Halo Reach is out

[ynh]

Why do people still give a about PC vs. console for FPS?

My question is why do people feel the need to come into a thread about a console FPS and feel they need to tell us for the 100th time how much better a FPS is on a PC? They seem to not understand that people aren't coming in here to read about how they feel a PC FPS is better than a Console FPS..

Yes we have heard this over and over... anyone that has played a PC FPS would agree..

But you are in a thread about a CONSOLE ONLY FPS.. so off.

[phyzik]

I seem to recall, maybe falsely, when the origional Halo was being developed by Bungie for the PC and Mac only. It was supposed to be a PC/Mac le only back then until Microsoft aquired them... Then I'm pretty sure, for a brief period, it was talked about going cross-platform... But that was nixxed because of the inherant imbalance PC gamers would enjoy so Microsoft forced them to port it to XBOX only. Again, I may be wrong as that was YEARS ago.

I think I remember watching a tech demo for Halo, before Microsoft aquired them, showing off the vehicles.... That was the only innovation I can remember over FPS games at the time on PC. The vehicles, being able to all mount up on one, and the physics they had for them, was awesome at the time.

There have been tests shown with FPS games, even with the most elite console FPS players playing against mediocre FPS gamers, that PC wins hands down in FPS gaming, thus you will probably never see a cross-platform unless Consoles come out with a comparable controller such as a mouse and keyboard.

Having said that, as both a PC gamer and an owner of a PS3, 2 Xbox360's (my brother bought one while on military duty over seas, and I bought one as well) and just about every console before them dating back to the Atari, I think Halo gets WAY too overhyped as an FPS... Its a good game, but nothing I havnt seen before on a PC.

I dont hate Halo.... I hate its fanbois who think its the greatest thing since a womans pussy.... and its not.... even on a console. But its treated as such.

[phyzik]

OK, I was a bit off... but I was right that it was origionally developed for PC and Mac... it was origionally designed as a 3rd person game. Here was the trailer I saw back in 1999.

The online multiplayer was dropped mainly because Xbox Live wasnt going to be finished in time.... Still, I could swear I read somewhere that that was not entirely the case.

[mingus]

eh i personally prefer playing FPS on console. i like the feel of the control in my hand more (wgaf about accuracy when you're playing with people who are using the same as you and have no advantage) and i can play on a 50 inch tv. and you can play multiplayer with friends at your house using one x-box. imo that is why FP gaming on console is superior.

the graphics are better on PC, but at least for me, it's not that big of a difference. i know that if Halo came out on PC it would look better than on xbox, but i think the graphics are great on the the 360 already so i couldn't care less.

[Cry Havoc]

eh i personally prefer playing FPS on console. i like the feel of the control in my hand more (wgaf about accuracy when you're playing with people who are using the same as you and have no advantage)

That's akin to saying, "Who cares if we're playing football in 3 feet of sand? The other team has to play in it too, so there's no advantage."

It's not about having an advantage. It's about having a system that gives you the best controls. You know, controls? Arguably the most important thing to a great game?

and i can play on a 50 inch tv.

Why do console fans continually bring this up like it's a legitimate advantage? Do you really need to see a photo of my desktop hooked up with an HDMI cable to my 42" Plasma? PCs have been able to do this as long as the Ps3 and 360 have been around.

and you can play multiplayer with friends at your house using one x-box. imo that is why FP gaming on console is superior.

Split screen sucks. And what's preventing you from taking a computer with you? I can take a laptop over to a friends and we can game together with no problems at all.

the graphics are better on PC, but at least for me, it's not that big of a difference. i know that if Halo came out on PC it would look better than on xbox, but i think the graphics are great on the the 360 already so i couldn't care less.

It's huge. You just haven't stopped to notice how vast the difference is.

[mingus]

That's akin to saying, "Who cares if we're playing football in 3 feet of sand? The other team has to play in it too, so there's no advantage."

It's not about having an advantage. It's about having a system that gives you the best controls. You know, controls? Arguably the most important thing to a great game?




