Does anybody really care about playing FPS games with motion controls?

V

Virtua

Guest
Does anybody really care about playing FPS games with motion controls?

Nobody cared on Wii and nobody will care on PS3. Killzone is a cool series but you're making a big deal out of just another shooter. Bulletstorm is going to be a much bigger release that same day, and not just cause it's multiplatform.
 
Last edited:
[quote name='jer7583']Does anybody really care about playing FPS games with motion controls?

Nobody cared on Wii and nobody will care on PS3. Killzone is a cool series but you're making a big deal out of just another shooter. Bulletstorm is going to be a much bigger release that same day, and not just cause it's multiplatform.[/QUOTE]


Are you really comparing shooters using the Wii motion technology on a system that is basically a generation behind to what the Move "could" possibly do?

Of course no one cares about shooters on the Wii. Comparing the Wii to the PS3 move is like comparing an asus laptop to a playskool laptop
 
[quote name='jer7583']Does anybody really care about playing FPS games with motion controls?

Nobody cared on Wii and nobody will care on PS3. Killzone is a cool series but you're making a big deal out of just another shooter. Bulletstorm is going to be a much bigger release that same day, and not just cause it's multiplatform.[/QUOTE]
Actually, I care. I am anxiously awaiting the Sony Sharpshooter.
I think there is a decent buzz surrounding KZ3 and Move.
Bulletstorm? Not so much. The demo did nothing to help it.
Point being, many people will be buying KZ3 day one, full MSRP if necessary and waiting for BS to go on sale.
 
well it's the same, control wise. I loved goldeneye and playing CodBlops on Wii but did goldeneye Wii sell? No.

Console players are always going to use dual analog for FPS games. There's a lot of negatives to pointer controls, Wii or Move. And the technologies are virtually identical as far as IR aiming/camera aiming goes.

I'm not talking about my personal preference, I think both are fun but the game needs to be designed around pointer controls to work right.

I actually liked the killzone 3 stuff i've seen more than bulletstorm but I think bulletstorm is going to be the bigger seller/more unique game. KZ3 is really just another KZ2 with better controls this time.
 
[quote name='jer7583']well it's the same, control wise. I loved goldeneye and playing CodBlops on Wii but did goldeneye Wii sell? No.

Console players are always going to use dual analog for FPS games. There's a lot of negatives to pointer controls, Wii or Move. And the technologies are virtually identical as far as IR aiming/camera aiming goes.

I'm not talking about my personal preference, I think both are fun but the game needs to be designed around pointer controls to work right.
[/QUOTE]

I definately like pointer controls on fps's on wii.
Golden eye has lots of customization, which should be required on all pointer based fps. I just wish more games would follow metroid prime 3's lead and have a button to lock the screen.

Its not a mouse and keyboard, but i like the direction its all heading.
 
[quote name='jer7583']well it's the same, control wise. I loved goldeneye and playing CodBlops on Wii but did goldeneye Wii sell? No.

Console players are always going to use dual analog for FPS games. There's a lot of negatives to pointer controls, Wii or Move. And the technologies are virtually identical as far as IR aiming/camera aiming goes.

I'm not talking about my personal preference, I think both are fun but the game needs to be designed around pointer controls to work right.

I actually liked the killzone 3 stuff i've seen more than bulletstorm but I think bulletstorm is going to be the bigger seller/more unique game. KZ3 is really just another KZ2 with better controls this time.[/QUOTE]

Same technology my ass. One part of ten is roughly the same. The other 90% are absent from the Wii -- and this isn't even taking the consoles themselves in consideration.
 
[quote name='Vader582']Actually, I care. I am anxiously awaiting the Sony Sharpshooter.
I think there is a decent buzz surrounding KZ3 and Move.
Bulletstorm? Not so much. The demo did nothing to help it.
Point being, many people will be buying KZ3 day one, full MSRP if necessary and waiting for BS to go on sale.[/QUOTE]

Have you even been keeping up with these games at all?

Bulletstorm has no buzz? Fox news released articles last week how it was the worst video game ever, they made a parody of it called duty calls, was downloaded 2 million times and the demo has helped this as well.

Not to mention the Gears 3 beta is packaged in with the epic edition.


Really should probably do a little research before spouting off nonsense.
 
