Lame: Unreal Tournament 3 for PS3 to bring keyboard and mouse support
http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogs.../~3/140782340/
There goes the neighborhood. Now MS need to decide if they're doing it for the 360 or not. I hope to high-heaven they don't. I'm tired of these whiny PC gamers bitching about control schemes on the console, just because they spent R1000 on a 2010233DPI laser mouse to pwnzer noobs.
Like, actually, y'know, like, playing FPS games with a controller isn't that hard. Like, y'know, and stuff.
What irks me about this, is that basically people who have gotten used to the mouse and keyboard simply refuse to accept any other control scheme, not because it may be inferior, but because "they spent years perfecting their aim, and now have to learn a new control scheme".
You know what, that's just tough ****, isn't it? Move over, grampa - let the kids show you how it's done.
Personally, I can play an FPS with mouse+keyboard and a controller equally well, because I've never put much stock in having pixel-precise aim (which is why I'm no longer interested in most competitive e-sports bull****, because it's more about having the DPI and getting the headshots, instead of proper tactics).
A proper gamer understands that the input method is irrelevant. Any control scheme (unless it's done horribly, in which case it is an exception) is just a minor detail to overcome before getting involved in the bigger picture.
My beef with UT3 having mouse and keyboard on the PS3 is that it essentially forces EVERYONE to head to the mouse and keyboard, even those FPS gamers who HAVE NEVER PLAYED A PC FPS IN THEIR LIVES.
Frankly, it is bull**** and unfair, to take the PC gamer tone.
Console FPS gamers who grew up with the genre thanks to TimeSplitters and such, should not have to learn the mouse and keyboard control scheme now, after decades of playing with a controller.
As much as any FPS gamer on the PC whines about the controller being inferior, I wholeheartedly expect the console FPS gamers to do the same think about the mouse and keyboard, because it is DIFFERENT.
Frankly, I'm very unimpressed with this rather naive and short-sighted move from Epic, and it's obvious they're trying to pander to the (wrong) crowd.
Mouse aiming is more accurate and easier, yes, but not "better". That is ignoring the entire concept of control scheme and control affinity, not to mention a totally biased viewpoint without even bothering to consider the other side of the argument.
I think I should adopt a new stance on this to make my life easier:
AIMING WITH MOUSE+KEYB FOR NOOBS, ANY1 CAN DO IT! IT TAKES A RAEL GAMER TO AIM WITH AN ANALOGUE STICK 4 THE HEADSHUTZ!
I'd really like to know what they mean by that.Epic VP Mark Rein was concerned that having multiple control methods would give some players an unfair advantage, but apparently those problems have been worked out.
If they have worked out something then I don't see what's wrong with giving people the option. I guess I'm just OLD or something but those friggin' controllers (as used to them as I may get) don't do it for me. Call me anal.
Agreed - my issue is with the picture itself (if I can take the metaphor a step further). For me, using a controller will limit me in the end because even the best schemes on the console end up in tap-aiming as you're trying to go for extreme accuracy. Back and forth and it's just dumb. Things like sniping end up a pain because the further things get away, the harder it is to get the target on that one spot. This just means that games using this kind of control scheme will apply certain ways to work around that - auto-aim or a locking reticule...whatever.A proper gamer understands that the input method is irrelevant. Any control scheme (unless it's done horribly, in which case it is an exception) is just a minor detail to overcome before getting involved in the bigger picture.
And that's fine. If you like to play like that. I don't mind, there's lots of games which use that (even on the PC) but you're getting rid of a lot of potential for skill and depth as far as I'm concerned. I don't see how giving players the option of using them is bad, even if you end up splitting matches up according to control scheme.
You can bitch and moan all you want, but the fact remains: Keyboard + Mouse is still the best control scheme for FPS games.
No, it is not. You saying it is, does not make it fact.Originally Posted by Etienne
They just dont want the Pc gamers to throw hissy fits after they are pwned by console players with controls, seeing that the game is gonna be cross platform between the PS3 and PC. (apparently) :)
Professional console FPS players don't tap-aim - they can snipe in one, smooth arc of motion. How you play, doesn't represent how everyone plays.
Worst mistake in the history of gaming, in my opinion.
I don't want PC gamers on my goddamn console - their attitudes, their l33t haxxor skills - console FPS was just fine until PC gamers started feeling left-out and got themselves (or are thinking about getting) a console.
I didn't need to say anything. It's already a fact. I has always been a fact.
2 + 3 > 1
Keyboard + Mouse > Controller
My logic is sound.
No, it is not a fact.
Keyboard + Mouse is not superior to a controller with dual analogs. Neither is better than the other. It is a matter of context, control affinity as well as tacit ability.
Stop being such a close-minded git, damn you! :P
You've clearly never seen console players do perfect headshots on the fly, while moving full speed... See, what an analogue stick gives you is regular, smooth movement. You don't twitch aim like you do with a mouse, you slide your crosshair to inevitable death for your opponent... If you're to slow on the trigger to make the resulting shot, tough. That's the same thing as not being pixel-accurate with a mouse.
Honestly, if you're trying to aim without moving your character at the same time on a console, shame. You don't tap, you slide. You don't twitch, you lure. You don't do everything NOW NOW NOW! You plan a little more.
Oh how terrible.
-D
-edit- Whoa, Miktar already pwnt what I was going to say...
Last edited by dislekcia; 07-08-2007 at 04:38 PM.
Forget it, dislekcia. I get the feeling we could explain with diagrams and flowcharts, not to mention images showing vectors and velocities, and certain people would still refuse to acknowledge that the control scheme is only that - the control scheme.
