In defence of the controller over the mouse for online FPS

[DeadlyFred]

Now, maybe that has something to do with the difference between playing with a mouse and playing with a controller?

That accurate weapons are made more effective by a more accurate control scheme? Well, there's a leap of logic if I ever saw one.

Exactly--the flip side is that inaccurate weapons are made more effective by an inaccurate control scheme.

FPS stands for First Person Shooter, not First Person Sniper.

And again, the point of this revelation is to prove what, exactly? That the two platforms are different? Kinda think that's what I've been saying all this time. To wit, however, the potential for greater accuracy hardly renders inaccuracy-by-volume useless. From personal experience on BF:2142, I can get just as many kills playing as Support as I can anything else. Oddly enough, a volley of LMG fire does wonders to make enemies dive for cover (read: suppress them).

Your argument is still basically coming down to the virtues of arbitrarily-enforced (via hardware) accuracy restrictions; this is somehow an asset to console FPS gaming? This enhances strategy and "thinking skills"? No, sir, I think not. In fact I think the very opposite is true. Giving each individual player the ability to be more singularly lethal puts far more emphasis on the need for concerted team-play. The fact that standing around in the open will get you shot in the head emphasizes the need to use cover and advance smartly and with support. Et al, et cetera, ad nausiam, yada yada yada.

 

[vede]

Five pages in and you guys haven't come to this conclusion yet? What the hell?

Maybe, just maybe, they're balanced.

M+kb allows faster reflexes to be used, so the defenders get an advantage? No, because the attacker can aim faster.

Planning is more important in controller games because it takes longer for the defender to get out of the line of fire? No, because it also takes longer for the attacker to attack.

Seeing a trend? They're different, but still (roughly) equal. There shouldn't be an argument here past "I prefer mice" or "I prefer controllers."

But, I do have an argument against Rossatdi. You say that controllers are better because they make playing the game harder? (Note, not making the game harder, but making the act of playing it harder.) That seems a bit dumb, because the main idea of making forms of control for games is to make playing the game easy to do. What I got from this is, "Controllers are better because they are worse." Contradictions are bad, my friend.

Personally, I prefer keyboards and mice. The way I see a controller is a large, misshapen rock with buttons or patches of related buttons placed arbitrarily around it. The keyboard just seems more... I don't know. I like it more.

 

[DeadlyFred]

The main idea of making forms of control for games is because we haven't yet concocted a means of doing it via psychic interaction.

 

[vede]

But, I do have an argument against Rossatdi. You say that controllers are better because they make playing the game harder? (Note, not making the game harder, but making the act of playing it harder.) That seems a bit dumb, because the main idea of making forms of control for games is to make playing the game easy to do. What I got from this is, "Controllers are better because they are worse." Contradictions are bad, my friend.

I would say the main idea of making forms of control for games is to make playing the game *fun/rewarding/etc.* to do. Something can be harder without also being more frustrating. When that's the case something can be both harder and better--it's when you have to fight with the controls that there's necessarily a problem.

That's what I was saying. The point of having a form of control is so you can control the character, relatively easily. I don't mean the controls are meant to make the game easy, I'm saying they aren't meant to make the game harder, which seems to be what the OP thinks.

 

[Screeling]

I personally prefer the mouse versus the controller as it is much more precise. I will agree that the controller's are more comfortable, but I really don't believe that playing with a mouse is twitch over tactics, as previously stated in a post, if you're playing on PC, everyone else is using a mouse too, so the playing field is pretty even.

 

[Iori Branford]

I would say the main idea of making forms of control for games is to make playing the game *fun/rewarding/etc.* to do. Something can be harder without also being more frustrating. When that's the case something can be both harder and better--it's when you have to fight with the controls that there's necessarily a problem.

Challenging games with challenging missions are fun and rewarding.

Challenging controls are a loogie in the player's face that makes the game into work at best, and torture at worst.

 

[rossatdi]

That's what I was saying. The point of having a form of control is so you can control the character, relatively easily. I don't mean the controls are meant to make the game easy, I'm saying they aren't meant to make the game harder, which seems to be what the OP thinks.

No, I think the OP was saying that the controller makes the game different, and in a good way.

Exactly. It's not like console controls make the game difficult. Right at the start I said that I prefer mouse and keyboard to controller for SP, hands down, over and over again. But for multiplayer it just means that those born with freakish hand-eye-coordination or with too much time on their hands don't have such an advantage. I mean if you want to practice obsessively over something, aiming with a mouse probably isn't the best thing to do it with.