[quote name='jer7583']there are differences. The PSMove seems to be laggier than the Wii pointer when talking strictly about it's function as a pointer/cursor on the screen.

The problem being that the move has to scan the entire camera feed from the PSEye along with the gyroscopic data from the move controller to get pointer data.

The wii just uses the IR X/Y coordinates data and seems to have less lag.

Digital Foundry (A well regarded tech blog that analyzes input lag and platform differences) put the lag on Move at around 8 frames. If a game like Killzone 3 is running at 30FPS that's almost 1/3 of the frames it's running at that you're lagging. Not to mention any lag introduced naturally by most HDTV setups, and the lag inherent in killzone's renderer for post processing effects. (seen in KZ2, but somewhat reduced in KZ3)

So yes, they are different. It does seem that the Wii works better as a pure pointing/FPS device than the move is able to.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/playstation-move-controller-lag-analysis-blog-entry[/QUOTE]

Thus far I would mostly agree with this, however I think we still have been in a "iron out the kinks" phase with the Move, while the Wii has been out for a while now and people already know how to program for it and program for it well. There are already Move games out that track way better than other Move titles, it can be all down to how the programmers know how to utilize the hardware.

With that said, I was amazed at how well it tracked in the single player Killzone 3 demo for PS+ members. I didn't feel like I was fighting against it, the only thing I felt that was holding me back was that I was holding the Move in my hand, looking at the Sony battle rifle's set up I believe that will help a ton in making it feel more natural.

It will end up being like all other control schemes thus far, some people will prefer the controller, others may prefer the move, just like some people prefer controller over mouse+keyboard. Who the hell cares if someone thinks it is neat and wants to play that way, to each their own right? I really doubt it's going to hurt anyone here if someone is excited for Move controls in any of their games.
 
[quote name='jer7583']there are differences. The PSMove seems to be laggier than the Wii pointer when talking strictly about it's function as a pointer/cursor on the screen.

The problem being that the move has to scan the entire camera feed from the PSEye along with the gyroscopic data from the move controller to get pointer data.

The wii just uses the IR X/Y coordinates data and seems to have less lag.

Digital Foundry (A well regarded tech blog that analyzes input lag and platform differences) put the lag on Move at around 8 frames. If a game like Killzone 3 is running at 30FPS that's almost 1/3 of the frames it's running at that you're lagging. Not to mention any lag introduced naturally by most HDTV setups, and the lag inherent in killzone's renderer for post processing effects. (seen in KZ2, but somewhat reduced in KZ3)

So yes, they are different. It does seem that the Wii works better as a pure pointing/FPS device than the move is able to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWKV8ih1HAg

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/playstation-move-controller-lag-analysis-blog-entry[/QUOTE]

Um what? Do you even understand what the blog you linked is saying? Apparently not, because according to them, if KZ3 was ruining at 30 fps, the latency would be 4 frames, with 2 frames roughly being from the TV itself, meaning the Move causes 2 frames of lag, including the time it takes for the input to transmit to the PS3. How the hell does the Wii even compare?
 
Not me personally. I don't have very steady hands and will never be able to aim with motion control as well as I can with dual analogs (or a mouse).

I think it only works for on rail shooters, or FPS games with lock on like Metroid Prime 3. At least for me.

If others dig them, that's fine. Hopefully it's an optional control mode on top of traditional dual analog. And if not, I still don't care as long as there are plenty of traditionally controlled games coming out.

But moot as I'll never buy or play any motion controlled games/consoles/accessories after not digging the Wii at all.
 
[quote name='HakurenKyo06']Have you even been keeping up with these games at all?

Bulletstorm has no buzz? Fox news released articles last week how it was the worst video game ever, they made a parody of it called duty calls, was downloaded 2 million times and the demo has helped this as well.

Not to mention the Gears 3 beta is packaged in with the epic edition.


Really should probably do a little research before spouting off nonsense.[/QUOTE]
I'm aware of the Fox News bullshit, smart-ass. FN (unfortunately or fortunately, depending on your POV) has a shit-ton of viewers; viewers who believe what they see and hear. To me that translates into a bunch of parents not buying BS for their kids. And actually Epic made the parody of Call of Duty called "Duty Calls", not FN.
Perhaps you should do a little research before you start spouting off nonsense, son?

