Is playing FPSs on the PC worth it anymore?

[MHR]

My stance is that you should play the other shooters with the developers that give a damn. Counter-strike and Team Fortress 2 have Valve Anti-Cheat which actually works

And all these shooters to play on the PC and what you play is COD? It's like going to a steakhouse and ordering the salad.

 

[Ryan Hughes]

I have several points to make:
1) For people like myself, PC is really the only way to play a shooter, particularly a modern one, so I would be stuck with whatever is available. I would not say my right thumb is paralyzed. . . just that an injury left it decidedly non-dexterous, and modern shooters are not kind to even the most virile right thumbs to begin with. Really, for most console shooters, I have to play on easy settings or not at all. Preferably not at all.
2) Hacking has been around in the PC space for a long time. The indifferent attitudes of developers and studios do not help, but anywhere there is competition, there will be people that are willing to throw away what dignity they may have once had for a fragment of data or a kill:death ratio. If people were to leave the PC space for consoles, the basic restrictions on hacking would come down eventually, and before you knew it the problem would be in the console space as well. The thing cheaters really desire is recognition, and they will go wherever they can acquire that.
3) Yes, Cod Ghosts is terribly unsupported by Infinity Ward and Activision; their attitude being mostly that once people have bought their product, they simply do not care. This is far more a problem with the distributors of the game than with PC itself, though.
4) You could try playing better games. Cod is effectively the lowest common denominator of video games. The video game equivalent of Katy Perry or any other base and artless pop star. So, there is that as well.

EDIT: For those saying Titanfall is going to be so much better: Please, have you already forgotten what EA did with SimCity and Battlefield 4? Those games were buggy messes.

 

[Asuterisuku]

EDIT: For those saying Titanfall is going to be so much better: Please, have you already forgotten what EA did with SimCity and Battlefield 4? Those games were buggy messes.

Except that just the beta was one of the most solid FPS experiences I've had in a long, long time. Respawn seems to know what they're doing, and they seem to have creative control on this one - unlike DICE, or Maxis. I say let the game speak for itself.

 

[Ryan Hughes]

EDIT: For those saying Titanfall is going to be so much better: Please, have you already forgotten what EA did with SimCity and Battlefield 4? Those games were buggy messes.

Except that just the beta was one of the most solid FPS experiences I've had in a long, long time. Respawn seems to know what they're doing, and they seem to have creative control on this one - unlike DICE, or Maxis. I say let the game speak for itself.

Yeah, and the Diablo III beta and stress tests went off without a hitch as well. Respawn may very well know what they are doing, but EA holds the reins. The game cannot speak for itself, it is not released yet. Thus, go on long experience: ever since Ultima VIII, EA has been a terrible company.

 

[Hadley]

ANYMORE????

Shooters on Consoles were always only for the Casual-Scrubs! I have not played a Console-Game since the N64 Days and I never would even think of playing one, especially no Shooter without Mouse/Keyboard lol!
Just look at Titanfall - its so Casual and clearly made for the Console-Scrubs that are used to play Call of Kiddy with a Gamepad.

BF4 on PC is just by far the best Shooter you can play. Its challenging and most of the Weapons feel different and are somewhat hard to master.

 

[The Lunatic]

Hacking is easier on the PC, there's not much doubt about that.

However, it's up to the developers when making a game to ensure the port has adequate protection against it.

I'd say not including it would essentially be poorly porting a game.

 

[Evonisia]

Well Call of Duty is targeted at console players, and Ghosts was hacked before it was even launched. I think it's just a scenario where Infinity Ward needs quality control but they lack it.

As for hackers well all I can say is that said problem has always been there. The developers sometimes just don't care, whilst other developers will just fix everything they can. You can choose to risk it or you can choose to go to consoles (if you can tolerate the controls like I can).

 

[Yopaz]

I get the feeling that you're talking about a very specific niche, but applying it to the larger genre. CoD:Ghosts is a AAA modern military shooter with an absurdly strong emphasis on multiplayer. I can only guess that Infinity Ward doesn't care too much about hackers on the PC version is because they might have their hands full with the crazy number of people playing on console.

