f13.net

Rahul Sood, founder of Voodoo PC sez MS killed a project that would allow PC gamers to play XBoxer after the PC gamers kicked the shit out of the console jockeys. (http://www.rahulsood.com/2010/07/console-gamers-get-killed-against-pc.html)

Or they could have released a mouse/keyboard combo, sold it with halo as a pack for an extra 50 bucks, and made a fucking ton of money.

That's an apt description of what happened to Shadowrun. :why_so_serious:

Didn't the PC guys kick the shit out of 360 players already in cross-platform play in Shadowrun?

I had a guy in a TF2 clan that I was in for a while who insisted on playing with a 360 controller, he didn't get picked for a lot of matches  :awesome_for_real:

Thing was, he did pretty well CONSIDERING, but you don't get points for that in a competitive league.

Interestingly enough, there are ways to use a mouse and keyboard with an Xbox 360; though there are complaints about mouse lag.

There is ZERO surprise that console controller is a shitty interface for FPS/RTS or anything but side-scroller it was designed for.

Or sports games... or 3d platformers... Or shootemups... Or racing... Or...

Visited a friend whose computer was happily emulating a Xbox controller so I know solutions to this are already out there. With the advantage that you can remap and macro keys as well. Of course this requires you to have two computers (PC and Xbox) which is a bit idiotic but then, that's consoles for you.

I see both controllers have a role though. Lounging on the sofa = console controller, sitting at a desk = PC.... flailing around like a monkey = motion control? And all of them put different pressures on what sort of games you are going to be playing.

This comes as no surprise. I could also totally win a round of minigolf if I could use a pool cue, but for some people don't go around spouting that everyone should replace their putters, unlike with the pc/console dick waving contest.

Racing? With a pad? That surely won't be a very realistic racing, the only controller I would even consider for racing would be a racing wheel, and I would still whine and moan like a little bitch if it didn't have force feedback.

Having said that, I absolutely love it how shit games (my opinion, bite me) like guitar hero etc get their own custom controller, but FPS games (which used to be my favorite kind, until the consoles started ruining them with their suboptimal controllers) get ... the pad, and that's it. Any hints of keyboard/mouse or equivalent is met with "that would make it too much like a computer" and banned.

Racing with a pad works just fine, and even better if it's an arcade racer. Such hatred of gamepads is just weird, especially considering tens of millions of gamers have absolutely no problems with one. Face it, a pad is a good way of controlling games for the vast majority of humanity.   

Or most 3rd person action games in general I would say controller. Games like Freedom Force and Gears of War can probably pull it off.
Although I'm probably the only one here who bought MGS2 when it came out for PC...lesson in frustration to say the least. At least my finger dexterity went through the roof while wondering why I was killing myself to play a game whose main character has to change his tampon every 15 minutes.

I'll agree that you can probably drive around, maybe even get a bit of speed going, but there are huge limitations which show themselves the instant you go beyond the arcade games like NFS and their ilk. There's absolutely no way of knowing exactly how much grip you have left in your front or rear wheels with a pad, or whether you're over- or understeering, whereas a steering wheel with force feedback does tell you. Additionally, I find it much more rewarding to either pull of a good clean lap in LFS where I get close to the best laptimes out there, or if I pull off a good string of corners in a clean racing way or in a well-controlled drift, than I ever did the few times I tried whatever the NFS crowd was crowing about a few years ago, because all you had to do there was drive very fast, throw the car into the corner and tap a key once in a while to "control the slide".

But at least you can get a racing wheel for people like me who do want to use something more custom-made for the job than a pad. That option does not exist for a large chunk of today's games, most notably FPS/RTS games, and that is probably the most annoying part of the whole thing. Why couldn't they just start making it so that you could play with either pad or keyboard/mouse, and make it so the players could choose if they wanted to be the pad-playing guy on the server if it's a multiplayer game instead of just banning it alltogether?

Actually, I too bought MGS2 for the PC, and I don't remember anything in particular that annoyed me with that game (except the fact I rushed through the playable areas to get to the next cinematic).

As for 3rd person action games, they can work with a pad, yes. RDR and GTA for example work "fine", but for me that's mostly because they have a good autoaim system which covers over the main problem the pad has. SW:TFU doesn't work very well, but that's because the aiming system works on the basis of where your character is looking instead of where you're looking, and that's thankfully more of a fluke in the gaming world than the norm.

The problem is that this doesn't really just stay on the consoles anymore, it's infecting the PC versions as well. I tried gears of war 2 (I think it was, I forget which version it was) just to see how it was, and I was constantly annoyed with how the game decided to autosnap to some structure. I was also rather annoyed with mass effect 2 for much the same reason, because whenever I wanted to jump over an obstacle, I had to press space to "duck behind" it first, and then press space again to actually jump over it. It's jarring, it ruins the flow, and it all just feels so unnecessary because to me it's a regression from what games on the PC used to be like.

But just to get back to the article, I feel he's missing the mark slightly. I also wish they'd kept it going, but for a different reason. If they'd gone through with this, they would most likely have had to design and release a specialized controller for use with FPS/RTS games (or just allow keyboard/mouse to be used) just so the "hardcore elite" who went online to play competitively had a level playing field. I'm sure MS would be in an even better position than they are now, because people would be able to choose how leisurely they wanted their gaming experience to be. Want to play a racing game with a pad instead of a wheel? sure. Want to recline in the sofa and play an FPS game on the pad? sure, switch on the autoaim and other help aids and go nuts. Want to play hardcore? flip out the "fps controller" and go to town. I would assume this would be a pure win-win, but apparently MS feels differently. :oh_i_see:

I actually do like a wheel better than a pad for sims (ie. Forza3), so I won't bore you with any more hyperbole on that.


