[QUOTE=Hyrage;285775]In general I would say that’s most likely the case, however it really depends of how lazy the player actually is (lol).
The game controller is real good at swipe shots (lightning gun - Quake III, pistols, assault rifles, etc.) and feels great when the mouse really shines at following a target perfectly (lighting gun - Quake III).
But it doesn’t prevent the players from following a target with a game control or to swipe shot with a mouse. In fact, a player on console could look like that: http://youtu.be/mvcVugsCHog[/QUOTE]
Like what? Playing with aimbot against bots? Get a life.
I don’t really have a strong opinion about AA on consoles. I just know that any FPS that I play on PS3, if it has the ability to turn aim-assist off, I do it. Then I turn controller sensitivity up so that when I move the sticks just a fraction of an inch it shoots across the screen. Its taken me a long time to learn just how much i have to flick the sticks to get my aim to go from one side of the view all the way to the other, or 180 behind me.
Either way, I do kind of hate aim-assist because it screws me over sometimes by making me snap to something I don’t want to snap to.
But I can see aiming on the PC being superior, when I used to watch my room-mate play MW1 on PC aiming with a mouse seemed alot easier. But we all adapt, and I’ve found my own way to adapt to slow-ass movement on controllers =o
yeah yeah i get it, PC gamers are real gamers and ten times better than the consoles and every console gamer is stupid yeah yeah ok we race lawn mowers yeah ok i get it now i am inferier do to my choice and i will forever burn in hell for it
@ Otto - I think you should consider that BRINK might not have even been produced if it was not for the console versions and the money they will generate.
As for the lawnmower/carting to PC/Console analogy; As far as I am aware you can be competitive at just about anything and to validate one over the other is just an opinion.
We all know that top PC players would would beat a top console player on Kb/Mouse and visa versa so they both have there own skill set. (in my opinion) It’s a waste of time arguing which requires more skill as both control devices have a VERY high celling and there are valid arguments for both.
Actually I can tell the difference really easily. kb+m is a lot snappier. I know because back when PSN was up (or… was that just a dream?) I saw some footage of PC gamers playing BC2, and immediately thought, “Wow. He can turn properly.” I’m not playing with the sensitivity on low, I just can’t get my dude to turn on BC2 anywhere near as fast as I’m comfortable with.
But you have to realize that the behavior of the thumbsticks in BFBC2 are designed for long range precision exclusively. Once you are in iron sight, forget about CQB.
No, controllers are just not a good tool for FPS gaming compared to K+M. This is a simple fact. A mouse moves to and stops exactly where you want as fast as you want. Joysticks cannot do this, it’s a physically limitation of the joystick. it simply doesn’t have the space as big as a mouse-pad (though I think if you had a joystick with a range of motion as big as a mouse pad it might be as precise?).
So instead of moving at the speed of your hand to a point on the mousepad which correllates with a pixel on the screen, you are telling the game to “move th screen at X speed until I stop” where X is controlled by the joystick. There’s simply no way this is ever as precise as mapping mouse-pad to screen (which is effectively what a mouse does). This means there is a speed limitation. X can only be so high. If X is very high, you can spin around and aim fast, but you cannot aim precisely, due to the limited range of motion of the joystick. If X is very low, you can aim very precisely, but you cannot aim fast. This is one of the reasons that Iron Sights work really well on consoles, it helps you jump between these two extremes, but they are extremes. Neither is as good as a mouse where you can be both fast AND precise.
Controllers are fast OR precise. Keyboard+Mouse is fast AND precise. And nothing you say will change that fact.
As someone just said previously, elitist d-bag pc gamers don’t realize that without the revenue generated by consoles they wouldn’t even be getting AAA titles anymore. You would be stuck playing CS and QW until time’s end. If you think otherwise, you are full of ish. Pretty much every dev admits that consoles set the pace. PC gamers are an afterthought bro.
if you have written that console gamers cannot be competative, you are stupid. if a pc gamer played a console gamer on a console the console gamer would (most of the time) win and vise versa. i play both pc and xbox 360, and i can honestly say that gaming with the xbox is a more level playing feild because you are sure that the person who killed you killed you out of how skilled he is at the game, not because of his better mouse, gaming keyboard, control set up and rediculous screen settings (BFBC2) stop hating on other platforms, there is room for them all
yet this fails to explain the witcher 2. a pc exclusive, potentially coming to consoles later, but the fact that this game exists and exists as a pc exclusive first invalidates any factual basis your post may have had. (of which it had none)
in the end i don’t care about console gamers, i am indifferent to their existence. it causes some negative aspects and some positive. as far as developers are concerned for the most part there is very little negative to developing for 3 different platforms (other than the added time), as it VASTLY increases their market for the product. increasing market size is common business sense. nothing more.
however, with the manner in which you approached your post instead of being a “normal” console gamer, instead you become an entitled asshat console gamer.
as a side note if things are moving as a group it is the slowest member that sets the pace. not the fastest. so saying that “consoles set the pace” is saying they are the slowest and weakest member of the gaming platform groups. therefore you yourself have essentially stated that pc gaming is superior.
First of all, wrong. Ps2 and xbox had online before then. Second of all, I was on PC about a decade ago and Ilve been playing sd games as long as anyone here. Anyways, who cares about “late to the party”? Lol PC gamers are almost irrelevant nowadays. Give it another decade or so and all you guys will have is crappy ports of console games. Enjoy!
I guess you are form the US and you might not be aware of this but there are actually other countries in the world and in some of them (in the majority of Europe for example) PC is still a major platform. In countries like Germany it is actually still the main platform.
Either way nothing you wrote has anything to do with competitive scenes pretty much being exclusive to the PC (with the exception of fighting games) and consoles being the world of casuals, pubs and matchmaking instead of server browsers. Apart from a single genre consoles could pretty much not exist at all as far as esports go and for competitive play console versions rarely ever play any role for multiplatform titles.
People around here laughing at the use of competitive and console in a single sentence are rightfully doing so.
You’re a source of income, you have no influence over anything.