Why do console fans continually bring this up like it's a legitimate advantage? Do you really need to see a photo of my desktop hooked up with an HDMI cable to my 42" Plasma? PCs have been able to do this as long as the Ps3 and 360 have been around.

It's all a matter of opinion, man. I like the way the control feels in my hand and I don't care about it being less accurate than a mouse and keyboard.

As for the graphics. I know it's significant. it's just not significant TO ME bec. graphics of the games I play already look beautiful and any better graphics wouldn't matter. surround sound, 50 inch tv's, and the fact that most of the people I know don't game on pc or laptops, makes XBOX a superior medium in my view.


Split screen sucks. And what's preventing you from taking a computer with you? I can take a laptop over to a friends and we can game together with no problems at all.



It's huge. You just haven't stopped to notice how vast the difference is.

[mingus]

tried responding to that on my iPhone. ed that up.

[phyzik]

tried responding to that on my iPhone. ed that up.

As expected from a console gamer.....









just messing with you.

[ynh]

Good for you.. now shut the up this isn't a PC versus Console thread.

[ynh]

If you want to play Halo Reach you need a 360.. Thus I don't give a if the controls for FPSers are better on the PC.. it is better on console for this game cause it isn't on the ing PC.. Now shut the up and get the out of here.

[Cry Havoc]

If you want to play Halo Reach you need a 360.. Thus I don't give a if the controls for FPSers are better on the PC.. it is better on console for this game cause it isn't on the ing PC.. Now shut the up and get the out of here.

It's not a PC vs console thread, but if console fanboys are going to spout inaccurate information, I'm going to correct them.

[balli]

It's not about having an advantage. It's about having a system that gives you the best controls.

As an elitist asshole in many pursuits, I understand what you're saying. But if that's the case, and I give you credit for acknowledging such, the pro-PC argument need not routinely lower itself to the implied notion that:

"our control system is so much more responsive and given cross-platform compatibility, we'd rule."

Those statements are both true, but unfortunately both a given and one is an impossiblity and neither really impact the experience of communities which use dual stick controls. And I resent the passive implication that better controls somehow require more talent to command.

For example and in regard to the control mechanism, cod4 wasn't a great game because you could aim slightly quicker and more precisely with a mouse and keyboard. And it wasn't a great game because you could pull off headshots near as fast with a 360 controller, it was a great game because of what it allowed the player to do against a level playing field.

Which again is why I find the controller debate utterly moot. Great, the PC controls are more precise. In terms of the over-arching debate about which system is better, I guess it's a piece of ammo that speaks to the quality of input. But one thing it damn sure doesn't speak to, is strategic talent.

[ynh]

... might as well add to the topic.

As far as the controller debate

People do know that you can go on to ebay and the net right now and by a mouse FPS controller for the 360 and ps3 if you want to right?

It's not first party.. but the reviews on them are pretty good. The only issue being that it takes quite a bit of time to map the keys.

[Cry Havoc]

As an elitist asshole in many pursuits, I understand what you're saying. But if that's the case, and I give you credit for acknowledging such, the pro-PC argument need not routinely lower itself to the implied notion that:

"our control system is so much more responsive and given cross-platform compatibility, we'd rule."

Meh, if you'll notice, I never discuss this issue unless someone provokes me into it. It really doesn't matter to me. I don't care how good/bad console players are, because my opposition is my PC counterparts. Console gamers are not my worry, they are not the ones I have to frag when I log on at night.

Those statements are both true, but unfortunately both a given and one is an impossiblity and neither really impact the experience of communities which use dual stick controls. And I resent the passive implication that better controls somehow require more talent to command.

There are absolutely some great FPS players on console, absolutely. I would not say that there are fewer talented players on console, but I do think that a PC allows one's talents to increase to a higher ceiling relative to the console gamer.

It's like playing a musical instrument. Would restricting a piano to just 44 keys mean that Bach or Prokofiev is any less talented? Absolutely not. Could they still make beautiful music with those 44 keys? Undoubtedly. But would they ever be able to achieve what they were with a full piano? I doubt it.

