FPS on Console

Sky1981

Fending off the urge
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
30,666
Location
Under the bright neon lights of sincity
I can't really get around using the analog to move the Aim.

Any tips? I fail even at the very basic :(

PS: I'm ace with mouse and keyboard though, feared in my city as one of the top CS player back then ;)
 
When PS2 first came out I set all my fps and racing games to using the buttons and not the analogue sticks for as long as possible. Eventually that option was taken away as you need most of the buttons for other tasks.

I have to say that you do get used to using the analogue aim but it is tricky to get the hang of it and you will be killed many times before you find your aim.
 
That's why it wasn't really a popular genre until Halo came out. It's different and game mechanics need changing to accommodate that. It's not the accuracy of the sticks as such but rather the control possibilities available with two analogue sticks. A few early PS3 FPSs supported keyboard and mouse, because PS3 supports keyboard and mouse, but it never took off and they stopped bothering. Some then added MOVE support to provide a more similar experience, but again, it didn't take off, and I doubt it will either when Sony's top line studio Naughty Dog doesn't bother with MOVe support at all in Uncharted 3.
 
Try turning your sensitivity up. I personally prefer console on FPS as I find the controller far more comfortable than M+K, the's an argument is that PC/M+K players are better than console/controller players but I think that's a myth, M+K is a lot more accurate because you point the reticle where you want to look where as the software in the game has to approximate where you want to look in a console a bit more. In fact it probably takes a bit more skill to get shots lined up on a controller than it does on M+K. :p
 
That'sHernandez said:
Try turning your sensitivity up. I personally prefer console on FPS as I find the controller far more comfortable than M+K, the's an argument is that PC/M+K players are better than console/controller players but I think that's a myth, M+K is a lot more accurate because you point the reticle where you want to look where as the software in the game has to approximate where you want to look in a console a bit more. In fact it probably takes a bit more skill to get shots lined up on a controller than it does on M+K. :p
Click to expand...

Agreed, but prepare to feel the wrath of the PC gamers. They are a sensitive bunch
 
Took me a while too. Only started getting FPS's for my PS3 once my PC couldn't handle the new ones. I assure you though, you will get better in time. Just keep at it.
 
Doom is my favourite ever FPS on consoles coz you just shot in line with a baddy and it hit him. Nowadays you have to aim n stuff :(
 
That'sHernandez said:
Try turning your sensitivity up. I personally prefer console on FPS as I find the controller far more comfortable than M+K, the's an argument is that PC/M+K players are better than console/controller players but I think that's a myth, M+K is a lot more accurate because you point the reticle where you want to look where as the software in the game has to approximate where you want to look in a console a bit more. In fact it probably takes a bit more skill to get shots lined up on a controller than it does on M+K. :p
Click to expand...

Randall Flagg said:
Agreed, but prepare to feel the wrath of the PC gamers. They are a sensitive bunch
Click to expand...

This has already been tested. Some of the best console players in the world were put up against some average PC players each playing their own machine. The console players of superior skill were annihilated over and over and completely embarrassed by the mediocre PC players.

So I'd hate to think what would happen if good PC players were put up against good console players, considering what happened to the best of the best against lesser opposition.
 
Zarlak said:
This has already been tested. Some of the best console players in the world were put up against some average PC players each playing their own machine. The console players of superior skill were annihilated over and over and completely embarrassed by the mediocre PC players.

So I'd hate to think what would happen if good PC players were put up against good console players, considering what happened to the best of the best against lesser opposition.
Click to expand...

That's not a fair test though, the PC players will always have the advantage because the mouse is so much more accurate than controllers.
 
That'sHernandez said:
That's not a fair test though, the PC players will always have the advantage because the mouse is so much more accurate than controllers.
Click to expand...

And that's the entire reasoning behind a PC being a better platform for FPS than consoles, oh apart from PCs graphics and performance pissing all over a consoles. Console users disagree, then get annihilated against it, so obviously it's true. A M+K means much faster gameplay and less time to react to somebody shooting you, where on a console everybody with analogue sticks experiences slower gameplay because everyone is aiming the same. M+K is merciless online because everyone is extremely fast so you have to be too.

