to all criteria for it to be tournament friendly.
With all this said why is this device so hated in the fighting community?

Brooks super converters use illegal hacked software to authenticate the console also u have to buy multiple usb sticks to active ,all ceoss platforms, while cm is a one stop shop! With all the newest updates Cm has full touch pad support and button remapping for non tournament payers. I just can’t wrap my head around why this is so hard to get! There’s a reason why super converters are not sold to major retailers and cm is. I’m pretty sure ill get a lot of shot for speaking my mind but I’d love to hear others prove me wrong on this.


#2

Pretty sure it was the timeout issue that caused them to be banned by most TOs. While technically it is the players responsibility to reset between matches, I know many people got far too into the game, forgot and lost rounds from disconnects because of it. Needing a USB hub is too much of a work around tbh, especially when it means that your “one stop shop” USB stick needs the player to bring a USB hub and DS4 controller just to make their controller of choice work without risk of timing out. All those requirements are the similar reason why many TOs also ban the use of legacy controller options in SFV.

Until CM create a device that removes the timeout disconnects without need of extra faff, there will be an issue.


#3

Why ChronusMAX is banned?
Macros! CM supports Macros and Brooks does not.

Also the CM was known in the past to break usb ports and cause interference with the other player.

/thread


#4

Programmable stuff in CronusMAX/ControllerMAX gear. Big no no.

Brook Super Converters has turbo in normal mode but the Tournament firmware removes it.

If you want to talk about selling and distribution, that’s a different story unrelated to this topic.


#5

The biggest issue I believe was the fact that the Cronus gained a reputation for frying USB ports.

Also, Brook has done a much better job of communicating with and working with the FGC. Look at how they put a lot of work into FGC specific projects/products as well as how timely they respond when issues arise.

Finally, nobody really cares about “legality”. What matters more is that that not having to plug in a DS4 is much more convenient.


#6

Cm also a tournament mode in which all macros can not be used. I can see the aspect of having to daisy chain controllers together to make it all work though. Technically CM has the technology to make their usb hubs work just the super converters but it would have to hack the authentication protocal of the system which in terms is illegal. Anyway thanks for your replies, I just wanted to hear what people have to say about it. For me I’m just a average player, don’t play or plan on playing any tournaments so the CM is just easy for me to use my old fights sticks and the latest gen consoles. It does make sense to me to see why these super converters are tournament friendly as they offer a very useful and easy interface of opperation.

I guess it comes down to personal preference when choosing between super converters and cm devices in the non tournament applications. I can see not wanting to buy all the extra gear that the CM needs to work as compaired to just plug in and play like super converters do. I’m sure with all the it cost with extra acessories the CM requires U will proplably spend the same in multiple converters to make your setup work on all platforms and not have to carry all the extra baggage with the cm.


#7

Why not just make a converter with a built in USB hub?

That said, if CM wants to get where Brook is, then they’d have to start working closer with the community. Aside from the Super Converters, Brook is also involved in alot of other specialized fighting game specific projects, such as the Universal Fighting Board, etc., which is why they see much better acceptance.


#8

I totally get it and I personally love brooks products. I can’t speak on behalf of cm as I’m mearly a member like everyone else in their forums I was just given a staff promotion for my work in writing macros for them. I’m technically a noob when it comes to tournent stuff so I just wanted insight to why it was banned. I can see why now and I don’t really think cm cares to much about getting invoked in the fighting community as there making a killing in what they are doing now. I just want to reiterate that I’m not a spokesman or fanboy of cm as I use both brrooks and cm which would make me a Hippocrate if I was such things. I just wanted to gain insight on this subject.


#9

The initial fallout of problems sort of gave a huge hill to climb for CM in terms of this community. The port issue I still say was a torque problem on worn systems, which people learned from and, by my suggestion to TO’s, is basically a requirement now to use short extensions to eliminate that. Brook sort of gets a free pass on that potential problem. I don’t believe it was an internal component problem, never really did.

The other issue was with tournament mode and the slow response on making it. It’s easier to tell that a SC is in tourney mode just by a glance than a CM, which could have a burned 7 segment or something else that makes it difficult to really tell. Time is a huge factor, so a fast glance vs. needing to lean in and see that there’s a ‘T’ on the display is actually very important for pool runners.

Most majorly, and this is something that CM will never be able to stand against, is the legality and simplicity. CM cannot do what SC’s can do. They have always, and still have to rely on pass-through authentication. Which is awesome for home use because you don’t have to worry about any sort of rolling black outs from system manufacturers. However, for tournaments, less is more. Having one or two SC’s that you can basically tape together, that fit in your pocket, and allow you to just plug and play at any given tournament is too large a shadow for CM to stand in for the FGC. For the CM, you need to carry too much shit for it to make sense to any given player needing to be on the move for pools, across potentially multiple games.

Yes, it’s weird that Brook is allowed to somehow get a free pass at basically throwing the hijacked IP in the face of manufacturers, but they are doing it, and being rewarded for it in spades. I almost guarantee that if somehow the CM team decided to try that route by using grey market security chips, they’d get slammed. This is the same for the XIM team, too. There’s no way that CM can ‘hack the authentication protocol and make it work’, unless CM magically has some crazy cryptographers that can break the security handshake, which I heavily doubt. Previous gen security was crazy on the 360, it’s no different now, thus the need for the external security ICs.


#10

If anything the current security on current gen consoles is even tougher.