Really now? Have you actually read the study? Because it is not what I asked for at all. I said what I really wanted was an unbiased study that puts people who are familiar with the device they are using against each other. The study did not do that at all. They outright say that they did not do that.Treblaine said:
Keyboard and mouse are losing the FPS market
- Thread starter Vault101
- Start date
Camping has become far less common, and if you are killed by a camper there are ways to get them.Treblaine said:
Use of cover is a different style of gameplay, sometimes I like games where you zigzag at speed in the open and can take many shots before dying, sometimes I want to use more cover/pin enemies down etc. Obviously games like tf2 are best by FAR with m/k, but with cod not as much. Guns have more recoil and spread, the style of game play (tailored or not) has precise aim rewuiring ironsights, (which is a feature I actually appreciate). It's less about precise aim.
True, you can say using a m/k raises the skill ceiling, but so would making all players move 10x faster and only headshots cause any damage. Point being having a higher skill ceiling isn't the be all and end all.
Some people want (at least some measure of) it. You get far less of it in a game with fast moving, high health players which have high precision aiming while sprinting sideways.
The thing is it's an inherent problem and it's more than people being sedentary. It's how easy it is to chain together head glitch spots and camp bottlenecks, training sights on points and easily killing anyone who wanders across. So often you are killed by people you have no defence against, you're dead before you even know what's hitting you.Pulse said:
That can't be COD compared to the likes of TF2. In TF2 the Weapons spread is huge as well as rapid damage drop-off, the few weapons that can kill quickly at long range are very hard to use. Imagine trying to land two throwing knives/tomahawks... in rapid succession, against very fast moving enemies.
And precision is not needed, about 3 bullets hitting anywhere on the body will kill, it doesn't even have a significantly high multiplier for the head. The weapons have low recoil, especially how often it is vertical and the fire rate is so high and viewkick from being hit combined with lag and lag compensation and the bullets are ALL hitscan.
It's simply a matter of getting the first hits on, which is easy to do with just sighting in on where they will come around.
Now that's taking it to extremes, it's a fallacy as it doesn't consider it to the appropriate extent.
My point is the skill ceiling is too low in COD, it's as easy as clicking on them, and it causes a lot of consternation amongst console gamers who don't have any better alternative.
You get a measure of realism with Team Fortress 2, it's not like it's a Kafka-esque land totally detached from any real word physics. You have to ask what does more realism get you? It certainly isn't the case that more realism is always better. Certainly the attitude and tone has to be balanced with pretences of "gritty realism" which clashes with the very mode that competitive multiplayer operates under: it's a game. It's people endlessly dying, re-spawning and killing for no established story reason.
How... read this:Little Gray said:
Yes, it's not fair, it's not fair IN CONSOLE'S FAVOUR, and STILL the consoles lost.the exact quote from the article you still won't consider said:
What, do you seriously think if the mouse+keyboard users were more experienced they'd do WORSE against gamepad users??!?!
Any excuse... any excuse at all to ignore mouse + keyboard, it's, it is just so... oh jesus. Why. Why are you like this?!?
Im not sure what about I wanted facts and not rumors you dont understand. Sorry but I dont trust some random dude on the internet who says withing the first few lines of the article that its all a rumor and he has no evidence to back up anything he says. He then continues on to rant about how amazing the PC is.Treblaine said:
So I will say it again come back when you have evidence that is not of the fox news variety.
For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone would choose to play FPS as anything other than a point and click adventure!
That would be a games fault, not the control scheme. Also an Aimbot does all the aiming for you whereas aim assist does a couple millimeters.Ultratwinkie said:
Controllers take a tiny bit of skill to use, unlike a mouse which is why unskilled people have to rely on aim assist.
The console players were playing with gamepads, which are laughably bad and nothing like their normal controllers in most cases. They were also playing on the PC gamers home turf.Treblaine said:
Explain again how people good console gamers have an advantage against any PC gamers in a PC game? I seem to have missed that bit.
