The difference between PC and Console FPS games.

Recommended Videos

funguy2121

New member
Oct 20, 2009
3,407
0
0
Joccaren said:
ZeZZZZevy said:
Hasn't the point that m&k > gamepad for fps's already been proven?
You're talking about simply a faster method of movement:
point and click is always faster than acceleration

this really doesn't matter anyway, as long as everyone is on the same playing field (unless you're at the absolute highest levels of play)

also: different control method =/= "dumbing down"
it's a different method of control that some people happen to prefer, like you happen to prefer pc games and m&k
He's saying that the level design is being affected by the limitations of console controls. As they can't turn around as fast, or aim as well, there tends to be fewer enemies on screen, and the levels tend to be more linear, with enemies usually infront of you. This, is dumbing down for consoles. It is not just a preference in control method. If developers didn't do this, console players would start to hate FPSs as they would become VERY difficult. Pcs on the other hand, would get a better experience for this, with more challenging things in the game then 'hide behind cover till the enemy stops shooting, shoot'.
No, the levels are more linear because the developers think the only way to mass market their products is to literally dumb them down for mass consumption. See eponymous Prince of Persia for more on this. The developer bragged that it's "easier to be a bad-ass" in this game in which you literally cannot die. There's too much emphasis on pretty graphics and scripted events. I call it post-Metal Gear Solid syndrome. In many franchises, the games are slowly becoming interactive movies. This has nothing to do with the limitations of consoles, though I'm sure it affects PC games when it comes to ports because PC games (aside from Farmville, et al) are usually more "hardcore" in that they don't have a sturdy tutorial system and assume you're already a master of the genre so they don't focus so much on marketing.
 

ZeZZZZevy

New member
Apr 3, 2011
618
0
0
Continuity said:
ZeZZZZevy said:
also: different control method =/= "dumbing down"
it's a different method of control that some people happen to prefer, like you happen to prefer pc games and m&k
Did you even read his post? he was saying how the different control method has lead differences in game and level design, specifically making levels more linear, putting enemies in front of you more and giving you few enemies... plus a general lack of sophistication I might add, even the most detailed console FPS still have a very strong arcadey feel to them IMO.

So in summary its not just a different control method but also the difference in game design that that entails.
I already responded to a post almost exactly like this one. Please refer to that for my response. And yes I read his post, I just misunderstood what he was trying to convey, try not to jump to conclusions.
 

zehydra

New member
Oct 25, 2009
5,033
0
0
Mr. Omega said:
(slight rant warning)

It's not that they don't have points (Give me TF2 over CoD any day of the week...), but they just about being such ASSHOLES about it. Some people happen to like console shooters. Good for them. I don't really like the FPS genre in general, but I do enjoy some of the games. And PC Gamers LOVE blaming all their problems on console gamers. And the concept of "different opinions" just seems to be absolutely ALIEN to them... no, the PC Gamer mentality is "OUR GAMES ARE BETTER, AND IF YOU DON'T STAND IN AWE OF OUR SUPERIORITY, YOU'RE AN IDIOT."

That being said, I don't care if it isn't as good, I prefer a gamepad. Then again, I'm not that much of an FPS guy, and play for fun...

On a side note about DNF: Your little theory is a blatant example of PC Elitism. You assume that it being made for a PC inherently means that it would have been a better game. You ever stop to think maybe Gearbox would have messed up either way? The REAL issues that game has would not have been any better with M&K in mind. But NOOOOOOO, it's all console gamer's fault! That's the ONLY possibility!

PC Gamers who use the term "dumbed down for consoles" and aren't talking about Dues Ex or Starcraft need to get over themselves and their mahcines...
Well considering that Consoles are in essence limitations on development and hardware for the sake of making things easier for the gamer (and sometimes the developer), I don't think the PC gaming elitist position is without justification.
 

irishstormtrooper

New member
Mar 19, 2009
1,365
0
0
TrevHead said:
I think the point is being missed here. What you are arguing is actually old vs. new games, not PC vs. console games. Both Serious Sam 2 and Painkiller came out for the Xbox as well as the PC. Putting fewer enemies in front of the player isn't caused by a gamepad's inherent inferiority (as you say) to the mouse and keyboard, but rather because modern shooters are shifting away from the "tons of health-health bar" system to the "less health-regenerating health" system. Players would be overwhelmed because they do not have enough max health to handle ten or so enemies at once, not because controllers are less accurate.
 

theheroofaction

New member
Jan 20, 2011
928
0
0
Well, some people seem to forget that there is no control scheme that's perfect for everyone.