BTW, I didn't say BS had no buzz. It just doesn't seem to have any positive buzz about it. After actually playing the demo, I can see why.
It's "The Club" for brats who like to cuss. The GoW3 Beta may be one of the few things it has going for it and it ain't enough IMO for a release-day purchase.

EDIT: I just wanted to thank whichever mod chose to move this discussion instead of just outright deleting it. It is much appreciated!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Vader582']I'm aware of the Fox News bullshit, smart-ass. FN (unfortunately or fortunately, depending on your POV) has a shit-ton of viewers; viewers who believe what they see and hear. To me that translates into a bunch of parents not buying BS for their kids. And actually Epic made the parody of Call of Duty called "Duty Calls", not FN.
Perhaps you should do a little research before you start spouting off nonsense, son?

BTW, I didn't say BS had no buzz. It just doesn't seem to have any positive buzz about it. After actually playing the demo, I can see why.
It's "The Club" for brats who like to cuss. The GoW3 Beta may be one of the few things it has going for it and it ain't enough IMO for a release-day purchase.

EDIT: I just wanted to thank whichever mod chose to move this discussion instead of just outright deleting it. It is much appreciated![/QUOTE]

It was Shrike, and two of my posts are still missing, but whatever =P
 
[quote name='elessar123']It was Shrike, and two of my posts are still missing, but whatever =P[/QUOTE]Sorry, it was one post, and I restored it.
 
Eh, it's a neat option for people with the Move. I've yet to try using the Move on the Killzone 3 beta, but I'm sure I'll give it a go eventually. I really liked using the Move in Resident Evil 5, so maybe I'll enjoy it on Killzone 3.

Personally, I'm really looking forward to Killzone 3 and I'll be paying MSRP. The beta is a hell of a lot of fun and I'm interested to see how the full campaign plays in 3D.
 
[quote name='shrike4242']Sorry, it was one post, and I restored it.[/QUOTE]

Thanks =P I was actually going to move it to a Move discussion thread actually, but I don't think others care.
 
Yes and no. While I'd greatly prefer native mouse support (and until then get by with the FnS), the Move controls are far better than what the kiddie analog sticks can ever offer. I honestly can't wait for something better to be implemented so I can get back into the genre. PC's became a hassle and I simply refuse the inferiority of analogs.

Both games have something going for them. KZ has the Move and Bullet is finally a step away from those crappy realistic war shooters. Which will be more popular I don't know.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Not me personally. I don't have very steady hands and will never be able to aim with motion control as well as I can with dual analogs (or a mouse).

I think it only works for on rail shooters, or FPS games with lock on like Metroid Prime 3. At least for me.

If others dig them, that's fine. Hopefully it's an optional control mode on top of traditional dual analog. And if not, I still don't care as long as there are plenty of traditionally controlled games coming out.

But moot as I'll never buy or play any motion controlled games/consoles/accessories after not digging the Wii at all.[/QUOTE]

Well said, this echos my sentiments exactly.
 
I like being competitive with shooters so anything with an analog or motion is an immediate no no.

Not to say those controls can't make for fun FPS games.
 
I like first person shooters with motion controls. not online as much (cause Im better with controller), but its really fun to play through games with motion control IMO. But Ive always enjoyed them, even on wii. Now with killzone, I dont even like killzone 2... but Im thinking of at least renting KZ3. I recently got a 3d tv so its gonna be double bad ass, 3d with the move. yeah, Ill prolly have to rent it at least.
 
I actually can't believe any of you guys are comparing Killzone to Bulletstorm...

Bullet storm is a new and unproven IP, and therefore shouldn't have ever even been included in this discussion. Could it be fun and sell? Sure. But it's not even the same type of game that KZ3 is.

As for the Move controlled FPS, I enjoyed the controls for RE5(yes, I know that wasn't FPS) so I'm interested to see how it works out. I'll definitely give it a try.
 
BTW, the latency between using a Move controller and the DS3 is a little as zero frame s, to as much as 1 frame (possibly 2 frames at 60fps). Still don't think you can be competitive with it?

