Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Gaming Consoles, what is the attraction?

Author
Message
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 20:35
Why do people like games consoles?
I know it sounds like a daft question, but given you can get a computer with just as much power for around the same price now; why do people purchase an Xbox360 over a new PC?

Is it because of the way you can quickly boot them up and just get going without having to always find programs and such?
Is it because you don't have to install anything?
Is it because there is much more performance because the operating system isn't always taking up much of the system resources?

Do you think that desktop operating systems should also provide a similar sort of service to games consoles, rather than constantly getting more and more complex?

Intel Pentium-D 2.8GHz, 512MB DDR2 433, Ati Radeon X1600 Pro 256MB PCI-E, Windows Vista RC1 / XP Professional SP2
Oraculaca
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Jan 2003
Location: Scotland
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 20:37
Yes
Yes
Yes

No

David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 20:40
Personally, I have no interest in games console what-so-ever; they are simply expensive computers which you can never upgrade, not even to another OS

n3om0rph
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 14th Aug 2005
Location: Croatia
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 20:43
Quote: "Personally, I have no interest in games console what-so-ever; they are simply expensive computers which you can never upgrade, not even to another OS"


I agree.

n3om0rph aka RAM
Silvester
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Dec 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 20:45
Quote: "never upgrade"


Playstation Portable,has its own OS,wich upgrades itself,in older version Homebrew apps where alllowed(V1.5)but now its blocked.

The PSP has many applications for 1.5 too.painting programs,Music software and more!

even webbrowsers and MSN,Yahoo messenger and AIM can be on it.so dont say it cant be upgraded

My arrival shocked some people maybe...but i dont seem to care anyway...behold my mights!
-Prince Of Darkness
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 20:47
Quote: "Playstation Portable,has its own OS,wich upgrades itself,in older version Homebrew apps where alllowed(V1.5)but now its blocked.

The PSP has many applications for 1.5 too.painting programs,Music software and more!

even webbrowsers and MSN,Yahoo messenger and AIM can be on it.so dont say it cant be upgraded "


Yes, but inevitably, there will be a PSP2 or something, which will require a big hardware upgrade, and you wont be able to play PSP2 games on PSP1 or something. That's what I mean.

With PC's, you only need a hardware upgrade once every sort of 5/6 years if your lucky, and you can still get away with an improved OS to play new games if your lucky. Consoles are not so.

Tinkergirl
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Jul 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 20:54
Well, there's one main reason for people buying consoles these days - the games. If the games you got on the consoles were literally identical to ones you could get on PC, with no exclusives whatsoever, then people would not be quite so keen to get consoles.

Mind you, I suppose it's a cultural thing too - in the UK, computers like the Spectrum and Amstrad were where you played games, but in other countries, it was NES (or Famicom etc) all the way.

The simplicity of getting the game running is a factor too - not so long ago, it would be beyond the average householder to 'install' a game. Heck, most people still can't tell you what graphics card they have - how do they check the minimum requirements? Remember - most people not being your hardcore PC fanatic - most people being the ones that check their email sometimes.

From a developers point of view it's easier too - fewer hardware setups to test it on - oh the pain of testing your game against near infinite combinations of graphics cards, drivers and processors.

As for operating systems providing a more game-friendly environment - why would they do that? Microsoft certainly won't - they'll get their cash out of the XBox (eventually). And why would anyone else? I mean, they won't get extra buyers out of people just so they can play games - people are buying PCs to do non-game stuff anyway (at the moment). They might eventually be left behind if the consoles let them check emails etc though. Still, why bother if there's no money in it for them.

Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 21:03
I think it's basically because people think it's nicer to sit in your sitting room in a comfy chair rather than sit right in front of a computer screen.

Also, like Tinkergirl said, you can't get Zelda on PC.

Quote: "Do you think that desktop operating systems should also provide a similar sort of service to games consoles, rather than constantly getting more and more complex?"


Are they? Seems to me like you just put the DVD in and click 'Next' till the game starts.

-= Out here in the fields, I fight for my meals =-
Dr Manette
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jan 2006
Location: BioFox Games hq
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 21:05
Yeah, if all the same games were on the PC, I wouldn't be getting any console, regardless. I find I send a lot more time on my computer than on all of my consoles combined, all three of them.

