@sepharo, sorry dude, you just dont get what i am saying. where the hell is verno when you need him. :/ lol.

Beamer wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 07:19:

The guy said "no one" plays FPS games on the PC.

I don't get how that one kid quoted me and said "he made it up." No, he didn't make it up. He's just viewing the numbers one way.

You don't get it. No kidding. That's apparent. You made up "facts" and then admitted, once sentence later, that you really don't know the numbers.

Yeah you made a post about how you think mouse and keyboard are better and you don't want to turn this into that type of argument.

But... you did say:

"but the concept that console shooters are bad because people dont know how to use a pad is laughable"

This is a stupid and untrue statement. Consoles shooters are bad because they are simplified and use an inferior control scheme. On the rare occasion that I do play a console shooter at a buddy's house, in comparison to the console-exclusive players, I do relatively well, but I would do a hell of a lot better with a mouse and keyboard.

In most players opinions things that are inferior are "bad". Inferior controls and inferior graphics are not outweighed by the supposedly superior TV/Couch/Convenience combo so coveted by console gamers.

Verno wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 14:38:

Theo wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 11:57:
PC's still have awsome games, but the concept that console shooters are bad because people dont know how to use a pad is laughable (or they are unwilling to learn because "lol mouse is better").

No control scheme is "better" per se, it's always going to be subjective and based on the genre you're playing but I think if you have someone with equal experience on both input devices(like me) then that person will perform better with a mouse. It allows for more free form aiming at a faster speed which in FPS games is all that really matters.

tl;dr - you're wrong.

I am gonna quote you, not they guy above you (all i have seen till now).

I am not wrong, reason is, i am not saying controller is better. I am a PC gamer mate, always have been always will be i hope. i love the pc. I came to blues due to quake back in the day - i am not arguing about the controls and what is better.

there is a very real reason MS trialed and decided not to allow cross platform gaming for FPS, with regards to xbl.

Mouse and KB are better for control. End of arguement.

that however, does not mean that i dont think that games should not be reviewed , or judged - based on the environment they are played in. some console FPS communitys are like the first quake communitys (halo being one), its a speical place and time for those environments and as long as everyone is on the same page (controller) you should not hessitate to join those communitys.

i love games, both on PC and console, as long as its a good game. the bitter fact is right now, i am playing more shooters on the console than i am on the PC. thats the first time i can say that - i am 33 years old now. weird.

point is, please dont turn my comments in to a "controller vrs mouse thing" i am not making that arguement, i am just saying that consoles have A) good shooters - and B) great shooters communitys.

i have got hopelessly off topic.

gn folks

/dunk trindermon,

Cutedge wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 11:19:
Halo sells better because having a console is more accessible than buying a $2000+ PC.

If FPS games actually required a $2000+ PC to play them, I probably wouldn't be a PC gamer.

Theo wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 11:57:
PC's still have awsome games, but the concept that console shooters are bad because people dont know how to use a pad is laughable (or they are unwilling to learn because "lol mouse is better").

How many times do you need to see it proven that mouse/keyboard is better input for FPS games than thumb knobbies before you'll accept it?

Theo wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 11:57:
PC's still have awsome games, but the concept that console shooters are bad because people dont know how to use a pad is laughable (or they are unwilling to learn because "lol mouse is better").

No control scheme is "better" per se, it's always going to be subjective and based on the genre you're playing but I think if you have someone with equal experience on both input devices(like me) then that person will perform better with a mouse. It allows for more free form aiming at a faster speed which in FPS games is all that really matters.

tl;dr - you're wrong.

lol this topic honestly, consoles have lots of very fine shooters; i dont recall a good one comming out on the PC for a long time.

(source games = all old)... is there anything else? i honely cant think of one?

PC's still have awsome games, but the concept that console shooters are bad because people dont know how to use a pad is laughable (or they are unwilling to learn because "lol mouse is better").

I posted something about this on a mailing list earlier and I think it sums it up pretty well:

"This thing is kinda silly. He’s arguing that the kinect is getting the same complaints about shooters that console shooters had, which is that console shooters don’t give the responsiveness that a mouse/keyboard combo gets. The thing is, that point is still true to this day. The fact of the matter is that you have to create the game with a playstyle that works with console controls (i.e., Halo). The point about controls is irrelevant in the end because Halo doesn’t sell millions because it’s better on consoles than PCs. Halo sells better because having a console is more accessible than buying a $2000+ PC.

As far as his point about Kinect being able to do whatever and that people said the same as they did for console shooters, it’s a sidestep around the real questions people are asking about the Kinect, which, to be honest, is a pretty impressive piece of technology. It’s still worth asking though, how do you control stuff with this thing? They are coming out with a kart racer game and you can’t control the speed of your vehicle in it, you just always go forward. I don’t think that’s a very reassuring argument that you can do “anything” with the Kinect."

Bhruic wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 09:41:
...
Say what you want about who plays what games on what systems, but there's absolutely no way you can make a valid argument that FPSs are better on consoles than they are/were on PCs.