I like moving with 2 joysticks and 16 buttons, and find it more efficient than mouse control. That doesn't however mean that any control scheme is better for everyone, and I don't think anybody is "wrong" by preferring a different control scheme, frankly it's the fact that people assume their opinions are somehow "right" that's annoying.
 
Oct 2, 2010
282
0
0
Huh. The OP seems to suggest a very limited approach to what FPS games "should be." Everything should be circle strafing? Not that I dislike circle strafing, but really?

It's also wrong to suggest that consoles are incapable of that sort of approach. Yes, many modern console shooters don't do it, but that's more because of current industry standards ("old versus new" design) than actual limitations. I mean, look at the original Halo; once you get into the hang of it, Flood combat in that game can make for amazing strafe fighting. And it can often involve a heck of a lot more enemy AI than you show in the videos you posted.
 

Inkidu

New member
Mar 25, 2011
966
0
0
Wolfy2449 said:
Inkidu said:
I don't like the mouse and keyboard. They're bland, boring and purely utilitarian. I guess I grew up with too many old Nintendo games or something. I love controllers. I just have the long palms and mid-sized fingers for it I guess.

Plus keyboards don't rumble, and rumble scripting has gotten so good with modern gaming. It's surprising how much it can immerse you into a game.

Whem people say mouse and keyboard, I usually just use the mouse for my RTSs and Civ games.
Because you cant use them this doesnt meant they are bad controls compared to controllers...

I mean m&k are ultimately superior and its pretty much a fact. Even if bothpalyers were pro mouse would still have more power than controller...

m&k are simply better, if you cant use them dont call them bad controls
Oh God, I just love the internet. Please point out to me where I ever said, "Keyboards and mouses (I suppose it's mouses when you're talking about the tool) are bad". Please, I'll give you a minute.

I didn't say they were bad, I said they were bland, boring, and utilitarian. Yes, yes, and yes all perfectly reasonable opinions to have about a slab of keys better suited to typing memos than playing games, and a tool whose main purpose is to interact with GUIs. It's not like I said they were Satan's own torture devices for kittens. You can play games well on them. They multitask. I said that I liked controllers better. I like the feel and the ergonomics better than any keyboard (and no, I'm not shelling out money for an ergonomic keyboard, I can type just fine on a regular one).

Sure, click and drag is good for RTSs but I managed to complete the whole of Command & Conquer 4 with an Xbox 360 remote just fine. It's a bit of a learning curve but soon I was selecting units and making groups just as well as I ever did.

I don't refute that if you empirically tested the speeds of mouses and keyboards against controllers the former would win every time, but you know what? It doesn't matter to me, I get along fine, and I'd still rather have a controller. It allows for better immersion as far as I'm concerned. Everyone's allowed to pick their poison, and I never said they shouldn't. It was totally what I thought.
 

RA92

New member
Jan 1, 2011
3,079
0
0
I was reading Captain Placeholder's posts, and it was hilarious how his responses slowly devolved into shutting his ears with his hands and going 'LA-LA-LA-LA-LA!'



Cronq said:
I've survived soooo many times in console games because I was able to strife diagonal at a 37* angle, compared to the 45* angle those n00b PC gamers are STUCK with. LOLOL!! Analog Stick = Precision!!!
Circle strafing. Try it sometimes.
 

Continuity

New member
May 20, 2010
2,053
0
0
Wolfram01 said:
And as for controls, I clearly said a thumbstick is more precise than WASD but NOT more precise than a mouse.
But of course you realise that's a pointless assertion, as WASD is never (these days) used without a mouse, they are two parts of the same control system, you cant separate them.

Also, WASD is more precise than a thumb stick, a thumb stick gives you a greater range of movement which is exactly what you don't want when strafing (which is what WASD is used for), you want precision straight lines as supplied by the digital input of a keyboard... combined with mouse look gives you all the control fidelity you could need.


