155 réponses à ce sujet

[S1L0]

Acid the Wraith, you are partially right and partially wrong.

1. Mouse is king. Always has been. Likely always will be.

2. Consoles don't need aim assist.
They need to tweak the aiming mechanics
to get better use out of the analog sticks.

3. This CAN be done. I've been DOING it for years.
I play online Multiplayer FPS on PC using a DS3.
In Battlefield 3 I was to the point where I was never afraid
to engage in a firefight because of my "handicap".
The way I rigged my BF3 Controller Config was very, very satisfying.
I probably would hate playing it the way its rigged on PS3 and 360.
I don't think I could go back to that.

I play a LOT of games on MY PC. 95+ % of the time
I'm using my Dual Shock 3. Even when the game has no controller support
at all. I almost prefer it that way because when they add controller support
too often they do it wrong.

The solution to the Analog Stick's weakness - was actually found by looking
at the strengths of the MOUSE. I'm reluctant to say what it is - ionno might
be worth some money someday.

[Kaitheus]

_symphony wrote...

jimmyw404 wrote...

Honestly I think xbox players have an advantage from the majority of them having working mics. It's dead silent in almost every run I play in on the PC.

actually, that makes the PC better

I agree, having some *not to be racist but this was utterly Annoying* guy on a mic with a deep south indian accent was OMG annoying and they talked the entire Match, luckly I muted them the next match >.> and I have ran into quite a few ppl like that lol, this is why I hope they setup Regional Servers, it would help with that And the latency issues hopefully.

[Felhand]

Across various games its always been the same for me in terms of console vs pc, generaly the pc has the overall accuracy while the console had the manuverability. Im gonna get the xbox version when it comes out even though I REALLY like shooting through guardians viewports on pc, Ill adapt my playstyle and probably go bash the holy hell out of cerbs with a krogan cause I imagine a joystick will do twitch melee very well and be considerably more accurate then trying to 'aim' your character with WASD and mouse pivot at least for me.

[S1L0]

I shoot through guardians viewports all the time on PC - with my DualShock 3.
You are right though. Standard setups encourage different play styles.

[Duncaaaaaan]

One thing PC users don't have that console players do.... is the ability to run in more than 8 directions, and at more than 2 speeds.

Like in Skyrim, on the 360, I can change the pace I run. It's kind of pointless in the end though.

Either way, PC is so much better than consoles, it is mind boggling just how bad console hardware is.

The argument "PCs are more expensive" is moot, as PC games are in general about 1/2 or 2/3 the price of a console game, online is free and there's far better customer service in things like Steam, and PC developers treat their customers with a lot of respect, like CD Projekt.

You can buy a computer that can run ME3 at 60 fps+ and all graphic effects on for about the same price as a console, (buy the parts and fit together obviously, takes about 20 minutes).

I really hope the xbox 360 and PS3 crashes and burns one day.

[Atmosfear3]

Considering how important it is to score headshots to quickly dispatch enemies, I would say yes, it is much more easy to play on PC than it would be on console.

[Soshigenkaku]

As someone who plays their computer on a 52 inch TV screen, I gotta say, comfort isn't hard to have when PC gaming, its about finding the right keyboard and mouse. I have a flat space on the comfortable chair arm to have my mouse sit on a mousepad. Light keyboard in lap.

Comfort and control!

[Moose Invictus]

Yeah, PC is king for aiming and moving aiming as well. Using a gaming mouse (Abyssus) and a clunky eight year old keyboard offers me superior control and precision that I never had with all my years with a controller. Having maxed the mouse movement sensitivity and gotten used to the freakish speed, I can do things like chain together multiple headshots with a scoped in Carnifex or Mantis that simply could not happen consistently on a controller. In that case, an extremely subtle movement of the mouse can cover many degrees of view whereas an analog stick would require more pressure and movement and offer considerably less accuracy. And then you have moving while aiming.... there's just no comparison.

But even despite that, it is all about a measure of comfort. I have friends who seldom play on anything but console FPS and they find mouse and keyboard too alien.

[jimmyw404]

Duncaaaaaan wrote...

One thing PC users don't have that console players do.... is the ability to run in more than 8 directions, and at more than 2 speeds.

Yeah, that's why I'd love a keyboard with a thumb joystick for the left thumb. Would replace WASD and would offer the best of both worlds.