I have trouble with both schemes. Aiming with control sticks is fucking terrible, but I love movement with them.
Meanwhile, aiming with a mouse is the most convenient control scheme imaginable, but moving with a keyboard is awkward and horrendous.
Meanwhile, aiming with a mouse is the most convenient control scheme imaginable, but moving with a keyboard is awkward and horrendous.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2007/04/20/shadowrun-pc-versus-xbox-360?page=2Little Gray said:
The developers had to gimp the computer players to make it comparable.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/ms-killed-pc-xbox-cross-platform-play
That's likely one of the reasons they gave up on PC live, which in the end is a good thing considering how horrid it was, still pissed at how it screwed up Universe at War's sales and multiplayer scene.
But it's still in all the games that gamers rely on as the basis of claiming they are capable of such feats. It is so open to abuse, how you just have to sweep across them and it will even track a running opponent.Trippy Turtle said:
PC gamers don't tolerate such software player aids as they are so open to abuse.
Uuh, "gamepad" and "console controller" mean THE SAME THING.
Gamepad is the more widely used term as the term "controller" implies that a gamepad is the default or fundamental way to control a game, it's the type of thing someone says if they only ever use one type of input... like on consoles. But on PC you have a wide selection of input options.
FYI, they used the Xbox 360 wired controller, which is the most common gamepad controller for PC.
What? Home turf??!? That doesn't make any sense, it's all in virtual environments and the article explicitly said cross-platform. They were each on their home-turf.
That's some amazingly mangled grammar, but from what it seems you were trying to say, you are asking "how" something is... of something nobody said.
No one said "good console gamers have an advantage against any PC gamers"
What was said was that they took the best Console Gamers against mediocre PC Gamers, using gamepad and mouse+keyboard respectively.
What is so hard to understand about that? If mouse+keyboard and gamepad were in any way equal in capability, then experienced gamepad-gamers vs mediocre mouse+keyboard gamers the results should clearly be in gamepad user's favour. But the opposite outcome, shows which is a more capable input.
So are they trying to say more people play shooters on console than PC now? If so from my experience that is correct and has been so for quite a while as for which control scheme is best well thats another discussion I would say mouse and keyboard is best but a controller is more than suitable for most people and is probably the control scheme they are most comfortable with hence why using it dosent bother them.
the difference is that controllers use degrees per second, like turrets, M+K basically just points at what you want as the rotation speed is stupidly high.
controllers have also changed FPS map design massively, its very rare you get vertical maps anymore, as 5 deg/sec dosn't let you look up or down quickly
controllers have also changed FPS map design massively, its very rare you get vertical maps anymore, as 5 deg/sec dosn't let you look up or down quickly
When I switched over to PC, FPS with keyboard and mouse was a nightmare for me. Now its the opposite. I think if you're playing on PC, you'll eventually get used to keyboard and mouse. So yeah, I think saying that PC gamers don't really use k+m for FPS is bull. Plus, everyone I know uses keyboard, not gamepad.
The first article is just referencing the last one you posted and again starts off with phrase "rumor has it."Auron said:
The second article actually does not support your point of view. Its a review on the game written by IGN and not an actual study so it doesnt provide supporting documents but it is the closest thing to what I was asking for. Not surprisingly the PC elitest douche bag went on to praise PC controls and insult console gamers. They then said that both pc and console gamers won about the same amount of matches.
As I said, anyone on a high enough sensitivity and a tiny bit of skill could do that with an Xbox controller. If you believe being able to spin 9 time a second is too slow, then you must play on some godly sensitivity on PC.TheKasp said:
I have no idea what you are talking about of direction change of the thumbstick. You don't hold your thumb on the side of it. Also on the mouse good luck spinning in one direction without lifting it up and placing it back over to the side.
So far it seems like you are just using a controller wrong.
Also a fair amount of games allow you to turn aim assist off, and its a much better alternative then having a large chunk of the people playing search out actual aimbots like on PC.