Because then every competitive console mp fps player would have to sit at a desk with kb+m, and that would be huge marketing fail.

Yes, that means kb+m is easier to aim with than a pad, but that doesn't mean any game is any worse or better just because of that, because no game's purpose is to aim as trivially as possible.

And what makes FPS games special since they have to be "protected" from us evil kb+m players, whereas racing games and guitar hero doesn't? What makes having a steering wheel while driving a racing game less serious than having a kb+m when playing an FPS? It's just an arbitrary and silly restriction which should never have been thought of.

Fair competition.  FPS more than any other game save RTS really require players to be on similar equipment or else its just not going to be fun for one of the groups (or both, beating up on a bunch of people fumbling around with a controller isn't exactly pulse pounding shooter action).  Combine this with the fact that FPS is a much more inherently competition oriented genre compared to something like racing, and you have a pretty decent reason.

Of course, I don't even own a console except for Wii for more or less precisely this reason.  Controllers are better for some games, don't get me wrong, but the kinds of games i like the best are *Generally* better on the PC to begin with.

Malakili said it for me. A competition is pointless without a level playing ground. Or level enough anyway, since there's the obvious issue of horsepower in the pc gaming world.

Good mice and keyboards cost more than 50.

Shit, someone should've told me that in 2003!

I guarantee you that you do not need a "good" mouse and keyboard if your competition is using a gamepad.   :awesome_for_real:

Who said you were competitive?  

OH!

edit: Wait a minute, he said "competitive console mp FPS player".  WHAAAA?  :headscratch:  And if you want to go "bizzaro world Sky", it's pretty trivial nowadays to have your console at your desk.  I had my PS3 sitting on my desk for a few months due to noise issues with the new baby.

Well, that was BF1942, heh. I admit I'm rusty mcsuck at fps online these days. The only real sacrifice is the wired vs wireless mouse, if that even makes a difference anymore (and I guess you could string a USB extension to the sofa).

And did you just Dice Clay me?  :ye_gods:

(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSTfNKkv7l5z4QJ68OXaDLVaDz-2Y0AJO4t-93BiLJ3D74gC5k&t=1&usg=__pN82aHbaXijrm-D4BLdRBcq5EgI=)

No, they don't, but who said they had to be good mice/keyboards to add $50 to the price? Selling $10 kb/m combo for $50 only adds to that "fucking ton of money" Malakili spoke of. Especially if you then market a $20 kb/m combo as "elite" or "pro" and sell it for $75 with the feature of background lit keys and a flashy logo on it.

Except initially, the reason why consoles shouldn't have kb/m was "it would make it too much like a computer" and "it's not casual enough". Competitive play doesn't sound very casual to me. Besides, what's the problem with making servers which ban kb/m so that those who want to be "competitive" on a pad, can do so with others who want to be "competitive" on a pad, while those who want to use kb/m, can?

I'll tolerate using a pad in a singleplayer game (well, as long as the autoaim is sensible and not designed all retarded like as it was in SW:TFU), since I can do things at my own pace, but there is absolutely no way in hell I'll ever play an FPS/RTS/racing/etc game competitively, with a pad. For one because I'd get curbstomped, and secondly because I'd feel like I was trying to run through jelly.

Hell, it wouldn't even have to be a normal keyboard. Something like this (http://www.coolest-gadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/wolfking-warrior-xxtreme.jpg) or this (http://www.slipperybrick.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/ergonomic_game_keyboard.jpg) would probably be fine.

Edit:
Btw, no. Pit a guy with a steeringwheel with forcefeedback in live for speed (no, not need for speed) against a guy with a gamepad, and the guy with a steeringwheel will eat the pad-player for lunch. And in a good racing game, competition is probably just as fierce as it is in most FPS games.

I read the "OH!" in a Quagmire voice.  Although I suppose Quagmire wouldn't use it in this context.

You know what I can't do with a keyboard and mouse? Sit on my fucking couch and play.

Oh, I suppose I could get some sort of lapdesk, rack up some nice wrist-aching hours, and manage that way. But it's not comfortable. Kb+mouse = ideal for desk. (Fuck, I get pissy about laptops because trying to angle things right so you have a comfortable surface to type, and because I hate those fucking pads and always want to plug in a mouse....).

KB+mouse? Sucks for dude wanting to lean back in his recliner, or lounge on his couch, or anything like that.

So, that's sort of a problem. Mouse is a far better aiming device for a FPS, no doubt about it. It's also never really going to be a good console controller, because kb and mouse is a big hefty fucking handful to juggle, as opposed to something you can just sit there with.

I refuse to play with controllers that have to run wires -- like some sort of fucking caveman -- to the console. I'm certainly not going to juggle a keyboard. I'll just go over to my PC if I want to play that.

Which is exactly what I do. I use my console mostly for sports/action games where analog controls really help, and use my PC for shooters for pretty much everything else. I really would enjoy playing against some console players someday...might get my K/D ratio out of the toilet!

It helps that I truly, absolutely, positively, SUCK at any form of shooter. Ever.