I'm not saying you should all switch over, but if you compared fight sticks with controllers, logic would say that most high level play would be done on controllers. Same thing with using a mouse versus an analog stick, but people get so good at using the mouse and joystick, that a greater distance you have to move the mouse and joystick is compensated by the player's body and mind. But we all know that tons of players at the highest level use these seemingly more inefficient input devices to greater efficiencies than logical. So who knows, maybe the peak of skills is eventually higher on a motion controller, once the latency is minimized, like it is now.

Not saying it will happen this way, our even this generation, but a lot of people seem a little quick to judge that it can't be better than what they're used to. Three years ago, I refused to use anything other than a mouse and keyboard myself for FPS games, now it feels almost as natural.

Just my two cents.
 
Fightstick vs pad is often personal preference, that isn't even comparable to the FPS situation though. I understand people like to think, "oh I'm better with analog so it doesn't matter," but a mouse is faster and more precise. That is a fact. Just because you are personally more efficient with one form of control does not mean it is the ideal form. It's not even a minuscule difference either.

Shooters have been made for consoles though, and since everyone must use a controller in a game like Halo 3, the playing field is even and if you want to be competitive with that -- by all means.

But for games that actually require precision, recoil control, and twitch reactions (things that make competitive FPS actually impressive) -- you're not going to see a CS player plug in a 360 pad to his PC.

On the subject of motion control, I don't see it becoming the staple of competitive FPS no more than I see Kinect replacing a fight stick for Street Fighter. Though I guess one could argue a mouse is a form of motion control :whistle2:k?
 
yes. Just takes getting used to. Had a hell of a time trying to play RE5....but prefer it with move now that I'm comfortable with it
 
[quote name='elessar123']BTW, the latency between using a Move controller and the DS3 is a little as zero frame s, to as much as 1 frame (possibly 2 frames at 60fps). Still don't think you can be competitive with it?
[/QUOTE]

I don't care so much about that. As I said my issue is I don't have very steady hands so I can't aim as precisely as I can with sticks. I can move the cross hairs around quickly, but I'd lose precision--not that I'm great anyway!

[quote name='DurbanBrown']BTW, mouse and keyboard is the WORST way to play FPS, IMO[/QUOTE]

I hate them as well. Mouse is great for aiming, but I loathe the keyboard portion of the controls--kept me from ever getting into PC gaming despite trying a few times over the years. That and just hating gaming on PC vs. lounging on the couch in front of the big screen.
 
[quote name='jer7583']Does anybody really care about playing FPS games with motion controls?

Nobody cared on Wii and nobody will care on PS3. Killzone is a cool series but you're making a big deal out of just another shooter. Bulletstorm is going to be a much bigger release that same day, and not just cause it's multiplatform.[/QUOTE]

Sounds like a weak argument so you can show your hardon about bulletstorm.

Besides what exactly does bullestorm have to do at all with your argument about motion controls in shooters? Your topic is titled does anyone care about fps with motion controls, then in the thread you said killzone is just another shooter despite the fact it only supports the movie it doesnt require you to have it, then launch into how its just another shooter and then into how awesome bulletstorm is. If you want to argue about something atleast stay on topic, your allover the place.

And if you think bulletstorm is somehow not just another shooter then you really must be a epic studios fanboy. And I also assume a 360 fanboy since you took multiple shots at sony for no real reason what so ever.

From the sound of it Im pretty sure you dont even own a move and fps games that work with it. Just playing with one for a couple minutes and saying "This is stupid LOLZ!!!!" does not count. Maybe if you owned one and spent a good amount of time trying different fps with it then you might have a valid opinion. Again, sounds like blind wii and ps3 hate speak to me.

[quote name='DurbanBrown']BTW, mouse and keyboard is the WORST way to play FPS, IMO[/QUOTE]

Its all personal taste. Even after all these years on consoles with analog sticks playing shooters I still suck with them and dont like them anywhere near as much as my mouse and keyboard on my pc. In a fraction of a second I can whip my sights behind me, shoot more precise, whip back around the other direction and keep moving. Mouse/keyboard just work for me extremely well vs a controller because they are more precise and a lot faster. But its just prefence, like the sound of it you would kick my ass in a shooter with controllers cause you took to them a lot better than I did. But hell long as it works for you and you have fun doesnt matter if you play a fps with a mouse/keyboard or a powerglove.
 