A mouse frees you. There's no restriction with it other than what your settings are for the game. It is a perfect imitation of a human movement, so that it allows for the development of so much more finite, precise control at the highest levels of compe ive play. Below that, ech, it's debatable.

For example and in regard to the control mechanism, cod4 wasn't a great game because you could aim slightly quicker and more precisely with a mouse and keyboard. And it wasn't a great game because you could pull off headshots near as fast with a 360 controller, it was a great game because of what it allowed the player to do against a level playing field.

There's no debating that you can have a blast with a controller and an FPS. I would never attempt to say otherwise. I just think that some, or many (not all) people who proclaim how great it is have never really sat down and attempted to learn the precision a mouse can offer.

Which again is why I find the controller debate utterly moot. Great, the PC controls are more precise. In terms of the over-arching debate about which system is better, I guess it's a piece of ammo that speaks to the quality of input. But one thing it damn sure doesn't speak to, is strategic talent.

Agreed. Strategy is in the mind of the gamer, not the controller he's using. However, again, if a keyboard+mouse allows me to place a flashbang within inches of where it needs to be, and a controller would have restricted that placement, then there stands an argument that can be made that it still allows for a more open combat dynamic.

[mingus]

Meh, if you'll notice, I never discuss this issue unless someone provokes me into it. It really doesn't matter to me. I don't care how good/bad console players are, because my opposition is my PC counterparts. Console gamers are not my worry, they are not the ones I have to frag when I log on at night.



There are absolutely some great FPS players on console, absolutely. I would not say that there are fewer talented players on console, but I do think that a PC allows one's talents to increase to a higher ceiling relative to the console gamer.

It's like playing a musical instrument. Would restricting a piano to just 44 keys mean that Bach or Prokofiev is any less talented? Absolutely not. Could they still make beautiful music with those 44 keys? Undoubtedly. But would they ever be able to achieve what they were with a full piano? I doubt it.

A mouse frees you. There's no restriction with it other than what your settings are for the game. It is a perfect imitation of a human movement, so that it allows for the development of so much more finite, precise control at the highest levels of compe ive play. Below that, ech, it's debatable.



There's no debating that you can have a blast with a controller and an FPS. I would never attempt to say otherwise. I just think that some, or many (not all) people who proclaim how great it is have never really sat down and attempted to learn the precision a mouse can offer.



Agreed. Strategy is in the mind of the gamer, not the controller he's using. However, again, if a keyboard+mouse allows me to place a flashbang within inches of where it needs to be, and a controller would have restricted that placement, then there stands an argument that can be made that it still allows for a more open combat dynamic.

i've played my share of PC FPS, and i knew someone in high school that used to play all the time and i used to hang out with him a lot. we played Operation Flashpoint, SWAT 3, Counterstrike, Soldier of Furtune, Far Cry, Rainbow Six, Rogue Spear and more. being able to throw a flash bang a 1/10 of an inch to the right or left or whatever is great, but it's not really that important. same with being able to aim a 1/10 of an inch higher, or move more akin to humans. an added key to the right or left on the piano, though: very important. changes everything. you're comparing to things that just aren't comparable. i just think you're making all this accuracy out to be more than it is imo. it doesn't improve the gameplay imo. it makes it more complex, but it doesn't imporve it.

either way, i'm done with this. we'll agree to disagree. you'll probably come back with something... it's all a matter of opinion.

[Cry Havoc]

same with being able to aim a 1/10 of an inch higher, or move more akin to humans.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.

If you don't know the value of a 10th of an inch when it matters, you've never played FPS at a truly high level. I've gotten headshots from across an entire map when I could only see 1/10th of an inch of a guy's head. I see z0sa lurking this thread, and I'm betting money that he'll absolutely agree with me on this. I can't begin to count the number of times I've got a kill by shooting at 1 or 2 PIXELS of the other person and managing to get a headshot, or take the last of their life off. It happens... maybe once or twice per day. I've killed guys that I didn't think I had a chance to even damage before, because it gave me that 100th of an inch, not even a 10th.