Hence, I have no need to really play them on a PC, hence I don't have to keep my PC updated, hence I just muddle along with the controller with the game set on easy. Except Halo games, because my two friends will play through once on normal, then again on heroic, for reasons that escape me. (Except, of course, for achievement whoring. I understand that). Then again, other than Halo and now the L4D games, there's not a lot of decent FPS's that can play 3 people in campaign mode, are available on the console we all have (360), and also -- games we all have. :)

We're doing L4D2 now, and one day may even turn the difficulty up. However, I suck at FPS, one of my friends is even worse than me (although lucky the other is fairly skilled), so doing L4D2 with only one computer aim-bot is surprisingly difficult. :)

7 years of doing just that, I have to say you're wrong. There is an adjustment period, but it's very natural for me. I set a thin book about 9x12 on a firm bed pillow next to me, that's my 'mouse pad'. Keyboard just goes in my lap, never felt the need for a table or tray or whatever. I do have a coffee table with a horizontal wood strip under it that I can rest my feet on.

Only problem is when the cat wants to sleep on the pillow. TF2 in 3D at 1080p and 65" is pretty awesome. And comfy.

No elbow support = unpossible, for me. I'd need some way to raise the mouse up much higher than what you describe too. Once all that gets involved I lose all the comfort factor of sitting on the sofa in the first place.

I slouch down, though. My butt is basically at the edge of the sofa and I sink down into the cushions. So I get support from the elbow down.

The difference is that the purpose of a racing wheel or a guitar-shaped controller is to make the game seem more realistic, not to make you better at it. If you want an equal experience, put down the Xbox controller and go play your FPS games on the Wii with one of these (http://www.nintendo.com/wii/console/accessories/zapper/).

Wait, you mean all my FPS skills won't translate to the shooting range?  :cry2:

Actually, I would argue that mental aspects of combat like situational awareness, target/threat recognition, etc might translate to some degree. The actual pointing and shooting, not so much.

I'm sorry, but that's pure bullshit. A racing wheel doesn't just make it seem more realistic, it also makes you a better driver to boot simply because you get so much more feedback about what the car is doing. That is, as long as you're not driving a complete shit racing game.
If that isn't fiddly, doesn't get straining after a few hours' gaming, and has enough buttons to facilitate the common FPS actions like switching items, activating items, leaning, strafing etc etc etc, then that would be absolutely fine with me. All I ask for is a way to play FPS games that isn't inherently frustrating.

I very much doubt it isn't a complete suck-fest after a few hours, but if it had even a modicum of a chance to improve on the pad, I'd happily try it. But I'm not buying a wii for the privilege, I already feel like I have one console too many as it is, and I was given this one as a present.

Racing wheels do not give you feedback to make you better at racing games; they give you feedback so that the experience feels more authentic.

Using a controller to play an FPS isn't "inherently frustrating."  :uhrr: You just hate it because you're used to something else; if it was fundamentally wrong we would never have heard of Goldeneye, or Halo.

Fuck, I'm so tired of having this stupid argument.

Using a controller to play and FPS isn't "inherently frustrating" because the games are doing most of the aiming for you. Was watching someone playing crackdown and explaining that doing a head shot involves allowing the game to auto-target them and then hitting "pad up" before you shoot. Meanwhile I'm just wondering where the fun is in that. Then again crackdown is a fairly silly game.

And any interface tool that gives you better precision and feedback is going to give you an in game advantage. Racing wheels versus pads in racing games and KB+M in fps though one of these is allowed and the other forbidden.

I don't really care too much though. The dominant mode for consoles is slacking on the sofa for which the pad is eminently well suited, and familiar, so even if the interface is sub-optimal it is fine as long as it is consistent. Though if there was a serious competition how they are going to prove someone isn't using a KB+M is beyond me. I thought most of the dead serious competitive FPS cultures were PC centric anyway (Counterstrike, Quake).

(Incidentally I also wouldn't really use a KB, the PC gamepads like the fang are good stuff for gaming.)

A wheel is also more precise than an analog stick...hence, makes you better.

personally, I prefer a blowjob while playing - controller or mouse+kb, doesn't matter - it makes me better.

Does the Keyboard itself convey an advantage, or is it just the obvious mouse properties and the keyboard being a default pairing?

The mouse conveys a huge advantage for the functions it can execute.  A keyboard in and of itself isn't a huge advantage over a gamepad except that you can use one (or a subset of one) far more easily than you can use half of a gamepad with one hand, and do a lot more with it to make up for the relatively small number of discrete inputs on the mouse. 

While playing TF2 I routinely use about 20 different keyboard keys (6 for movement, 5 for weapon switching, 5 for communication, plus a few more), fairly evenly distributed between five fingers of one hand.  One side of a PS3 controller has something like 16 different inputs if you count the analog stick as having 8 positions, with all but 3 of those are controlled by one digit.

If we only use the performance metric, kb+m is vastly superior for Guitar Hero too. it's so much easier to just pound asdfg instead of those horrid fret buttons.

I don't know how it is when you play racing games (or even what you call "racing games"), but when I play racing games like Grand Prix Legends, Live for Speed, Richard Burns Rally, Nascar Racing 2003 etc etc etc, FF racing wheels let me feel exactly where the limits of grip is, which again enables me to push harder than I would if I were to play with a joystick, keyboard, pad, or whatever. Hell, even switching FF off slows me down by a few tenths because I'm not getting as much information about what the car's doing when I'm on the edge.

So yes, it does indeed make me better at racing games.

Notice how I didn't specify that a controller was inherently frustrating. I'm saying the pad is inherently frustrating because it's a slow interface, being used somewhere speed and agility is more or less required. The only way I can even consider playing FPS games on consoles is if it has aids like autoaim or (in Mirror's Edge, a button to flip me around 180 degrees). I made the mistake of playing GRAW on the 360, and it was a horrid experience because it had absolutely no aids at all.