What is it with PC gamers and always having to be the "better" of the options? "PC Games are > Console games!" "PC controllers > Console controllers!" "PC Online Gaming > Console Online gaming!"
It's like you have to leave your objectivity at the door when you pick up your computer . :/
I swear, playing Quake 3 online on the PS2 was a better experience if only because it left the "leet" back on the PC servers where they belong.
Hey! How dare you call me close-minded? :P
I've been playing FPS games on the console ever since Timesplitters was released. Dual analogue sticks are good, but I have yet to see someone pull off some of the stunts with a controller that I've seen on Quake 3 demos.
Look harder. Youtube is a good place to start. Check out some Halo stunt videos.
Oh, and one final point before I go home...
If a mouse and keyboard isn't superior to a controller, then why do all the game companies have to "dumb down" the mouse and keyboard controls so that it will be balanced when playing vs. controller players? Surely they should not spend time with this balancing if the controller is just as good as the m+kb?
I'm going home, punks.
Cheers.
*sighs*
A mouse and keyboard is not superior to a controller, but different.
All game companies do not "dumb down" the mouse and keyboard controls so that it will be balanced when playing vs a controller - in fact, such a game does not exist. Cite? You can't.
In Shadowrun, the first cross-platform FPS, the PC version has perfect PC style FPS controls, exactly as PC gamers would expecting them.
Shadowrun doesn't even try to "up" the console players by giving them auto-aiming. Instead, the *balance* of the game has been reworked by using interesting spells, classes and movement options to give the PC gamers a chance against the console gamers, and *vice versa*.
Console FPS players have their own advantages, gained specifically from having such an analogous input device. PC FPS players have their own advantages, gained specifically from having such an absolute input device.
What I'm saying is, is that neither is superior, but obviously both have strengths and weaknesses that come into play when you get down to the design of the game.
God - this is like comparing Skateboarding and Rollerblading, trying to convince the one side that the other is "superior". It is not. Skateboarding is not "superior" to Rollerblading, or vice versa. Both are *different*, both have pros and cons.
This is not rocket science, people. Stop showing how ignorant you are.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadowr...x_360_VersionsShadowrun is the flagship title for the Games for Windows - LIVE service that allows Windows Vista PC users to be fully integrated into Xbox Live. Due to this integration, FASA has decided to make several changes to try and create a more balanced competition between the Xbox 360 and PC versions. Because of some of the lack of 'pixel-accuracy' with the Xbox 360 analog thumbstick, the designers have included an aim-assisting technology, which basically interpolates the player's movement and causes the reticle to stay over an enemy player like a weak magnet. In addition, FASA has implemented a feature which causes the crosshair to expand during quick movements, thus lowering the player's accuracy, making it impossible to quickly turn and maintain accuracy, reducing the potential advantage of playing with a mouse.[5][6] PC players, who have a more sensitive control scheme, are able to turn significantly faster than their controller brethren and would have gained an unfair advantage. Many believe this defeats the purpose of having a separate version for the PC platform and that it is forcing PC players to play it like a console game.
Balancing in UT3:
http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?op...=6711&Itemid=9"I checked with Steve Polge [the lead designer] and he said that YES we are supporting keyboard and mouse in Unreal Tournament 3 on PS3," Rein announced via the official UTIII forums.
"He is confident we are doing it in a way that will be balanced without feeling "gimped" for either side.
There, I cited. I can get more for you in the morning. I'm really going home now.
You just confirmed everything I said, actually. Thanks.
However, the quote you cited from Wikipedia is incorrect. It is a perception opinion, and not a factual examination of the points. It may be an opinion that echos your sentiment, but that doesn't make it a fact.
The argument they have is that turning speed is the *sole* defining difference between PC and console controls, with higher turning speed being the obvious winner. It ignores the benefits of a relative input vs absolute input, and generally approaches the idea with the ignorance I expect from a PC gamer who's too stupid to think beyond his mousepad.
However, on the topic of UT3 and keyb+mouse support: I think it's the worst mistake Epic has ever made, and they are being incredibly short-sighted and naive. If you want to talk about *that*, that's another topic.
But I maintain, and will continue to maintain, that keyboard + mouse is not superior to a controller.
If someone disagrees, they're going to have to ****ing prove it.
Citing examples of developers who *get it wrong* when trying to balance PC vs Console doesn't help either.
Try to examine the idea from a logical standpoint,removing the mouse cord wrapped around your balls. (Removed, because I'm supposed to be nice on these forums, no matter how stupid the people are).
Personally being from a predominantly PC gaming background i'm generally in favour of the mouse/kb control scheme for action FPS titles, but i'm not opposed to console controls...i'm slowly getting used to it playing GOW/GRAW2/Halo2.
When it comes down to it, the mouse/kb combo is clearly superior with regards to pin point accuracy and high paced reflex oriented gameplay and this helps in the competitive arena (those console players who refuse to accept/admit this are just as irritating and naive as the FPS pc cronies who believe console controls suck in every situation), especially with games like Quake/UT.
For action/adventure rpg's like BioShock or tactical shooters like GRAW2/R6:Vegas, console controls are great, because the focus is more on other aspects like strategy, tactics and stealth.
Although i'm sure you also get console aliens with ridiculously accurate aim with such a controller as well.
I agree, giving mouse/kb access for UT3 on the PS3, will alienate the console following as it would give a clear advantage to those mouse/kb players in a competitive situation...for that specific game.
However, if they(not Epic specifically) want to do the whole cross-platform competitive thing with such a game, they're gonna have to do something like this to "level the playing field".
Maybe if they introduced some Unreal Championship type gameplay into the fold, they didn't have to do this?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote