Really curious to see how this works in practice.
For instance say that you are playing one of those shooters where the weapon can jam. In this case the trigger would put up so much tension that you can't even press the button?
That relates to the 'stopping distance' thing I mentioned.
In the patents there's a mechanism to push the back 'stopper' to any point along the trigger's travel. So that, yes, you can 'stop' the trigger being pushed at some point. Or you could say, stop it half-way, and then when the user is applying a certain level of pressure, release it suddenly, to give a sense of something breaking. Or stop it at a certain point to indicate distance to a hit (e.g. if you're swinging a sword with R2, you could stop the travel of the trigger depending on when the blade hits something. If you swing through without hitting anything the trigger would just travel all the way down - in that way, communicating spatial relationships through the trigger). Or even use the stopper to apply pressure in reverse direction of the trigger's travel - so, like in one example, you could simulate the controller being full of liquid, so when you squeeze down on the trigger on the left side, the 'liquid' pressure increases on the other side and pushes the right trigger up and out, and vice versa.
An actual 'dead-stop' stopping mechanism that prevents travel or even can move the trigger back out to another programmed position adds so much that I'm deathly curious to see it confirmed in real impressions. The Wired article did not, nor did it preclude it either. I'm really hopeful it's there.
Otherwise, it'd be a case of varying resistance on the way down the travel of the trigger, but whether the resistance could actually be so strong to stop trigger travel without that adjustable stopper, I'm not sure.