I don't really care if kids these days think of the pad as good enough, because I'm not them. I've seen how much better kb/m is for FPS/RTS/etc, and I don't really want to sit in my sofa while playing since I have a stressless I use at my desk instead. But honestly I would be more than happy to let consolers keep their pad-using ways since it's their gaming time, except for the fact the complete lack of alternatives is now causing the pad-dictated interfaces to infect games I might want to play with unnecessary and annoying mechanics.

It's stupid because it shouldn't have had reason to exist in the first place.

Racing wheels generally make you 'better' because they're more realistic. They go hand in hand. They're also bloody expensive and gamepads do a good enough job that many of us can enjoy racing games without them even if we'd prefer to have a wheel. It's nice to have options.

More and more fpses are designed so that you don't need a kb+m. Obvious examples being games like the Halo series. The gamepad is good enough if you can sit down and enjoy the game you're playing. I prefer to play my FPSes on a PC, apparently a lot more people prefer the gamepad sitting comfortably on the couch. There's a bigger audience than me and I may not be happy about it but I'm sure as hell not going to bitch.

Not sure if this is implied to be green or what.

But most "racing" games don't need wheels. What most people understand under that term is shit like NFS, DiRT and GRID. They play terrible with a wheel. I've tried and it fucking sucks. Now if fucking LFS development wouldn't have stalled...  :oh_i_see:

Depending on the simulation realism, it actually does make you better. Gran Turismo would probably work better with a wheel than DiRT.

There is no argument here, surely?

Racing games are better with a wheel, most RTS and simulation games are better with a keyboard and mouse, you might argue FPS games are too, but really it's down to implementation.

What frustrates me about input in games is the lack of innovation in some genres, specifically games with a lot of melee combat. Games like Skate and Fight Night Round 4, even FIFA - using the analogue sticks to control some actions and the result feels natural but Oblivion, Fable etc... action RPG control systems mostly suck.

But this is another topic which will go around in circles: these days I almost prefer my 360 pad for some FPS games simply because of the convenience of things like grenade, weapon switch and melee buttons. But shit, TF2 on console? Hell no.

As a side note I've found that with some tweaking DIRT2 plays great with the MS 360 wheel, NFS and GRID, not so much. Forza meanwhile...   :heart:

Well this speaks to another thing, which is that most games play best with the input device they were designed for.  There are exceptions of course, but when Halo is designed for a controller, the translation to keyboard always feels a little awkward, even though you can still aim better.   Some other good examples of this might be something like Borderlands.

That being said, aiming with a control stick is the most sluggish awkward feeling thing of them all for me, where as with a mouse is fast, smooth and precise, I can understand someone who never really played computer games being better with a control stick than a mouse, and I think thats where a lot of the argument comes from. "Hey, I'm better with a controller than mouse, so controllers aren't that bad" but thats poor reasoning, I'm better driving automatic than standard, but it doesn't mean than standard doesn't offer you better control if you are good at it.

The first FPS games I played were on the PS1 - Medal of Honor. On the old whatever-dualshock-was-called-then controllers. I got pretty good at it. Also, Goldeneye.
During this era, I tried to play HL1 and the original AVP (I think?) on my nephew's PC, but I couldn't do it properly.

I got a Mac at some stage in the late 1990s (97?) and got Quake 1 on it. I wasn't very good, but hey.

Later I got a PC (for EverQuest!), and got into FPS on it. Was then unable to play with thumbsticks. And let's face it - with Halo apparently the best thing going, why would I care? Or maybe the first Killzone? Point still stands, though I did go out and buy those adapter things to allow M+KB to be used on both my XBox and PS2. Thing was, that it was so fucking awkward to do so in my lounge room, that the only time I used either was when I got them to make sure they worked (they did) and then due to this, having a 58cm tv, and the fact that Halo and KZ were the top of the game, I never used them again.

More recently, in the last year, I've played a few FPS games on the 360, because sometimes sitting on my arse with a controller at the big TV is just easier than hunched intently over the keyboard. Borderlands not running on my wife's PC was the final impetus/straw, so Borderlands on 360 it was, then!

Now I'm still decently good at most games on the PC, and also competent on the 360 with the controller. Win!

The first time I tried to play Halo with people was at some party, and they tried to show me the controls. I tried to play for about 5 minutes, and just handed it back. I asked one of them, "How can you put up with this?" And he just blankly stared at me.  :oh_i_see: Simply put, most of them have zero freaking clue what's out there, nor do they care that there are infinitely easier ways to control fps games.

Whoever makes a k/m controller and puts these glowing testimonials on the box is guaranteed to win the console wars!

What do you mean when you say "the pad"? Do you actually try to play FPS games using the directional buttons instead of the analog sticks? I just assumed you were shortening "paddle" and meant controller, but if you're trying to move with the d-pad of course you hate consoles. You're playing them wrong.

The same applies to analog sticks.  Look at the time it takes to turn in a complete circle in a console FPS using the analog stick (absent nice shortcuts like in Mirror's Edge).  Now compare to the same action on a PC with a mouse.  Now consider that turning around and shooting at something behind you is something that you'll usually want to do as quickly as possible.  It's not quite as bad if you just need to turn a little bit, but that mouse is always going to be faster because it matches the movement of your hand instantaneously, rather than having you point in a direction and wait for it to get where you want it to go.  That's what he means by "slow".

If you play on max sensitivity it actually turns pretty damn fast in most modern shooters (MW2 specifically comes to mind).