But that doesn't really answer your questions much.
What is my stance? No *&^%s given.
Interested in Titanfall? Not particularly.
Does PC hacking make it less attractive to buy for PC? Full disclosure: I'm not much for multiplayer to begin with, so again, no &^%$s given.
Are AAA FPSs on PC doomed to the fate of Ghosts? NOPE. Bioshock, TF2, Dishonored, Fallout 3, *&^%-mothering Half-Life... you know that the FPS was birthed on the PC, yes?

Just wanted to inform you that saying no shits given or no fucks given isn't against the rules. It's calling someone a fucking retard you should avoid.

OT: Until consoles allow me to aim with a mouse I would say yes. That's the problem I have with console exclusives. I want to play the games and having all 3 last gen consoles having the console hasn't really been an issue either, but the fact that I can't use my preferred aiming method is an issue. I can still enjoy it, but not as much. So I would say yes. I would also say that competitive CoD seems kinda wrong...

 

[Zac Jovanovic]

I have a few simple requirements that came from many regretted purchases of multiplayer first person shooters on PC.

1: The game has to be stable at 60fps on a reasonably good machine with reasonable graphic settings. There's no getting around this one, playing a multiplayer shooter with high input delay is as pleasurable as filling tax forms while being impaled on a cactus.

2: The game has to have dedicated servers and server side hit detection. I would in theory be ready to forgive this one to a game that would justify it with a player count that wouldn't work with server side detection (No, Battlefield, this doesn't include you. 64 players is not a lot and does not justify using one of the shittiest gameplay impacting systems, especially when most your maps feel crowded with 24). For something like Planetside 2 (mmo, 500 player maps)it would be ok. There's also peer to peer...just nope.. nopenopenope.

3: Player game control. No anti cheat works perfectly, not one. Most don't do anything in real time at all. This is my biggest beef with recent COD titles. The bullshit console lobby system that doesn't even have a simple vote kick, leaving players at the mercy of cheaters between 6 months apart ban waves. Players should NEVER be forced to leave the server because someone on it is cheating. Dedicated servers with admins as well as vote kicks are my ideal scenario, I realize it's not the perfect solution but IMHO it's the closest thing to one we can have. At the very least I would settle with a working vote kick system, which most of them are not.

For a while I couldn't decide which I regretted buying more, BF3 or MW3. Then BF4 came out, I saw a good deal and bought it like an idiot and it now holds the throne. It's pretty fucked up that having bought pretty much all big FPS titles in the last 4-5 years the most fun I had in one was a shitty low budget free to play fps called Bullet Run, because EVERYTHING WORKED.

Oh and man, does people saying "hacking" rub me the wrong way -.-

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well there is certainly an element of hacking on PC, but any decent game will have ways to stick with a good group of players and most often then not people will cry wolf because they got expertly shot or just don't understand the games mechanics.

It's just a case of choosing the right games and the right people, usually games that only do random matchmaking are not it.

 

[votemarvel]

Seems odd to write off PC first person shooters because of hacking in Ghosts when it is just as rife on the consoles.

 

[seditary]

I came into the thread ready for a good old discussion about PC FPS and see it was all started from COD: Ghosts, which isn't a PC FPS, its a console FPS dribbled onto the PC by idiots who don't give a fuck.

If its a game run by matchmaking and its overrun by hacks, its a shit game.
If its a game run by dedicated servers and its overrun by hacks, you're on shit servers and can just go to good ones.

FPSes made by competent developers run by competent people are very much worth it.

 

[Ubiquitous Duck]

I don't really care for any FPSs anymore.

Cod was one of the final attempts for me to enjoy them, a few instalments ago with modern warfare one and two. I found the second one just too frustrating to play and I didn't really enjoy myself.

The people who play it annoyed me regardless of hacking. I was always more interested in objective based gameplay, but everyone just seemed to play for themselves and their stats. Excessive camping and trying to get a good kd, nothing to do with risking it all for the team/objective. Which just makes the game very dull for me, as I have no desire to just sit around, waiting for someone to pop round the corner, so I'd naturally sprint around the place and die excessively, get mad and then leave.

I hardly think that PCs are the only avenue for hacking (this is like when people said Mac PCs couldn't be hacked) and even with all the failings of PC shooters to entice me, I'd still never substitute in console games in their place. So PC FPS is all but dead for me, but that's not cause I'm turning to an alternative platform for FPS.