[quote name='gargus']Its all personal taste. Even after all these years on consoles with analog sticks playing shooters I still suck with them and dont like them anywhere near as much as my mouse and keyboard on my pc. In a fraction of a second I can whip my sights behind me, shoot more precise, whip back around the other direction and keep moving. Mouse/keyboard just work for me extremely well vs a controller because they are more precise and a lot faster. But its just prefence, like the sound of it you would kick my ass in a shooter with controllers cause you took to them a lot better than I did. But hell long as it works for you and you have fun doesnt matter if you play a fps with a mouse/keyboard or a powerglove.[/QUOTE]

This. I would get my ass handed to me in a shooter with controllers as well.

What I'm saying is basically that for all we know, the next top ranked player will be using the Move. I'm not saying everyone is going to shift over.
 
[quote name='DurbanBrown']BTW, mouse and keyboard is the WORST way to play FPS, IMO[/QUOTE]

Agreed, and I'll extend it to every genre except traditional MMOs (traditional meaning games like WoW, not DC Universe) and RTS.

As for motion, it can screw off and I hope this new gimmick dies quick for the sake of gaming. On consoles dual analog works perfect, there is no need for change there. If devs want to innovate, then come up with gameplay that doesn't copy COD 4 instead of fiddling with gimmicks.

I want to play Killzone 3 badly, but from what I've read a lot of people either hate the single player or multiplayer..or even both. Single player issues are too short or a laughable story and script. Maybe if Guerrilla wasn't wasting all their time on gimmicks like motion and 3D they could have focused on making a meatier game.
 
[quote name='DurbanBrown']BTW, mouse and keyboard is the WORST way to play FPS, IMO[/QUOTE]

Obviously IMO because you're not playing real FPS's then. If you were you'd say otherwise.

Mouse > motion > analogs. That's how it is for anyone serious about these games. I should add that the mouse is the important part. While a KB naturally goes with it, on consoles a navigation side controller will do fine. Many console FPS's don't support as many functions as a PC one, they're cut back to compensate for less buttons. The movement is fine with either input method since that doesn't need to be as precise as your aim.
 
[quote name='LottaGames']Obviously IMO because you're not playing real FPS's then. If you were you'd say otherwise.

Mouse > motion > analogs. That's how it is for anyone serious about these games.[/QUOTE]

I do wonder how much the consumer can push what the future will be here, as opposed to the hardware maker or the developer. When PC FPS made the transition from keyboard only games to mouse + keyboard, it seems like even though people were used to and may have largely preferred an inferior scheme, the mouse was adopted.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']I can't tell if you guys are trolling or not.[/QUOTE]

I'm not. I'm not a competitive FPS player at all (mainly play the single player and suck online but still have fun playing here and there). And I've never liked gaming on a PC thus never got into keyboard and mouse controls.

To me PC=work and internet. And I spend so much time on that crap I don't want to be anywhere near a PC when trying to relax so I've always been into console gaming only.

And I don't care if Halo, COD etc. aren't "real" or "serious" FPS games. Those are what I enjoy and what got me into the genre that I wasn't a fan of until last generation. I play games for one reason. To have fun. Not to be competitive or play "serious" games.
 
I understand your stance dmaul, I was talking about the others. I never said a controller wasn't an enjoyable way to play FPS, I do it all the time.

All I'm saying is a mouse is a much more favorable form of control. Analog shooters have to compensate with slower paced gameplay, aim assist (because you cannot physically be pinpoint with the analog itsellf), and a huge lack of recoil. Also notice how games like Halo allow perfect accuracy when strafing with say, a sniper rifle. The game combines your movement along with aim control to compensate for the limited range of motion. Halo is a very well made FPS for consoles, but it plays wildly different from popular PC shooters.

I was simply confused as to how anyone could argue an analog is more effective.
 
If cod's not a serious fps nowadays then I don't know what is. So it's not what you played in your parents basement on a PC lan connection in the mid 90s, that doesn't mean that the biggest online shooter out there isn't serious enough.

Thankfully, the majority of the market doesn't want motion controls in anything, let alone their shooters. It's one of the few things that the general public got right.
 
I'm not a competitive gamer either. I don't consider console FPS's serious because they aren't 'real' FPS's. Analogs mean the developers need to nerf the game to compensate. Autoaim, lock-on, and other assistance is also included. It's not the same game as what long time players know. In theory you're still shooting stuff and the genre is similar, but the control method changes everything.