I mean no disrespect, but would you ever tell a quarterback, a hockey player, or , a sharpshooter that a 10th of an inch doesn't matter? Often times that's all that does separate good from great. And especially in a game like CoD4, a 10th of an inch could be the difference between getting an airstrike/helicopter and going on a 20-0 run, and getting shot in the face because you're still trying to line up an earlier shot and people are watching where your tracer fire is coming from.

[z0sa]

It doesn't make a difference to the casual gamer, I agree. Yet to one who has weighed the differences and advantages, the idea of relinquishing the m+kb for a controller, at any point, is ridiculous. Once you have tasted it, you realize the controller interface is much inferior, just never feels nearly good enough in many aspects, to be general.

Which is the primary distinction between PC gaming and console gaming, methinks. League play, earning higher placement in said leagues, working with other gamers consistently for a win, etc are seemingly non existent in console gaming on any wide spread scale. Yet in a game like CS, there were literally tens of thousands of teams competing, many just for the fun of it - working together. There was a point when some serious CS players could name almost any CAL-i (highest league level) team and some of their best players (3D - Rambo, one of my all time favs, and HeatoN of SK/NiP are two of the most famous), a truly qualified sport of sorts. Can one watch a match as it occurs between two league teams on a console? Does any type of simplified way of participating in leagues even exist, like in the PC world? And why would a casual console gamer want to, since the vast majority has proven they have no want or need for such high compe ion?

The difference is not just in the sticks. It's in the high standard the PC community demands compared to their console counter parts. It truly is an elitist positioning, I agree, but is it the PC gamer's fault, for demanding the best and more? Or the console gamer's complacency as long as the playing field is even?

[Cry Havoc]

The difference is not just in the sticks. It's in the high standard the PC community demands compared to their console counter parts. It truly is an elitist positioning, I agree, but is it the PC gamer's fault, for demanding the best and more? Or the console gamer's complacency as long as the playing field is even?

I think that probably has to do with the nature of PC gaming vs. console. Console gamers want to sit in front of their TV and frag some random people, and have never even thought about how great it would be to have a dedicated server to play with the same group of people on. They have their friends list, and matchmaking system, and that's the be-all end-all of multiplayer gaming.

PC gaming has evolved a community that's as much focused on dialogue and discussion about the strategy of the games and the grouping together of people than the game itself. You find a server you like, become familiar with people on it, and actually start to get to know them outside of the game. That makes the gameplay so much more rewarding, IMO. Not only due to the fact that when I used to play on my server, there were several elite players, and if I had a good day against them, it meant I was competing at CAL level play, but also because of the way the PC is not just a gaming tool, but a way of communicating to a network that's much larger than you are.

I STILL talk to people that I met on my original Counterstrike server 9 years ago. How many people can an average console person say they've met on Xbox live without knowing prior and still talk to, years later?

[mingus]

i dont consider myself a casual gamer. then again, it's not my life, and i don't play it compe vely. i play maybe five hours for a whole week with school going on and everything else.

so console gaming is just better for me (and for most people as far as i know). that's what i've said all along though. that for me it's superior. the disagreement i had with you, Cry, is when you said there's no question that PC FP is better. is it more in depth? yeah. is it prettier? yeah. those things don't equate to the PC being better, though, because the definition of better goes beyond that.

[z0sa]

i dont consider myself a casual gamer. then again, it's not my life, and i don't play it compe vely. i play maybe five hours for a whole week with school going on and everything else.

so console gaming is just better for me (and for most people as far as i know).

A fairly telling set of statements. Some questions: why do you include the anecdotal evidence bolded? Do you assert that might=right? And if you consider yourself more than a casual gamer, why? The evidence you have listed points to just that, imo. Most games are compe ively natured when online - do you simply not play online?