Plus in the test above, it wasn't the best vs the best, it was the best vs average. Console users will rue a day that cross platform FPS comes into the marketplace properly.
 
Zarlak said:
And that's the entire reasoning behind a PC being a better platform for FPS than consoles, oh apart from PCs graphics and performance pissing all over a consoles. Console users disagree, then get annihilated against it, so obviously it's true. A M+K means much faster gameplay and less time to react to somebody shooting you, where on a console everybody with analogue sticks experiences slower gameplay because everyone is aiming the same. M+K is merciless online because everyone is extremely fast so you have to be too.
Click to expand...

When have I ever brought anything about console vs PC into it in that respect? I said my personal preference is a controller because I find it more comfortable to play and that because of the clumsy nature of the controller, that controller players probably have to be better at what they do than what PC players do with their M+K. Why do PC users always resort to that BS? Is it because they know that actually M+K is pretty crippling to their hands and rather uncomfortable so they have to rely on their excessively expensive computers (ironically I say that on my MBP) to make them feel better about it? Analogue sticks play mercilessly fast as well, generally the higher the sensitivity, the better the player, maybe it's not as fast as the PC but then it's not going to be given the process to make the game character move involved.
 
Zarlak said:
Plus in the test above, it wasn't the best vs the best, it was the best vs average. Console users will rue a day that cross platform FPS comes into the marketplace properly.
Click to expand...

You can't do that with XBox, Microsoft will not allow it.

It was supposed to happen with the last Unreal, but it got shelved. If I remember the reason it was that they could not update both at the same time, because updates on the PS3 require to go through Sony quality assurance. How that works with Portal 2 based on Steam I'm not sure.
 
Zarlak said:
:lol: There are some pussies in your city. Did you have a theme tune as you walked outside?
Click to expand...

I picture him going around campus with his keyboard under one arm and a mouse in the other hand to this tune:



Winking at girls, acting the part, like you do. Sky is one feared gamer!
 
That'sHernandez said:
When have I ever brought anything about console vs PC into it in that respect? I said my personal preference is a controller because I find it more comfortable to play and that because of the clumsy nature of the controller, that controller players probably have to be better at what they do than what PC players do with their M+K. Why do PC users always resort to that BS? Is it because they know that actually M+K is pretty crippling to their hands and rather uncomfortable so they have to rely on their excessively expensive computers (ironically I say that on my MBP) to make them feel better about it? Analogue sticks play mercilessly fast as well, generally the higher the sensitivity, the better the player, maybe it's not as fast as the PC but then it's not going to be given the process to make the game character move involved.
Click to expand...

Where did I say you did? Calm down boy. I was responding to you saying that it's a myth that PC players are better than console players, when it's not since they got annihilated against them. It's the only test you can do.

Faster and more accurate is better than slower and less accurate. But it doesn't matter, it bewilders me as to why console players get so irked by the notion that PCs are better, who gives a feck? The PC is more powerful than a console and easier to use/more accurate therefore it's better, it's common sense and it's not a bad thing. I don't see people on pushbikes starting arguments with people in cars saying that their way of transport is quicker or better when it's blatantly not. It's just one of those things that is, but it doesn't really mean anything. The reason console players aren't as good is because they are hindered by the machine they use, not a personal skill thing. It's fairly simple and easy to accept, it doesn't need to be an argument.

Console players don't need to be better at what they do, because they are playing against people exactly the same. They would only need to be better at what they do if they were actually gaming VS PC players. Playing console vs console you don't have to be better because the level of challenge is lowered due to everyone being on the restrictive console.

Also the M+K being crippling to the hands is bizarre, it isn't uncomfortable at all, it's the same setup that many of us use 8 hours a day at work, myself 11 hours a day. The console is more crippling to your thumbs from using the analogue sticks, but again none of that matters I don't know why you've put that in there.