As far as I can tell the pad has the advantage over kb/m that it is much easier to comfortably play while sitting on the sofa, aside from that it's pretty much worse in every way and requires games to be designed to get around the deficiencies. I can kind of see the argument that if you were to have kb/m for consoles it would mean anyone with a gamepad would get destroyed in on-line play, thus resulting in everyone who cared getting the kb/m and probably ending up having to get some sort of desk which would kill the casual 'pick up and play' factor. Frankly I think they could just release it as a set with some sort of sofa support thing and use some slimmed down keyboard/pad thing. I don't like playing with pads and it pretty much kills any console FPS for me, which is doubly annoying because the mechanics are normally set up for pads now so they don't play as well on a PC and even the ports aren't that great.

fakeedit: The problem with it turning really fast is that it becomes really difficult to get very precise with the movement, mouse control quickly becomes quite natural but if the analogue stick is set to some massive sensitivity a slight touch can find you turning 30* when you just wanted to edge to the left a little. Admittedly auto-aiming does a bit to correct this but I don't want auto-aiming in my game when I could just use a mouse to do things far more naturally.

Um. Please give me at least some credit. Of course I mean "the controller", or as some call it, "the gamepad". Aka "the pad". Just because I don't like your controller doesn't mean I'm stupid.

This may be so, but it's still not nearly as accurate as I am with a mouse.

And you're still missing my main point. So be it.

The reason that they don't support kb+m for console games is simply that you guys who prefer it are a minority. Otherwise, PC sales would be beating console sales and catering to your crowd would be smart, financially. However since PC gamers are only a small portion of FPS players, there's no financial incentive for the devs to support kb+m. It'd piss off their loyal base because they'd suddenly be getting roflstomped, while not bringing in a significant number of new sales.

I sympathize with the fact that even the PC games are feeling the impact, but again this is because the PC version is an afterthought or a port due to low sales.


Fakeedit: tgr, I was giving you credit. Then you said "Notice how I didn't specify that a controller was inherently frustrating. I'm saying the pad is inherently frustrating" which made me think that we weren't talking about the same thing.

Its the way the mechanic works that is different though.  The mouse (assuming you are not using mouse smoothing, and I literally know no one who prefers it) has a constant sensitivity.  With a stick how fast you aim depends on how far you push the stick, its just terrible inconsistent.

L4D2 does a 360 quite fast. Of course, it maps a 180 to the left shoulder button. A rather useful choice, given the way the game plays. (You're likely to get hammered from behind, all the goddamn time).

I had a similar experience. My wife bought me an Xbox for my birthday when Halo was just becoming a phenomenon. I had a few friends over for drinks, and they bought me controllers and Halo for my birthday. I had been playing FPS for years, and was really excited to try Halo out, since it had heard so much about it, and my buddy played it constantly. I played for maybe 30 minutes, then told them it was completely unplayable due to the horrific controls. Never played it again. Tried again when GTA IV came out...it was fine for the single player game, but for MP it was just absolutely frustrating.

People prefer consoles because of the low price for entry, the social gaming aspects (being able to play with friends in the same room is a lot of fun), and the ability to play while lounging around. They do not prefer consoles because they have a better system for controls (FPS). If you truly believe that is the reason, you are delusional.

As someone who regularly teaches computer basics to people of wildly varying backgrounds, I find it rather laughable that because you weren't able to get comfortable with a new controller device in a single sitting, it has to be crap. People who have never used a mouse often have trouble even clicking on icons accurately, never mind double clicking. Does that invalidate kb+m?


 

It's crap because it's crap.  He could have sat there for ten years mastering it, but he knew better.

Does your family have a controller factory or something? Jesus. Read my post again. I had played many FPSs in the past with a suitable control system. I knew using an X-Box controller was utterly substandard compared to what I have used in the past, and further realized that I would derive no enjoyment from the game fighting the controls while knowing there is a much better way to it.

Last word of my previous post pretty much sums you up.

It would if there were an easier, already established and widely used different method that was significantly more efficient.

I played Goldeneye until my fingers practically bled because I didn't drink in high school. Me and the boys would get together at somebody's house and play that game all night, every weekend. I had no problem with the controller then, and I was good at it. That is until I started playing FPS on the computer. At that point, I'd done my time on the gamepad, so when HALO came out, I was like, "Wow, let's take a glorious step backwards to the olden days!"

Could I have become fine at the game? Certainly, but why bother? It's like mowing the lawn with a push mower all your childhood days without knowing they made riding ones.

The last controller that was good for fps on consoles was the nes zapper.


This is me, except I played Goldeneye and used it as a drinking game. That and Wrestlemania Royal Rumble. 30 drinks in a 2-3 min match is fun.

Lightguns are fine for rail shooters, but they still suck for FPSes because they don't solve the turning problem.  You end up needing TWO controllers then that don't naturally sync with one another.

Agreed, I just keep thinking about the nes zapper, powerglove, and R.O.B. during this whole conversation though and had to post one. That happened to fit the retardation that is this conversation the best.

I really thought the wii controller had the potential to provide a good FPS experience. Use the wiimote for pointing and the other controller for movement. But with the Wii being underpowered, the second controller optional and their inability to track the wiimote when it goes off center (not sure if that's technical or lazy programming) I don't think that came close to happening.

I tried to play some of the GTA3 series on PS2, and found things like the control and target-locking to make the game unplayable for me. Luckily R* set up all three of those core games as quite well done ports to the PC, so I played them there instead. Since then, I've gotten more used to consoles, and console controls have improved, else I'd never have been able to play Saints Row 1

Even in a perfect world, it wouldn't work that well because you'd either need to use the controller to turn (in which case you'd have a lot of different types of movement to manage with one hand AND compensate with the wiimote as your point of view shifted quickly under it) or you'd need to turn by aiming off center (which would be slow and would probably fuck up your aiming whenever you actually wanted to shoot something at the edge of the screen).

A lot of it comes down to simple anatomy and physiology.