[FLGSynyster]

Keyboard + Mouse is much more practical and precise as you have a lot more buttons laid out in front of you, and you can easily move the mouse at the speed you need without jerking it or over shooting like you do with thumb sticks

[Waykam]

Seeing how the demo has been out a couple weeks and has already been 'hacked' on PC I'm glad I'm on console. Consoles have glitches and exploits, but not to the extent PCs do.

For everyone who says consoles have aimbot, just give the 'hackers' time, you'll have better ones on PC.

[D Amiri]

Console games don't require aim-assist. The problem is that dev's find it easier to refine their aim-assist systems than to refine their analog controls tuning. Socom for the PS2 had no aim-assist in MP. It was the most played console MP game in it's prime and had a thriving competitive scene. That scene created what later became Game Battles.

Socom 4 and MAG for the PS3 don't have aim-assist either. Those game failed for a number of reasons but lack of aim-assist wasn't one of them.

KB & Mouse is more accurate than a controller. But the reason the controls on the PC are better is because the ME2/ME3 control scheme for the console is horrible. The current controls force console users to stop aiming multiple times per encounter because you must move you thumb from the right stick to reload, switch weapons, roll, melee, enter cover, revive, interact with objectives, and use your class-defined power.

That said, the Move is superior to the DS3 and Xbox controller. Don't confuse that with plastic piece of junk "the Sharpshooter" or the horrible marketing showing idiots waving their arms and pew, pewing at the screen. Killzone 3 players feel that players with the basic Move wand and Nav controller have an unfair advantage over DS3 users.

[blaidfiste]

Easier on the ears. Far fewer people with mics on the pc thus far.

[Cuthlan]

Duncaaaaaan wrote...


Either way, PC is so much better than consoles, it is mind boggling just how bad console hardware is.

The argument "PCs are more expensive" is moot, as PC games are in general about 1/2 or 2/3 the price of a console game, online is free and there's far better customer service in things like Steam, and PC developers treat their customers with a lot of respect, like CD Projekt.

You can buy a computer that can run ME3 at 60 fps+ and all graphic effects on for about the same price as a console, (buy the parts and fit together obviously, takes about 20 minutes).

I really hope the xbox 360 and PS3 crashes and burns one day.

Why do you hope consoles crash and burn? Did one make fun of your mother, or steal your job?

Consoles have helped make gaming an extremely popular form of media, far more popular than it would have been had they never existed. That means a lot of games that exist today probably wouldn't exist if it weren't for consoles.

Including the Mass Effect franchise.

So get over yourself and find something else to rage over.

[S1L0]

Okay lets be more specific about one thing.
Earlier I said Mouse is king. I did not say Mouse and Keyboard is King.

1. Mouse is Superior. Under stress I can get about 70 - 75 % of mouse accuracy out
of an analog stick. That's outstanding compared to what gamers normally get for controllers.

2. The Keyboard is not King. Not even close to being King. The keyboard is Inferior.
Totally Inferior. It has more keys obviously. It does not have more CONVENIENT keys.

I can put over 60 HotKeys on my Dual Shock 3. 60+
Anything done on the keyboard in just about any game INCLUDING RTS
I can do 10x better on a Dual Shock 3.

[Massamo]

same as people telling me i couldn't play bf3 on pc with 360 controller i showed them i could

[f1ndmenow]

Console controller is useful because the control layout is not complex to reach as a keyboard when activating powers on the fly

A PC on the other hand has great precision with the mouse for faster aiming out beating the movement sticks.

So it comes down to faster aiming or faster button reaction, I know this because I played both demo versions on Xbox and origin

[Moose Invictus]

S1L0 wrote...

Okay lets be more specific about one thing.
Earlier I said Mouse is king. I did not say Mouse and Keyboard is King.

1. Mouse is Superior. Under stress I can get about 70 - 75 % of mouse accuracy out
of an analog stick. That's outstanding compared to what gamers normally get for controllers.

2. The Keyboard is not King. Not even close to being King. The keyboard is Inferior.
Totally Inferior. It has more keys obviously. It does not have more CONVENIENT keys.

I can put over 60 HotKeys on my Dual Shock 3. 60+
Anything done on the keyboard in just about any game INCLUDING RTS
I can do 10x better on a Dual Shock 3.