Anyway, the long and short of it is yes PCs are better for FPS than consoles because they aren't as restrictive, the aiming is faster and more accurate and the graphics can piss all over them, but this isn't anything a PC gamer should use as a bragging stick, and it isn't anything console gamers should get upset about, it's just common sense. A Mini driver can't try telling a Ferrari driver that his car isn't as fast, nor should he get upset when the Ferrari driver points out that his car is faster. It's just what it is.

So don't get your knickers in a twist, I wasn't trying to start what you think I was.
 
This 'test' didnt really happen btw or at least not a fair test. It always gets brought up..but the only game i can think of that allowed pc and console gamers to play together was shadowrun, and well pc players didnt really dominate on that.

Its just that most console gamers are casuals, whereas if you are playing fps onmthe pc, odds are you have plenty of fps experience, so of course they are going to better than the average joe on xbox.

I think itd be even closer now considering fps on consoles is a bigger deal than it was in like 2006 with shadowrun.
 
Zen said:
This 'test' didnt really happen btw or at least not a fair test. It always gets brought up..but the only game i can think of that allowed pc and console gamers to play together was shadowrun, and well pc players didnt really dominate on that.

Its just that most console gamers are casuals, whereas if you are playing fps onmthe pc, odds are you have plenty of fps experience, so of course they are going to better than the average joe on xbox.

I think itd be even closer now considering fps on consoles is a bigger deal than it was in like 2006 with shadowrun.
Click to expand...

This would be true if it was a casual console gamer vs an experienced fps player like you said, but as I said it was the opposite. It was some of the worlds best XBOX players, so not casuals, or people with lack of experience, vs casual mediocre PC players. It was apparantly an experiment that Microsoft were trialling, which they scrapped.

Like the CEO of Voodoo PC wrote “The console players got destroyed every time. So much so that it would be embarrassing to the XBOX team in general had Microsoft launched this initiative.”

But like I said, that's not a bad thing or a haha you suck thing, it's just a common sense thing. I don't get why people attempt to debate it.
 
Zarlak said:
Where did I say you did? Calm down boy. I was responding to you saying that it's a myth that PC players are better than console players, when it's not since they got annihilated against them. It's the only test you can do.

Faster and more accurate is better than slower and less accurate. But it doesn't matter, it bewilders me as to why console players get so irked by the notion that PCs are better, who gives a feck? The PC is more powerful than a console and easier to use/more accurate therefore it's better, it's common sense and it's not a bad thing. I don't see people on pushbikes starting arguments with people in cars saying that their way of transport is quicker or better when it's blatantly not. It's just one of those things that is, but it doesn't really mean anything. The reason console players aren't as good is because they are hindered by the machine they use, not a personal skill thing. It's fairly simple and easy to accept, it doesn't need to be an argument.

Console players don't need to be better at what they do, because they are playing against people exactly the same. They would only need to be better at what they do if they were actually gaming VS PC players. Playing console vs console you don't have to be better because the level of challenge is lowered due to everyone being on the restrictive console.

Also the M+K being crippling to the hands is bizarre, it isn't uncomfortable at all, it's the same setup that many of us use 8 hours a day at work, myself 11 hours a day. The console is more crippling to your thumbs from using the analogue sticks, but again none of that matters I don't know why you've put that in there.

Anyway, the long and short of it is yes PCs are better for FPS than consoles because they aren't as restrictive, the aiming is faster and more accurate and the graphics can piss all over them, but this isn't anything a PC gamer should use as a bragging stick, and it isn't anything console gamers should get upset about, it's just common sense. A Mini driver can't try telling a Ferrari driver that his car isn't as fast, nor should he get upset when the Ferrari driver points out that his car is faster. It's just what it is.

So don't get your knickers in a twist, I wasn't trying to start what you think I was.
Click to expand...

You're the one who brought console/PC specs into it in the first place, my argument wasn't about what's better but I agree with you, I really don't care and I think it's down to personal preference and anyone trying to tell someone else their personal preference is wrong is just flatly retarded. I can agree that you're probably right about having to be better than what's around you but that doesn't take away from the fact that a console player has to compensate for more than what a PC player does and when you compare them with each other, the learning curve is probably higher for the console player than it is for the PC.