On a gamepad, you're aiming with just your thumb(s). Your thumbs are meant for gross movement, not precision.

With a mouse, you can use your entire arm to effect either quick, gross movements or small precise movements.

Console FPS sales are higher not because of a better interface, but due to the lower barrier to entry.

I have been sorely tempted by some of the recent Steam sales to pick up GTA IV for the PC and replay it. I know I would enjoy it a lot more. Any idea if there is any kind of MP scene still going? It was potentially fun on the 360 but ruined by playing against expert thumb jockeys.

I think the sales are higher because the console itself is a lower barrier to entry than a gaming PC.

Sorry, I don't know much about the PC version besides the fact that a lot of people seemingly had trouble with it, and the need to be logged into R* as well/at the same time (social club?)

My PC GTA-ing was III, Vice City and San Andreas. All of which were far, far better than console, but of course, there's no MP.

Here we have the true reason for why people are uncomfortable with a pad. I think I've said this before but I recall there was a study that found that active text messagers (ie. kids who send dozens of messages per day on a T9) had thumb dexterity comparable to other fingers, while those who didn't, didn't. The same applies to gamepads.

KB+M has advantages and disadvantages versus console controllers and each are better suited to certain types of games. FPS and RTS are more precise on a PC, but console FPSs have certainly worked (typically using auto-aim and battles designed to be at relatively short range). Console RTSs have to find some way of doing drag-and-select and precision waypointing et al.

However, there are genres where console controllers are better than KB+M: beat'em ups / third person action titles are much easier using a controller since you have more face buttons while KB+M are limited to two core action buttons - left and right mouse button. Sure, you can start adding in other keys (shift, Q, E, space) but that usually means you can't move and act at the same time.

To the rank amateur, both gaming KB+M and controllers offer challenges. It takes time to learn strafing using KB+M, while the number of face buttons on a controller can be a deterrent.

I doubt anyone here disputes the fact that controllers can be better at beat'em ups etc, but I'm not so sure about third person action titles. I mean, it "works" on a controller due to auto-aim etc, but it would still work better with kb+m (or an equivalent like the fang controller) simply due to the crisper aim.

However, I must disagree a bit with you on the limits of the kb+m. I have 7 different actions I can easily perform on the mouse, right/left click, mouse back, mouse forward, mouse scroll up/down, in addition to of course the aiming. Moving back and forth and strafing usually occupies from one to two fingers at a time, I've no problems using q or e to lean while tapping forwards, backwards, or strafe, while pressing crouch at the same time. Or I can bring out a map at the same time as well, or I can press f.ex alt and move the mouse around to swivel the head of the character around without moving the character itself (ArmA etc). And jumping is normally taken care of by my thumb.

Beat'em ups, I'll agree with you on using a pad. About the only way I can think of topping a pad there would be to use something like microsoft's kinect or whatever it is sony has (I seem to remember it having something which lets you play tennis or a swordfight or the like).

Did the study say something about when I would stop being a total ape when it comes to using the thumb in that regard? Because I've probably put 100-150 hours into GTA4, ME1 and RDR in total, and I still find it annoyingly sluggish and inaccurate compared to kb+m.

I agree with you overall, but to be fair, 100-150 hours is NOTHING compared to the time I've spend with a keyboard in mouse, thousands of hours easily, and probably so for most of us, even if those mouse-hours aren't all gaming, we are pretty damn used to using them and being precise with them.

Sorry; Yes, that is what I meant by the barrier to entry.


You missed the point. You don't use Fingers to aim with a mouse, you use the whole damn arm.

I actually just use the wrist and fingers. I rest my wrist on the edge of my desk, it's quite comfy.

When I'm aiming with a mouse I think I'm using my thumb and my pinky to push it around more than anything.  Amazing how much difference one extra finger and about two extra inches of motion can make, though.

If you feel your arm while you're playing...somehow, you're using all sorts of muscles, ligaments and tendons in your wrist and forearm.

Any time you move your fingers you're indirectly using a bunch of stuff in your forearm.  As anyone who spends all day using a computer very well knows.   :awesome_for_real:

Stick your arm out, put your other hand on top of your forearm like you don't know how to take a pulse, and then waggle your fingers like you're typing or playing the piano or something.  You're using some of those muscles when you're waggling a controller, too, although those are closer to the bottom of your forearm.

Naw, I was just talking about pads and thumbs. The point was that most people's thumbs lack practice.

The thumb is still not the idea digit to use for precision work, practice or not.

Indeed.

I just like to play with my joystick.

There are PC game pads so any advantages are trivially accessible to PC users. Indeed having a pad is probably becoming ever more useful in this age of half baked PC-ports of console games. The article was more about forbidding the same freedom to console users because in one important context there was a clear interface superiority.

This is true, I recently bought a 360 controller to have for a few games and it has made those games much more enjoyable, and yet I'm not forced to use it for TF2 just because I bought the thing.

We used to do the same, low man had to switch out the controller. I always used to curse the console guys and tell them I would mop them up on the pc (I was in a Quake LAN group that was ridiculous, I hated them but learned a lot). We ran competitions (beer and weed impaired ftw), there was a big deal with some other drinking group who played regularly, their champ against our champ. Our champ destroyed him easily, left the room in disgust. I picked up the controller (as #2 in our group) and destroyed him. We made them leave after that.

I even had my own N64 controller at the time!

Then I got them all playing Unreal and mopped them up endlessly for months until they got up to speed. Then they all started playing EQ  :oh_i_see:

You pretty much need a gamepad for the pc, I wouldn't call (some of) the ports half-baked. Something like GTA4 is awesome on the pc with a gamepad, Burnout Paradise, etc. Overlord was a much better experience with the pad, I played the demo with keyb/m and it was shoddy. It's almost like they'd make up an expression about being all thumbs or something.