Wth would you need 60 hotkeys for anything?  I can't think of a single game I'd need that many for, and I play TOR.  Also, having pressure-sensitive movement speed for the analog stick is entirely game dependent.  On platformers, it's very useful (Castlevania 64 is a great example of a game that relies heavily on this).  On first/third person shooters like say, L4D or ME3, there's simply no reason to have pressure-sensitive movement.  WASD or its equivalent is incredibly easy and quick to change direction, there's no issues with applying "too little pressure", and since you have all of 3-10 quickslots at any given time, excessive hotkeys is unhelpful.  

In short, ME3 benefits greatly from keyboard and mouse combo, although other games of different playstyles may obviously be another tale.

Modifié par Selandros, 06 mars 2012 - 03:35 .

[Raxxman]

S1L0 wrote...

Okay lets be more specific about one thing.
Earlier I said Mouse is king. I did not say Mouse and Keyboard is King.

1. Mouse is Superior. Under stress I can get about 70 - 75 % of mouse accuracy out
of an analog stick. That's outstanding compared to what gamers normally get for controllers.

2. The Keyboard is not King. Not even close to being King. The keyboard is Inferior.
Totally Inferior. It has more keys obviously. It does not have more CONVENIENT keys.

I can put over 60 HotKeys on my Dual Shock 3. 60+
Anything done on the keyboard in just about any game INCLUDING RTS
I can do 10x better on a Dual Shock 3.

No offense mate, but do you really think you can get close to the 300 APM proffesional starcraft players achieve with mouse  keyboard?

I seriously doubt you'd even get close to 120.

[RogueWolfie]

Elecbender wrote...

PC has harder enemies because aiming is much swifter on the PC.

If this wasn't the case I would agree with them.

By any chance can you post where you got this information? I've heard other people say it to discredit console players but I dismissed it as PC elitism. I am curious if there is any truth to it.

[Falcyn]

I play games on both the Xbox and PC, and aiming is absolutely faster and more accurate with a mouse and keyboard with a controller.

Nobody with common sense would even debate that, because it's just a fact of console gaming. Microsoft themselves had plans to allow cross-platform Xbox/PC multiplayer, but killed the project because even the best console gamers couldn't compete against mediocre PC players.

http://www.eurogamer...s-platform-play

[SilencedScream]

I've played on PC and 360. For FPS, I'll take either one. For games that use active cover (like Mass Effect, Gears of War, Rainbow Six, etc.), I prefer a controller.

It has more to do with getting in/out of cover than aiming, for me, but I've literally played with controllers since 1993 (granted, they were dual-stick back then...).

[Phazael]

The mechanics of the PC, with the mouse, are superior as people have stated. Also, PC users can tweak settings to do things like alter the field of vision (even when just zoomed in) to customize things to be more accurate and efficient. They can also alter their hotkeys and mouse aim sensitivity through various means that a console player simply cannot do.

That said, console versions tend to be easier to maintain because you are dealing with known hardware that is identical, for the most part, while two PCs build even by the same manufacturer in the same year can have widely different specs. And this may be annecdotal, but the AI tends to be superios on the PC, because of limitations on networking and hardware on the consoles, at least it was initially while Bioware was refining their net code. I know the first week I played it was like night and day facing enemies on my PS3, as opposed to my friends PC, with how enemies would behave.

[ryoldschool]

RogueWolfie wrote...

Elecbender wrote...

PC has harder enemies because aiming is much swifter on the PC.

If this wasn't the case I would agree with them.

By any chance can you post where you got this information? I've heard other people say it to discredit console players but I dismissed it as PC elitism. I am curious if there is any truth to it.

I can't find the thread anymore, but Christina Norman, one of the ME2 design folk, posted in the ME2 strategy forum that indeed they did buff the PC enemies more than console in ME2 because of the controls on PC being better.   Also many posters in the forum, who had played both systems, mentioned that controls were much better on PC than console.

Actually, this situation is more a knock on the PC players by saying that the game is harder on console than PC.  Otherwise why would they buff the PC enemies?

[claudeswares]

I believe the sprint/cover/revive button was chosen due to the lack of buttons on the controller. As others have stated, Mass Effect was designed with controllers in mind, so the differences aren't much.


Look up the X360 Shadowrun. It had cross platform play with the PC. They basically had to nerf the shooting/game mechanics to even the playing fields for people on the X360.