Further, there is something to be said for having three fingers on 4 buttons vs 1 thumb on a stick, 3 fingers will give you much snappier and precise instantaneous control, rather than having to roll your thumb around.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
zehydra said:
Well considering that Consoles are in essence limitations on development and hardware for the sake of making things easier for the gamer (and sometimes the developer), I don't think the PC gaming elitist position is without justification.
Exactly.
From a technical perspective, there is not a single thing a console can do that a PC cannot.
However, it's a combination of the refusal for some console players to accept this fact, and the fact that too many PC gamers are flaunting it like assholes that gave rise to the "PC gamer = elitist" trope.

Combine that with the fact that the Big Three and the mainstream Publishers keep treating the PC market as second-rate (due to economic and control-related reasons), and you have an unwinnable scenario that has no painless solution; only more shitty flame wars, fanboy whining and compromises that ultimately make the situation worse.
 

TrevHead

New member
Apr 10, 2011
1,458
0
0
Wolfram01 said:
Actually I've been on both PC and consoles since I was little. My first FPS games were Blakestone, Wolfenstein 3D, Duke Nukem 3D, Quake, Doom, etc, all on PC. I currently have a pretty sick desktop too.

Regardless of that false assumption, my point was simply that the old gameplay style of throwing a lot of ennemies at the player who have simple straight line pathing is pathetically simplistic. Now that AI can hide in cover or run around and surround you, going back to that old style would appear silly.

And as for controls, I clearly said a thumbstick is more precise than WASD but NOT more precise than a mouse.
Ahh my bad, sorry about that, it was a dumbass brain fart on my part. Your avatar even shows a modded rig.

Ok moving onto modern FPS games I think you are correct that good FPS games can be dynamic in their own way, IE tactics and (good) enemy AI like that used in the FEAR games. But I still think there is room for new old styled action FPS with lots of strafing, Ild argue that stereotyping all these games as dumb is wrong.

As with many good arcade / retro action games the better examples are simple in their play mechanics so that someone can playing in a casual and "dumb" way if they just put the difficulty on easy. However to play in a skilled and advanced plystyle takes just as much strategy as modern warfare FPS games.

funguy2121 said:
No, the levels are more linear because the developers think the only way to mass market their products is to literally dumb them down for mass consumption. See eponymous Prince of Persia for more on this. The developer bragged that it's "easier to be a bad-ass" in this game in which you literally cannot die. There's too much emphasis on pretty graphics and scripted events. I call it post-Metal Gear Solid syndrome. In many franchises, the games are slowly becoming interactive movies. This has nothing to do with the limitations of consoles, though I'm sure it affects PC games when it comes to ports because PC games (aside from Farmville, et al) are usually more "hardcore" in that they don't have a sturdy tutorial system and assume you're already a master of the genre so they don't focus so much on marketing.
Yes you are correct but I still believe that the analog stick, wii controller and kinnect are all having just as much an effect on game design as the casual mass market. Its simple logic that if aiming, strafing and 180 degree turns are easier to preform, more gamers will do more of those actions, and the opposite is true that when something is harder less pll will preform these actions.

Im no game designer but ild imagine that when developers are using the public to beta test and balance their games they will notice the gamers general playstyle and change the game to suit how their playtesters are playing.
 

TrevHead

New member
Apr 10, 2011
1,458
0
0
BTW has anyone actually played both the PC and console versions of a old style action FPS? Im wondering just what changes are made when porting a PC fps over to console. From my limited knowledge of watching console gameplay vids of quake 2 ild always thought that the the baddies are given a longer time between appearing onscreen and starting to shoot at the player, which allows for the longer reaction and aiming time for pad players
 

JET1971

New member
Apr 7, 2011
836
0
0
Danceofmasks said:
snippage

There's no reason why analog sticks don't work better than they do.
Thats very very true, I used to use an analog stick at work that was so precise there was no difference than the high end laser mouse. but then again that was a standard PC flight sim joystick adapted to control a robotic arm...

Control capabilities factor into dumbing down of games in more ways than just precision issues. lets talk about the loss of features such as the ability to lean right or left? toggle kneeling with kneeling thats not toggled. (I had to get a 3rd party script to get toggle kneel working in BFBC2 otherwise i had to hold down the kneel button making it harder to adjust position without standing up accidently and using it i lost the ability to quickly kneel as long as I held the button down). how about scope up with right mouse where you need to hold the mouse button down or hit a keyboard button to toggle scope and it stays up until you either hit the right mouse or the toggle key? then features like NVG and binoculars? what about prone?? leaning is completly removed. toggle scope/kneeling or quick scope/kneel is either or and not both. prone is pretty much gone. NVG and binoculars seems to be either or or just plain not exhistant. those are just a few features that multiplatform FPS games lose that were considered standard for PC. thats just part of why we PC players ***** about and consider dumbing down for console.

Then theres the whole lack of choices on keyboard mapping. standard PC was every single control could be remaped ingame. Now theres some that cannot. I myself despise using WASD and always remap to use arrow keys numpad and the surounding around the arrow keys when keys cannot be mapped makes is ridiculous just because on a console you cant map controls. why is advanced video settings limited now? oh wait because Consoles do not have that feature.

I dont give a shit if the games are multiplatform but I do give a shit when features are removed or just not added for the sake of multiplatform. thats not elitist! thats not being happy getting less bang for the buck.
 

Joccaren

Elite Member
Mar 29, 2011
2,601
3
43
funguy2121 said:
No, the levels are more linear because the developers think the only way to mass market their products is to literally dumb them down for mass consumption. See eponymous Prince of Persia for more on this. The developer bragged that it's "easier to be a bad-ass" in this game in which you literally cannot die. There's too much emphasis on pretty graphics and scripted events. I call it post-Metal Gear Solid syndrome. In many franchises, the games are slowly becoming interactive movies. This has nothing to do with the limitations of consoles, though
You got it right that devolpers, well, not developers, marketing, think the only way to sell the game is to dumb it down. But, there is a reason for this. Yes, any player well experienced in the use of consoles could probably overcome more enemies on screen and them coming from multiple directions (talking more FPSs here) due to the fact that the level is non-linear, even if they would have a far harder time that that of someone on a gaming PC, however, the fair majority of the console players marketing has in mind (sadly the seven year olds, even though the game is rated MA15+, marketing still makes their campaigns to sell to these guys, most of the time [especially EA]) do not have the skills or the experience to be able to handle such situations, and thus would not enjoy the game. They would also have no wish to learn how to handle such situations. If on a PC, they may be able to overcome these challenges due to the more precise and responsive controls (in most game types), however, since they use consoles, they would have a harder time playing and would not enjoy the game, a game that is not enjoyable doesn't sell, a game that doesn't sell isn't worth making, and thus such games are 'streamlined' to fit these console players.

It is dumbing down for consoles, as on a PC there wouldn't be as much trouble with the game being hard due to non linear levels, many enemies at once ect, though it would still be harder than what most younger PC players are used too.
A game that is too hard and thus unenjoyable for the, sadly, intended audience won't sell, and thus isn't made.

Its not entirely the fault of consoles, but it is equally shared by those players and the limitations of a console.

funguy2121 said:
because PC games (aside from Farmville, et al) are usually more "hardcore" in that they don't have a sturdy tutorial system and assume you're already a master of the genre so they don't focus so much on marketing.
An uneducated console player opinion. I really should make a thread on myths of the PC for console players, if it hadn't been made so many times already, but here it goes.

Yes, a number of PC games used to be more hardcore, they are not so much anymore due to the fact that developers want to release the same game on all platforms, and higher hardcore levels would be difficult for console players to handle. There are some games that I will call more hardcore these days though, mostly ones that aren't on consoles though, and even then mostly RTSs.

PC games aren't more hardcore because they don't have a good tutorial system, to the contrary, a number of PC games have great tutorial systems, I find console games have weaker ones when I play them. They are more hardcore as they were designed to be more challenging, to send a lot of enemies at the player from multiple directions at once with weapons that can almost instantly kill you, and the player is meant to be able to survive this (Crysis 1 was a good exampple in some spots. You, at times, had three squads of enemies (around 4-8 members per squad) coming at you from three different directions, and even with maximum armour you could only survive around 7 hits, and these guns shot fast (they were assault rifles after all). I have not played Crysis 2, so I cannot comment, but I consider Crysis 1, so long as you don't just stealth past all the fights, a somewhat hardcore game.
There are also other issues such as certain more in depth features that console players find clunky, but PC players love and that add depth to the game, these are also things that make the games more 'hardcore'. Though all of this is only if it is implemented properly.

PC games don't assume you are a master of the genre and not give you a tutorial, as if they did, no one would have any idea what is going on or how to do anything, and thus would not enjoy the game.
 

JET1971

New member
Apr 7, 2011
836
0
0
Dumbing down example.. BFBC2 Mcomm gets set, alarm is going off. you run to it and hit the button to shut it off. "Son of a *****!!!" same key to work the mcom as it is to pick up a weapon now forget about getting your old kit back. same bs setting it. weapon at the foot of a ladder you want to pick up.. "FFFFUUUUU........!!!!!!!!!!!1!" you just atached to the ladder instead. try to attach to an emplaced weapon? oh look you picked up a sniper rifle.

Oh look 110 keys and we have 2-3 functions set to one generic key rather than seperate.
 

maturin

New member
Jul 20, 2010
702
0
0
Sort of silly of you to bring up Arma 2, whose realistic gameplay style is the exact opposite of the running round and round while targeting six different enemies style you brought up earlier. But ArmA could never be played on consoles because you need all that avatar control to avoid being shot.

In that game you can crawl, crawl slowly, walk, walk while aiming, walk slower while aiming, walk while leaning (which can be toggled), run and sprint. That is eight different speeds of movement with their own rhythms affecting aim. You can also move your arms independent of your head or move your head without the camera, duck while standing or crouching, and raise your torso while prone. All this can be done without Track IR and the only button you need that wasn't used in the PC version of CoD 4 is Alt.
 

Kahunaburger

New member
May 6, 2011
4,141
0
0
JET1971 said:
Dumbing down example.. BFBC2 Mcomm gets set, alarm is going off. you run to it and hit the button to shut it off. "Son of a *****!!!" same key to work the mcom as it is to pick up a weapon now forget about getting your old kit back. same bs setting it. weapon at the foot of a ladder you want to pick up.. "FFFFUUUUU........!!!!!!!!!!!1!" you just atached to the ladder instead. try to attach to an emplaced weapon? oh look you picked up a sniper rifle.

Oh look 110 keys and we have 2-3 functions set to one generic key rather than seperate.
Haha I have died so many times from this. Although I think the ideal solution is actually to dumb it down even more - just have the player start automatically disarming when they walk near the MCOM. There's no reason you would want to not disarm it.
 

JET1971

New member
Apr 7, 2011
836
0
0
Kahunaburger said:
JET1971 said:
Dumbing down example.. BFBC2 Mcomm gets set, alarm is going off. you run to it and hit the button to shut it off. "Son of a *****!!!" same key to work the mcom as it is to pick up a weapon now forget about getting your old kit back. same bs setting it. weapon at the foot of a ladder you want to pick up.. "FFFFUUUUU........!!!!!!!!!!!1!" you just atached to the ladder instead. try to attach to an emplaced weapon? oh look you picked up a sniper rifle.

Oh look 110 keys and we have 2-3 functions set to one generic key rather than seperate.
Haha I have died so many times from this. Although I think the ideal solution is actually to dumb it down even more - just have the player start automatically disarming when they walk near the MCOM. There's no reason you would want to not disarm it.
I died a few times trying to both disarm and arm because im standing there spazzing on the button and cussing up a storm as I franticly cycle through a pile of weapons when i just want to use the Mcomm. bang im dead now my weapon is added to the frustrating lil pile.
 

TheDanielG

New member
Feb 9, 2011
29
0
0
A few points regarding the console:
a) Cover based shooters are WAY easier.
b) You can continuesly turn, unlike picking up the mouse for the PC.
c) I find the "other" actions like melee and driving a tank or sneaking with a stick is easier.