Are they dead for everyone though? I'd say not. People just want something a bit fresher, Titanfall has offered this and if the numbers they got in their beta are anything to go by, it looks like they could rejuvenate the genre and be very successful.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

It's not worth buying CoD on PC anymore (if at all) because Activision only gives a shit about the console community, with those being the vast majority.

Multiplayer focused FPS? Sure, there are some fantastic multiplayer FPS's on PC. Hackers aren't so prevalent that it ruins the entire genre.

FPS in general? Definitely.

In most cases hackers are found out and get banned eventually. Like I said not in a CoD game for the most part, but in general.

 

[SecondPrize]

Not all PC shooters are created equally. If the level of hacking is your issue, and considering how rampant it was in MW2 I can only imagine it's gotten worse, then you what you want is a game with dedicated servers. Server admins can sort hackers right out and it's not hard to build a list of favorite servers that allow you to play whenever on populated servers in game types and maps you want and with people you like shooting. After MW1 the CoD series, and Titanfall as well, have been console shooters, whether they port 'em to the PC or not. They have console player counts, console map sizes, console aim assisting and console matchmaking. You won't escape hacks in matchmaking on a PC, so just buy these games on a consoles.

 

[LetalisK]

I think that's a game problem, not a PC problem. I haven't played the last two CoDs, but in the previous ones I would notice a hacker every once in awhile on PC, but whenever I played the xbox version there was almost nothing but hacking, which surprised the shit out of me. At least, this was true of CoD4 and MW2 when I played them past their prime.

 

[UniversalRonin]

Wait, something happened post Star Wars Dark Forces?

Apart from some Counterstrike, I never really bother with online multiplayer. Local multiplayer has always been much more fun, with Goldeneye and PD at it's pinnacle.

But then, I'm fairly out of date when it comes to consoles.

 

[SerithVC]

*Disclaimer* I am not hating on PC. I love all the cool titles that are PC exclusives, and up until recently, preferred multiplayer oriented FPSs on PC.



Since buying, downloading, and playing CoD Ghosts,I have really come to notice the prevalence and uncontrollable hacking that is abound.

Ghosts is my example because it seems that aside from technical issues that have mostly been fixed, the main thing that keeps Ghosts at such a low population level (1,999 at time of this post), which makes only TDM and Domination playable, is the plague of hacks.

With Infinity Ward seemingly not taking any action against any hackers, I and many others have opted to leave CoD, and never buy another installment on PC.

However, it also seems that multiplayer F2P games like Loadout are now being hacked. There were even complaints about Titanfall hacks in the closed then open betas.


I find myself in the predicament that multiplayer focused PC ports almost always supports larger team sizes, has the potential for smoother frame-rates and higher fidelity graphics, yet is being kneecapped by hackers not being banned.

What is your stance? Did your Ghosts experience get ruined by the hackers and lack of moderation, are you interested in Titanfall? If so, does PC hacking make it less attractive to buy multiplayer focused games for PC? Are AAA FPSs that are mainly multiplayer on PC doomed to the fate of Ghosts?

Personally I prefer FPS games on the PC because I find the mouse and keyboard to be so much smoother than the controller and it makes life so much easier when I don't have to accidentally throw a grenade because the previous game i was playing had the grenade and reload buttons swapped with the current. As for the hackers. That is the problem with online gaming and well gaming in general really. People can't stand to lose so they cheat and ruin it for everyone. I remember back when i used to play Halo on the PC in multiplayer and had to deal with hackers all the time. Though some of them were shit hackers and i still managed to take them down. I like the concept of private servers or player controlled rooms. That way the hackers are mostly outcast to the rooms with hackers. I hate hackers. They have essentially ruined to multiplayer experience for so many people on all platforms because even on ps3 CoD Black ops i had to deal with hackers, since i grenaded them twice and put about 50 to 100 bullets in them befor they shot me once and i died.

 

[Jangles]

Is it just as common on consoles? If so, the consoles still maintain a much higher player count to filter it out a bit.

 

[Mister Chippy]

Judging PC shooters based on a shitty port from consoles that lacks almost everything most PC shooters take for granted these days (such as dedicated servers) isn't very fair.

PC FPS is IMO far superior to the console FPS experience.

(Also, The Escapist is a fairly "PC Master Race"-centric site, so even if there were some reasons why FPS on pc might be inferior (there aren't) this is still probably the answer you'd get asking that here.)