Panzer hit the nail on the head. However in that case if you have those games you probably have a 360, meaning you're under 15 years old, and probably don't know anything about controls they were never offered on consoles.

I've always requested mouse support in these games. When I learned UT3 supported mice I ran right out for a copy and it was the first shooter I got for PS3. It would be nice if we could convince developers to add support, there's gotta be millions of PC FPS players who also refuse consoles due to the poor control scheme. When I brought this up on a PS website I was met with opposition. More kids who think skilled gamers need to stay out or reduce themselves to using analogs. A point was made though that Sony will probably discourage mouse support in order to push Move. So who knows. I won't quit requesting it, but it might take a while.
 
[quote name='tmacairjordan87']If cod's not a serious fps nowadays then I don't know what is. So it's not what you played in your parents basement on a PC lan connection in the mid 90s, that doesn't mean that the biggest online shooter out there isn't serious enough.

Thankfully, the majority of the market doesn't want motion controls in anything, let alone their shooters. It's one of the few things that the general public got right.[/QUOTE]

Why do people always argue that because something is popular, it's the pinnacle of the genre? I don't see Avatar on any credible list of best movies of all time. Does that also mean Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus are better than Stevie Ray Vaughn? Or that Windows is the best OS, and IE the best browser? CoD is popular because it's accessible, possibly partly due to the dumbed down controls. Just saying.
 
[quote name='LottaGames']
Panzer hit the nail on the head. However in that case if you have those games you probably have a 360, meaning you're under 15 years old, and probably don't know anything about controls they were never offered on consoles.
[/QUOTE]

:roll: I'm 32 and have been gaming for over 25 years. I've just never liked PC gaming (nor much liked computers in general) and wasn't into FPS much before last gen.

You're clearly the youngun here if you have to go around insulting others based on the types of games they like and types of control schemes they prefer. Games are just silly time wasters for people to have fun with.

Who cares what types of shooters someone else prefers or what control schemes they prefer. Play what you like, how you like and don't go around bashing others or being a lame fanboy that insults other consoles etc. Nothing comes across as being more pathetically nerdy that engaging in that kind of crap. Ignore list +1.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']I understand your stance dmaul, I was talking about the others. I never said a controller wasn't an enjoyable way to play FPS, I do it all the time.

All I'm saying is a mouse is a much more favorable form of control. Analog shooters have to compensate with slower paced gameplay, aim assist (because you cannot physically be pinpoint with the analog itsellf), and a huge lack of recoil. Also notice how games like Halo allow perfect accuracy when strafing with say, a sniper rifle. The game combines your movement along with aim control to compensate for the limited range of motion. Halo is a very well made FPS for consoles, but it plays wildly different from popular PC shooters.

I was simply confused as to how anyone could argue an analog is more effective.[/QUOTE]

Agree with all that. A mouse is much more effective for aiming. I just hate the keyboard portion of the controls.

I just prefer console FPS as I've always been a console gamer since the Atari 5200 on so I'm used to d-pads and analog sticks. I don't mind aim assist and all that other stuff as I don't play FPS games because I want to test my aiming skills. I play for story and the fun of easily shooting the hell out of everything in sight and vegging out for a bit.
 
Age isn't really a factor in what gaming culture someone has been a part of. If you've played twitch based PC shooters like CS, UT2k4, Tribes, DoD etc... or even the old CoDs -- you'll notice the FPS genre has changed greatly to fit the mold of analog controls in recent years.

It makes the games accessible to an entirely new audience, but at the same time really restricts what you can do in terms of gunplay IMO. The skill ceiling is much lower for analog, but again -- most people just want to rack up k/d ratios in pubs, unlocks tons of weapons, and make passes over maps with an apache after getting their kill streak. Intricate shooting is a thing of the past, unfortunately for some.

And since FPS is essentially all the same thing, changing the one thing that matters -- the feel of the weapon -- is the biggest change you can make.
 