Actually I believe the XBox 360 controller is designed with ergonomics in mind, which makes it more comfortable to hold as it fits neatly in your hands, with all the buttons well placed (at least they are for me), where as with the M+K your hand is splayed out across the keyboard. With regards to the thumbs getting crippled, actually it would seem quite the opposite is happening and thumbs are actually getting more dextrous.
 
What would you say to the idea of a console controller with a touchpad in place of the RH analogue stick. Maybe that would be the best of both worlds. The console controller for ease of use and out of the box simplicity and the touchpad for speed and accuracy of aiming. Not sure how it would work for other games though.

Actually just tried to drive the pointer on my laptop with the outside of my thumb and it ain't easy.

Maybe a system between wii and PS/XBx where by you control the running, firing, jumping with the controller, but actually aim with the controller pointing at the screen.
 
Irwinwastheking said:
What would you say to the idea of a console controller with a touchpad in place of the RH analogue stick. Maybe that would be the best of both worlds. The console controller for ease of use and out of the box simplicity and the touchpad for speed and accuracy of aiming. Not sure how it would work for other games though.

Actually just tried to drive the pointer on my laptop with the outside of my thumb and it ain't easy.

Maybe a system between wii and PS/XBx where by you control the running, firing, jumping with the controller, but actually aim with the controller pointing at the screen.
Click to expand...

Personally I don't really see how the 360 controller can be improved upon much more than making smaller dead zones to make the controller a bit more sensitive and Kinect just seems like it's a backwards step, having watched that video of the guy playing Star Wars and just sliding about the environment.
 
Sky1981 said:
I can't believe there are people here who played FPS on console though, I really don't know how they can do that. The thumb is not that accurate , or was there a trick i'm missing?
Click to expand...

Agree whole heartidly. I liked playing Resistance and and used to play Half Life sometimes on PS2 because it had co-op story mode which I thought was good but I could never get into the online version on it. Tried a bit with Resistance 2 but I haven't played shooters on it since.

My 10 year old nephew was shocked that I didn't want Black Ops on PS3. He hasn't been introduced to PC gaming and I imagine that's the norm with many his age and a bit older.
 
Zarlak said:
This would be true if it was a casual console gamer vs an experienced fps player like you said, but as I said it was the opposite. It was some of the worlds best XBOX players, so not casuals, or people with lack of experience, vs casual mediocre PC players. It was apparantly an experiment that Microsoft were trialling, which they scrapped.

Like the CEO of Voodoo PC wrote “The console players got destroyed every time. So much so that it would be embarrassing to the XBOX team in general had Microsoft launched this initiative.”

But like I said, that's not a bad thing or a haha you suck thing, it's just a common sense thing. I don't get why people attempt to debate it.
Click to expand...

And as I said, it wasn't really a test, it was just Shadowrun, a pretty bad game anyway, and it was before Xbox even had a hardcore FPS crowd as it was like a year prior to COD4 or Halo 3 came out. So basically a very casual crowd and Gears castoffs vs regular fps players on the pc. So of course the PC gamers were going to do better as they knew the FPS genre better, casual or not. However the few actual good Xbox gamers that played held their own on the beta and the full release...at least the ones I know of, and while they are a level above me gaming wise, they don't even consider themselves some of the best.

I'm not exactly debating whether one is better or not, but using the quotes from a heavy pc enthusiast who didn't look at the wider picture or even have any truth to back up his claims. Oh and most of the time he probably played with his other pc enthusiast friends....
 
Zarlak said:
The PC is more powerful than a console
Click to expand...

That actually depends on what type of PC you have. PC is a term that covers a wide range of differing hardware configurations. I can even point you to quotes from John Carmack where he says something along the lines of API overhead on PC at times makes it slower than the consoles in certain respects even though theoretically the hardware in question is faster and more modern by an order of quite some magnitude. Nobody can argue that a modern PC, 6 years down the line is more powerful, especially with GPU loaded software, but take a good PC from around the time of the release of the PS3 and XB360 and you'll not find a great deal of difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.