I think my fondest memory of the N64 was actually Hexen II rather than Goldeneye. Playing that co-op with two of my friends and the brother of one friend was always an exercise in hilarious frustration and my first introduction to TKing. I think we hardly ever made it throught the third level simply because trying to do them while killing the mobs and avoiding the three other players was damn near impossible, good times.

On the shoddy port thing, if you need a gamepad to play it properly on the PC I think it's a shoddy port. If it's not set-up to take advantage of the stuff you can do with the PC or even to play well with the normal control system then it's half-assed. This is opposed to actual bad ports that are filled with bugs and require some esoteric collection of hardware and drivers to work without crashing. Stuff like not being able to reassign command keys in a PC game is lazy.

No shit. Seeing the XBOX Controller on the Controller Setup on GTA4 PC Port was the last straw.

What? I'm mapping my keyboard keys to the fucking XBOX pad buttons IN A PC PORT GAME now? WHAT WHAT? WHAT?!!!!  :uhrr:

The great thing about the pc is that you can use the best controller for whatever game you are playing. For a game like GTA, that's the controller. I like having the variety, and more importantly, the freedom to control it how I want to. Batman:AA and Tomb Raider are another couple games I wouldn't want to play with a keyboard given the choice.

That about sums it up.

But I will add this:  Using a kb/m for an FPS does a vastly superior job at ultimately translating what my brain wants to do into action on screen.  No amount of practice with a gamepad can come close to duplicating that level of one-to-one interaction.  The difference in realism is astounding, and to me that translates into more fun.  I played CoD 4 on PS3 until the last mission...I then took it back to the store and picked it up on PC instead.  It's like two completely different games, and one of them absolutely paled in comparison.  All things being equal (which means ignoring the shitty console ports), every shooter is fundamentally superior on a PC. 

It's fine and all to defend consoles for what they are.  I have all three, and I like each of them for different reasons.  But let's not pretend that we aren't dumbing down our gaming.  Death of PC gaming will be bad for all of us, even the console kiddies.

PC gaming won't die, it'll just change form.

Also, I don't think (at the overall level) games are being dumbed down at all. Depends what you mean by 'dumb down', I guess.

It's not really dumbing down, but a shift of styles. It will take me a couple of pay packets - 3 at a guess allowing for bills, food etc- to save up enough for a new PC capable of blowing away the latest games. This new PC will play games better than this one, but the one I'm typing on (now 3 years old, with some upgrades since) will do everything else I use it for just as well as a new one.

Buying a console - 360, or PS3, or Wii, I can do with discretionary money-waste money from any given pay. The console can then obviously run anything that's out for that console with no need to upgrade until it fails in some manner or the PS4/XB720 comes out.

Now this is important, because the fact is that PC games were in their heyday 5-12ish years ago, when we accepted a lot less in terms of graphics and such, and consoles couldn't handle that shit anyway. These days, the bar for graphics and overall production quality in a AAA (budget, marketing, etc - doesnt mean it will be good) title is way, way higher than it's ever been before (compare GTA3 to GTA4). These days, with that production quality, games cost a lot more to make, and so they go where the market is. These days, my wife's respectable PC can't handle borderlands, so we had to play it on the 360, because I didn't want to spend the AU$2k to buy a new box at the time for the one game. Her $250 360 ran it just fine.

So PC gaming will continue, but it's not the first stop for AAA anymore, and it's understandable. Nowadays, the PC is still the primary home for a couple of genres (RTS, MMO, Diablo-perspective) and a cou0ple of key devs (Valve, Blizzard) but it's also the place where the new smaller indie games are coming through. Both in terms of the PopCap style as well as lots of stuff that we see on Steam. And hell, many of those indy games are comparable to what used to be AAA PC games in the old days. They're just not the same as today's AAA stuff.

Another point I saw recently that I thought was interesting was how desktop PC sales have been down for a long time in preference to laptops, since laptops are much cheaper and do 90% of the things that desktops do... just not games that require multi MBs of graphics' capability.

Which is another reason why casual gaming - that doesn't require high-end graphics - are really taking off on PCs.

I'm not saying that one or the other is better, but there are reasons why consoles have taken over from PCs for gaming, regardless of their advantages in some gaming areas.

I'd probably say that the market is broader than ever as well. When I was a teenager, I was able to save and scrimp to buy an A500 (actually, sold a large well-painted Warhammer 40k army for enough to buy it), but there was no way I was buying a killer gaming PC when I was 16 or 17 or 18. PC gaming enthusiasts were a little older with more money. A console's price is comparatively much cheaper, even for kids and teenagers these days, and they're also likely to have a mid-level PC as opposed to a rig that will run Crysis at full spec.

...

additional:
So after typing that, I flicked over to Steam to start up a download to try and use up the last of my monthly bandwidth that resets in 2 hours, and I choose Mass Effect. In the little team sidebar with news and such, there's a story that's quite pertinent to this. Yeah, it's Kotaku. Deal.

http://kotaku.com/5600452/mass-effect-designer-needs-to-sell-10-million-units

So yeah, the newest consoles have expanded the market hugely. Gamers demand more than ever in terms of graphics and shiny. In turn costs and budgets go way up. In turn, the numbers needed to sell go way up. Syndicate (Bullfrog) was awesome back in the day. How many units did it sell? How many did it need to sell to turn a solid profit?

No.