All things such as hitboxes and map design equal, dual analog sticks are challenging in a way which is extremely frustrating for me.

You find a controller frustrating and challenging? That's pretty funny coming from the guy slinging around 'casual gamer' as an insult. A good gamer should be reasonably proficient on any major input device, regardless of what system you own. Surely you've been at a friends playing a game or something and they have a console? I forgot, Eggo is so hardcore he probably doesn't have any flesh and blood friends.

It's not as immediately accessible as a mouse but you surely can learn to use a controller within the space of about 10 minutes? It was sitting around a friend's xbox and giant TV that I learnt standard FPS controller playing Halo. Now don't get me wrong, Halo is a pretty weak game overall but it's not like we were all walking into trees firing at the sky.

 

[rossatdi]

Hey Rossatdi, I posted your $850 PC build. Will you comment on it please?

"Casual gamer" is hardly an insult considering it's something you define the console gaming experience as with extreme pride it seems.

Surely you've been at a friends playing a game or something and they have a console?

You must have not read the bit earlier where I discussed my possession and use of an Xbox 360 for 3 months. I regularly ended up in the top 1-3 spots in all the slayer matches I played, even though I had never played any Halo game extensively before.

Despite this, it was still frustrating to know that my capabilities were held back by such a dinky control scheme that wouldn't let me flawlessly and seamlessly move and aim wherever I wanted. Here's an analogy if you still don't understand: just because I'm used to running and winning races with both of my legs but can still win one-legged races if forced to doesn't make the one-legged race any less frustrating.

I enjoy the freedom of being able to use whatever control scheme I want on PC. And I am by no means a gifted or talented or freakishly good FPS gamer...Yet somehow, I still have an amazing time playing multiplayer games of COD4, HL2M, TF2, and Battlefield 2. I think you are really exaggerating the difficulty and learning curve of playing a multiplayer FPS on the computer because I've never suffered the online buttrape you keep talking about.

...Maybe you're just poor at multiplayer FPS gaming on the PC?

Have you actually seen really good people play stuff like Unreal Tournament? That stuff is screwed up. And if you're finding controller FPS that frustrating after 3 months then its a bit embarrassing really isn't it? Not exactly a challenge to beat Halo-tards. Personally I quite the like the ease of footwork with analogue stick but that's not the point.

HL2M and TF2 aren't really what I'm talking about here. It's the CoD4s, the UTs and the CS(S)s. I was pretty good for quite a while, I got really good for a while but just got annoyed that if I didn't play many hours a week my aim would deteriorate. I certainly don't feel 'crippled' when playing with a controller.

I love how uppity PC gamers are. The word asinine has been used twice, which is at least twice too many times for anyone posting in an internet forum, and itself asinine.

I'm going to look for that magic computer now Eggo. I may be a while, I do have some work to do this morning.

 

[DeadlyFred]

I love how uppity PC gamers are. The word asinine has been used twice, which is at least twice too many times for anyone posting in an internet forum, and itself asinine.

Asinine is a great adjective in the context of this discussion. With your own words you admit the lack of skills necessary to be competitive in PC gaming and then proceed to try and blame that fault on the hardware and how good it allows your opponents to be. That's life, my friend, and you can extend the analogy quite further to the realms of things which are more meaningful than video games.

However, let us draw another analogy from that: should guitarists be forbidden from using real guitars and have to use Guitar Hero controllers so that they don't intimidate the world with their prowess of a stringed instrument? Should a star runner have to wear lead shoes in order to slow him down enough for everyone else to keep pace?

It is a meritless and unqualified argument bred from nothing but your own discontent. I'm far from being a pro-level FPS gamer but I can usually hold my own to at least some extent and I certainly am not going to begrudge the fanatical clickers who best me simply because they are better at it than myself. You have a choice, not only in which platform you game on but in what style of games you play; there is no edict which requires you to play UT or CoD4 or anything else for that matter.

Claiming people should not be allowed to be good at a game and condemning the control scheme which affords them that luxury? Yes, that is an asinine argument my friend.

 

[Leon P]

I agree a with a LOT of what rossatdi Is saying.

I recently bought COD4 for PC
to play the game with some close friends,

Now I used to play this game on the 360 a lot
and was always scoring in the top 3 in every match
but it seems the PC version is plagued with people who camp, cheat, and exploit the game
Hardcore Team Death Match seems to be the only available game mode around.
and IMO the game just seems to turn into a TDM like UT on the PC.

Everyone seems to be out to get Uber precise kills Instead of completing objectives, it gets seriously boring being picked of the other side of the map with a gold desert eagle from a 16 year old with wankers cramp.