I don't mean to sound snide, I'm just curious. It doesn't seem like you've addressed any of the points we made through objective means.

[Cry Havoc]

so console gaming is just better for me (and for most people as far as i know). that's what i've said all along though. that for me it's superior. the disagreement i had with you, Cry, is when you said there's no question that PC FP is better. is it more in depth? yeah. is it prettier?

As I've said before, PC FPS is better simply because it has better controls and a better community. Now, since controls are usually one of, if not the most important factor in determining most games, how much of a factor is it in FPS, where split-second reactions are crucial? And why are you asserting that a game with admittedly less control is superior as a game?

yeah. those things don't equate to the PC being better, though, because the definition of better goes beyond that.

Can you name one thing that a console FPS does that's better than a PC FPS?

[Nathan Explosion]

Split screen sucks. And what's preventing you from taking a computer with you? I can take a laptop over to a friends and we can game together with no problems at all.

There's one problem with that. You're actually assuming that laptops for gaming are easily affordable and accessible for everyone.

Fact is, they're not. I love having my whole screen, but there's nothing better than getting some friends together, getting drunk and just playing some games. Sure, elitists are more worried about their scores than they are about the fun, but then again, the stereotypical PC gamer isn't known to have lots of friends.

Consoles are social friendly. And for someone like myself, and millions of others, that aspect can't be topped by anything a PC can offer.

[ynh]

Hmmm.. Once again if the main point people are going to throw out to say that the PC is better than a console is because of the mouse and key board you do realize that I can go buy a hookup that will allow me to use that on my console if I wish?

[ynh]

[Cry Havoc]

Hmmm.. Once again if the main point people are going to through out to say that the PC is better than a console is because of the mouse and key board you do realize that I can go buy a hookup that will allow me to use that on my console if I wish?

At which point you're admitting that PC has enjoyed superior control all these years, and also basically making the Ps3/360 a small, underpowered PC.

In which case the PC is still the best due to the community/fan support for it.

There's one problem with that. You're actually assuming that laptops for gaming are easily affordable and accessible for everyone.

Is this the same thread with people talking about the advantages of their 50" LED TV? Cause last I checked, I don't buy the excuse that you can drop upwards of 3 grand on a TV and sound system but you can't afford a $650 laptop.

Fact is, they're not.

Neither are the latest gen consoles. Does that mean a Super Nintendo is superior to the 360, because it's more affordable?

I love having my whole screen, but there's nothing better than getting some friends together, getting drunk and just playing some games.

You mean like LAN parties? Again, we haven't even opened the discussion about the party aspect of console vs. PC. Consoles do indeed win that battle, no argument here, but how often do you have friends over vs. gaming by yourself?

Sure, elitists are more worried about their scores than they are about the fun,

Or getting better and enjoying the accomplishment of pushing a game to the limit. Or having fun because you're learning a more powerful, eloquent control mechanic.

but then again, the stereotypical PC gamer isn't known to have lots of friends.

And the stereotypical Halo/Madden gamer is a beer guzzling fratboy. We can play that game. Way to argue the points instead of resorting to insults -- oh wait, that's right, you've never been able to do that. Just keep arguing in favor of hype and ad hominem attacks instead of substance. It's pretty obvious that you're still a little sore over the iPhone vs. Evo threads.

Consoles are social friendly. And for someone like myself, and millions of others, that aspect can't be topped by anything a PC can offer.

What are you talking about? When is the last time you logged onto facebook or a chat client through your console? A PC is THE pinnacle communication tool in the history of our species, and you're saying it bows to a console in the ability to be social and interact with other people? That's.... man.... I just have no words for how inaccurate that is.

By the way, what tool are you using to communicate to me with right now? Is it your Xbox? No? Why not? I thought it was social friendly?

If you don't mind me, I'll just get back to talking to my friends on steam who are all playing a different game right now and debating how good Civ 5 is, if Zerg are underpowered, and if we want to get together this weekend to grab a couple beers. You know, because I can post a message on these forums, chat to friends, and game at the same time on a PC.