They're fundamentally better with a m/kb.  If the 360 or PS3 could be allowed to utilize a m/kb for gaming, PC gaming would probably die off rather quickly.  But Microsoft, at least, won't allow that because the lack of PC sales would kill their OS revenue.

Haha, do you really think most PC sales are because of FPSes??? Or even games for that matter?

A large part of them, yeah.  Not because of FPS games specifically, but because of games in general, especially among the under 25 crowd.  Hell, even as a member of the 35+ crowd, if I could get all my games on a console including MMOs with a m/kb, I'd dump PC gaming entirely.  Why spend $1K plus on a decent PC (that I'll have to build myself) when I can spend $300 on a console and hook it up to my TV?  My current video card cost more than my PS3 did.

More directly, it would cut into the Games For Windows licensing that developers have with MS, which is really where they'd lose revenue. 

Sony doesn't have any stake in high-end PCs that I'm aware of.  Why don't they start shipping a kb+m with the PS3 and destroy Microsoft in one fell swoop if it's that easy?  Why doesn't Nintendo?  Is it because Steve Ballmer has really good blackmail material on them?

I don't the generation that eats up Modern Warfare 2 has the capacity (patience) to move to something unfamiliar to them.

That still doesn't address the question. Besides, they all use computers all of the time.

So what? They're not going to be used to it for playing games.

Maybe you should go back and read Snakecharmer's post that I was replying to.

^^^^

Also, every kid with access to a computer will have at least some experience of playing games on it. Not necessarily FPS etc, but some experience of games.

You are, of course, correct.  I would be on console shooters like stink on shit if they were kb+m enabled.

Heck yea, if they came out with a viable mouse/keyboard and developers started making games with good support for it I would buy a 360 or PS3 immediately (maybe both).  As it stands, I'm just not interested.

He's correct in that people would probably use them. But not correct in his tin-foil hattery that the reason the 360 doesn't have a kb+mouse is because if they do, Microsoft won't be able to sell enough OS's anymore. *snort*.

I'd imagine, as I said before, the real reason you don't have a kb+mouse for consoles is that they're simply inconvienent to use the way most people use consoles.

Your couch isn't a desk. Or a table. And while you can rig something up, most people won't. And what "most people" do is what drives sales, and these days most people don't even want to bother with a wire connecting them to the console, much less having to figure out where to put the keyboard and mouse, and then using them.

But if you put a pillow on the sofa and a book on the pillow and a mouse on the book and you balance your keyboard on your cat or something it works out perfectly!

 :grin:  I keed, I keed.

You say that as if it's a bad thing  :headscratch:

It is a horrible thing. Wires, connecting to your console? Why not run the whole thing on vacuum tubes? Out of a cave? Written in COBOL?

Of course, my grandkids will probably be playing via direct neural interface. Which will be AWESOME, because given that the average teenage guy thinks about sex approximtely 50,000 times every minute, they'll be playing Halo 15 and tits will keep flashing on the screen as someone stops thinking about shooting the Convenant and starts thinking about that chick that sits behind him during math.

Why would you think that the amount of PC's sold that are primarily for game use is "a large part of them"?  Do you think businesses primarily buy their PC's for games?  Hell, what about the many, many netbooks out there, or systems just used by families for taxes, etc..?

I think it's insane to think that the reason there's no prolific Mouse and Keyboard option on consoles is because of OS revenue.  

A lot of people who prefer gaming on the PC do so more reasons than just what peripherals are used. With PC gaming, you get wonderful things that add to the value of the box price, like modding, and map editors... But that doesn't gel very well with "Hey, let's charge 15 dollars for 2 recycled maps and 3 new maps" so you're seeing these freedoms slowly fade away with most commercial games. Thankfully; we still have neat games like Minecraft and Mount & Blade to keep the spirit of PC gaming trudging along.

Unlikely. Microsoft has no reason to care about games on the PC over games on the XBox where they have 100% control of the platform both hardware and software. This is partly why microsoft is so meh about supporting xbox games having PC releases. The platforms are highly compatible after all, including both having piracy problems. Indeed the impressive thing is that PC gaming still exists given there's nobody pushing it.

The difference to me comes if you need a computer in which case springing for a decent video card allows you greater than xbox quality for a marginal price. If you just want a platform for games, especially if it's going to be attached to a TV, then a console makes a lot of sense.

Thankfully given the advent of  :heart: steam  :heart: I don't really care any more. I have enough games on my back-log and there's enough interesting, indie and deep titles around to keep me amused (plus I mostly MMO) and developers beginning to re-consider the platform (re. shatter). The AAA titles will stay on consoles because the market is large, easily seduced by shiny graphics and product tie-ins and the owners of those proprietary platforms are pumping money into it. On the other hand an AAA title has to appeal to the lowest common denominator in order to make back all that money spent on the shiny so a lot of them aren't that interesting (watching someone play crackdown 2 and transformers springing to mind).

If someone built a console mouse that didn't require a desk to use it (some sort of motion control thing) then it could take over as the standard way of controlling console FPSs. Playing Red Steel on the Wii showed the potential for this kind of set-up to work (Red Steel had other problems; playing it just made me feel like I was drunk).

However, I've also been pondering the Dvorak keyboard as an example where a better product runs straight into entrenched market and consumer behaviours, so consoles may continue to be controller only for a while to come.

Say, like a trackball?

http://www.trackballworld.com/desktop-usb.html

Heh. Ironically I use a trackball for FPS. I utterly suck with a regular mouse.

I use a Splitfish on my ps3.

Review please? I think someone (schild?) was going to do a review of these once, but it ended up not happening for whatever reason and just being "it sucks".

I'd be interested in seeing your perspective.