I'm not agreeing with the overall sentiment in the original link, but even your phrase is subjective.
no way you can make a valid argument that FPSs are better on consoles

CAR_1 might be less prone to failure in the longer run (10+ years)

CAR_2 might have a better-performing engine and handles better at highway speeds but the model tends to have issues after 5 years.

CAR_3 has the highest safety rating of 3 by a large margin, with middle long-term quality and middle performance.

• Ask a person looking for something more reliable and hastle-free for the long haul, they might say CAR_1 is better.
• Ask someone interested in performance and/or driving the autobahn, they might say CAR_2 is better because they plan on replacing in 5-7 years anyway.
• Ask someone with a family, they'll say CAR_3 is better.

Different folks, different strokes. Price, build-quality, performance, philosophies, conservative/liberal views, brand familiarity, packaging, etc all come into play.

Granted, there's also someone will begin their argument/description with "Well, you can't say one is better than the other" but for brevity most people just say BLA is better.



Though I don't agree with the sentiment, some might say a game is *better* if it:

• Is played by more people, accessible to more people instead of elite gamers with high-end rigs
• It has fewer bugs, glitches, crashes
• It has a more uniform performance / experience
• Shorter learning curve (joysticks + 10 buttons vs mouse + over 20 buttons)
• No install, tech requirements, etc. Just insert disk.

Someone else might say a game is *better* if:

• It can be played on multiple platforms
• More precise control method
• Easy to make custom content (maps, etc)
• Tweakable
• Can get better performance with better kit.
• Slightly cheaper

This comment was edited on Sep 21, 2010, 11:18.

J wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 07:12:

kxmode wrote on Sep 20, 2010, 20:49:
In other news the sky is purple. If you don't believe me then you're out of touch with reality!

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_is_the_sky_purple

LOL Wow!

Apparently Kudo is pissed that Bobby gets all the "What an utter dipshit" attention.

Creston

Even morons can be moronic. This doesn't surprise me. Activision says the same thing and they too, are morons.

Armengar wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 08:29:
I take it he hasnt heard of source games then. I think there are one or two people playing source games.

I once saw three people actually!

Weird, all the complaining about the FPS comment, and none about the actual conclusion he's trying to make, which to me seems even worse.

If you look at his analogy, he's basically saying that FPSs got better on the console than they were on the PC. Not just more convenient, better quality. And that's what he expects to happen with his kinect gimmick.

Say what you want about who plays what games on what systems, but there's absolutely no way you can make a valid argument that FPSs are better on consoles than they are/were on PCs.

I take it he hasnt heard of source games then. I think there are one or two people playing source games.

But the numbers are there. Far more people play FPS games on consoles.
And far more FPS come out for consoles.

There are far more console players in general anyways, I'm not sure why this is news. "Hardly anyone" is bullshit by the way if you have a glance at the Steam figures for FPS games played daily. I'm sure if you stuck a decent control scheme on the Xbox then there would be far more RTS games there too and so on. That doesn't mean the PC lacks games or access to it. It doesn't mean anything and frankly has nothing to do with Kinect which by many accounts is sparsely featured and the software of quite dubious quality anyways.

Beamer wrote on Sep 21, 2010, 07:19:
Again, there isn't a single FPS out in 2010 that is PC exclusive according to Wikipedia. Not one. But there are ones out that are console exclusive.
That says something, doesn't it? Even if you disagree that "hardly anyone" is playing them, as you should, it does show that the PC has lost its position as the place to play them.

Exclusives in general are dead, the only ones on the Xbox and PS3 are from Microsoft and Sony.

As for "THE place to play them" that has to do with mainstream "cool" bullshit that I don't care about. That's sort of my whole point, I DO know what he is saying, that the cool kids play shooters on Xbox, and I think that's a pointless and empty statement from a corporate shill.

Just because consoles have more exclusive games and most PC games these days are console ports doesnt mean the the PC has lost its position as the place to play them.

Where is the logic? Oh look everyone is buying the console version, I guess since everyone is doing it the console version MUST BE BETTER!

The guy said "no one" plays FPS games on the PC.

No, he said "hardly anyone." That's a relative term. And, relatively speaking, it isn't wholly inaccurate. But it's still inaccurate.

I don't get how that one kid quoted me and said "he made it up." No, he didn't make it up. He's just viewing the numbers one way.

But the numbers are there. Far more people play FPS games on consoles.
And far more FPS come out for consoles.

Again, there isn't a single FPS out in 2010 that is PC exclusive according to Wikipedia. Not one. But there are ones out that are console exclusive.
That says something, doesn't it? Even if you disagree that "hardly anyone" is playing them, as you should, it does show that the PC has lost its position as the place to play them.

Kudo Tsunoda is famous for his big mouth. The difference between him and other blowhards like Bobby Kotick is that I think Tsunoda purposefully does it to get attention whereas Kotick just doesn't know when to keep his trap shut. The best way to get people talking about you (and by extension the product you're promoting) is to still up controversy. The only difference here is that when someone like Rockstar does it, it sells more games. When Tsunoda does, it only further solidifies hardcore gamer's completely disinterest in Kinect.