[quote name='elessar123']Why do people always argue that because something is popular, it's the pinnacle of the genre? I don't see Avatar on any credible list of best movies of all time. Does that also mean Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus are better than Stevie Ray Vaughn? Or that Windows is the best OS, and IE the best browser? CoD is popular because it's accessible, possibly partly due to the dumbed down controls. Just saying.[/QUOTE]

Didn't say it was the pinnacle, said it was the biggest. The only other real current competitive shooters are halo, battlefield and killzone really. Everything else has a pretty niche following, or none at all.

Dumbed down controls? I don't even know what that's supposed to mean. It's not like the game controls with 1 button or waggle. It's no more complex or easy than any other game with non-broken controls.
 
[quote name='tmacairjordan87']Didn't say it was the pinnacle, said it was the biggest. The only other real current competitive shooters are halo, battlefield and killzone really. Everything else has a pretty niche following, or none at all.

Dumbed down controls? I don't even know what that's supposed to mean. It's not like the game controls with 1 button or waggle. It's no more complex or easy than any other game with non-broken controls.[/QUOTE]

You implied more than it was just the biggest. Pinnacle is too strong a word, I'll admit.

Most console shooters have some sort of auto-aim, which is very much a dumbed down control.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']Age isn't really a factor in what gaming culture someone has been a part of. If you've played twitch based PC shooters like CS, UT2k4, Tribes, DoD etc... or even the old CoDs -- you'll notice the FPS genre has changed greatly to fit the mold of analog controls in recent years.

It makes the games accessible to an entirely new audience, but at the same time really restricts what you can do in terms of gunplay IMO. The skill ceiling is much lower for analog, but again -- most people just want to rack up k/d ratios in pubs, unlocks tons of weapons, and make passes over maps with an apache after getting their kill streak. Intricate shooting is a thing of the past, unfortunately for some.

And since FPS is essentially all the same thing, changing the one thing that matters -- the feel of the weapon -- is the biggest change you can make.[/QUOTE]

Like I said, I never played any of those games as I've never been into PC gaming. The first FPS I played was Goldeneye on the N64, then maybe one of the Medal of Honor games on the PSX. Didn't play another until Halo 1, and I played that late last gen as I didn't get an Xbox until KOTOR came out.

It was really just this gen with Gears of War (third person, but still a shooter), Halo3, CoD 4, Bioshock and the sequels to those that really got me into the genre.

So I've never been one to care about precision shooting or played to test my aiming skill. I'm mainly into the single player modes, and just like to veg out and blow the hell out of stuff for an hour or two every now and then.

But I do understand that others grew up playing those precision shooters while I was mainly playing platformers, rpgs and sports games in those early generations. So I get that it sucks for you all that PC gaming is dying a slow death and precision shooters are largely a thing of the past.

But that's just the nature of gaming going mainstream. There's more people who'd rather game on the big screen, lounging on their couch and holding a controller than people who want to game at a desk on a pc using a keyboard and mouse. Especially people like me who are stuck at PCs far longer than they'd like for work already, and the last thing we want to do is spend any more time than necessary around a keyboard and mouse in our free time! :D

But it is a shame when genres change and leave certain groups of fans behind. So I agree that it sucks for you guys.
 
Some good discussion in this thread.

That Mouse+KB > Dual Analog > Motion controls to me is not debatable, it's fact. It's not the Keyboard soo much as it's the mouse. A mouse is just much more precise than an analog stick.

But the control method that you prefer, and the method that your best with, varies from person to person. I think all FPS games should offer all those control schemes. as well as fully customizable controls.

I prefer mouse + KB. But I almost never play shooters on my PC. I play them on my 360 with a lesser control method. I do this because my couch + 48" tv is better than desk chair and 22" monitor. Another factor is that I work on a PC 10-12 hours a day, and when I get home the last thing I want to do is sit at another desk in front of another PC.

Play what you want, play how you want.
 
[quote name='Puffa469']S
Play what you want, play how you want.[/QUOTE]

:applause:

Exactly. And don't go around insulting those with different preferences.
 
Why? The kiddies are just as likely to flame us for wanting the mouse. I brought this up elsewhere and those senseless gamers didn't understand why the genre needs to improve the control methods offered. If you want to use analogs that's one thing. But to drag down those with skill who've been playing them for years with a mouse, that's not cool. I always make the point to say if we can play racing games with wheels or fighters with joysticks for improved performance then why is the M/KB combo facing so much discrimination?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top