Bio Fox...four guys, one computer, games like nobody's business. Join our forum: http://biofox.aceboard.com
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 21:08
There is definitely a 'culture' divide between the games you get on PC, and the games you get on consoles, if you know what I mean.

I personally prefer the 'culture' of games that exists on PC's

Torsten Sorensen
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Oct 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 21:09
1. It may not be so bad that you can't upgrade, because if you never need to, you never spend extra money, and that money can go towards another console...*cough*

Megaton Cat
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Aug 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 21:28
What's with Raven's questionnaires? Being a developer and gamer hanging out in a forum full of the exact same tpye of people...you should know.

Lucifer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Dec 2005
Location:
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 21:45
Quote: "Personally, I have no interest in games console what-so-ever; they are simply expensive computers which you can never upgrade, not even to another OS"


oops.. dont forget the xbox ! you can softmod it and install linux on it and even use it as a desktop pc! and it is even posible to get windows 98 on it, i havent tried it yet but it seems to be very cool. and you can get new cases for the xbox, new power supplier and more stuff! stuffstuffstuff, and you can get windows 95 on the psp!! http://www.hacker.co.il/psp/bochs/



One is the lonliest number...
Krilik
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Mar 2006
Location: Arizona, USA
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 21:57
Quote: "With PC's, you only need a hardware upgrade once every sort of 5/6 years if your lucky, and you can still get away with an improved OS to play new games if your lucky. Consoles are not so."

Playstation consoles have had a lifespan of 5 to 6 years. Nintendo's is about 4 years, and Microsoft is 4. There's not a huge difference, if any, in hardware upgrade.

And I don't think that's necessarily true, I've upgraded my PC 3 times in the past 8 years, and they're not cheap upgrades. You have to upgrade the CPU, the RAM, Video Card, and ROM drives in order to play all games that are released.

But then again I've also bought 5 or 6 consoles in the past 8 years too... Different manufacturers though.
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 22:24
I find that if you've never purchased a game console, then you have a negative stigma and refuse to buy the hype. But if you've purchased one or two consoles in the past, you can see the benefits of owning them usually outweigh the detriments.

For example I like being able to pop in a game like Project Gotham 3 on my 360 and play it for a few hours. Then I can let it sit for a few months and play it again, without having the entire game installed on the hard drive. On my PC I am wary of installing game and demos because they almost always leave behind crap in the registry and even sometimes their program files folder altogether after uninstalling.

And then sometimes you have to worry about video card drivers, etc. But on a 360, you just pop in a demo or game and play in a minute, hassle-free. And developers can stretch the hardware further than on a PC. Doom 3 on the Xbox is the perfect example of "wow", seeing as the system had something like a Pentium 733 CPU

Killswitch
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Oct 2002
Location: School damnit!! Let me go!! PLEASE!!!
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 22:24
A lot of people are wary about the control system for games on the PC as well. When I introduced a couple of frinds to Counter-Strike they were horrifed about using WASD untill they got used to it. A uniform control layout for consoles is also an attraction.

~Heed my word hobags: Jism~
Zappo
Valued Member
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2004
Location: In the post
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 22:27
I think its mainly down to ease of use.
Consoles offer:
- Quick startup times
- Quick shutdown times
- Big screen viewing (stick the cable in your TV - no fuss and no extra monitor)
- No need to upgrade hardware to play the newest game for it
- No need to upgrade software or drivers constantly to play the newest games
- Smaller and less noisy for living rooms (although this could be debatable with the most recent consoles)

I would also argue that their life spans are much longer than a fixed spec PC for the same money. The PS2 is still being manufactured, still has games being developed for it, its almost 7 years old and you can buy a brand new one with a top new game for under £100. If you want to just play games then its hard to beat.
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 22:32
Dual analog is no comparison to Mouse/WASD as far as I'm concerned.

I hate getting beaten at Halo by my stupid console friends with their dexterous thumbs.

Grmmm... let's just load up UT and see's who's Godlike, huh?

The s**ts.

-= Out here in the fields, I fight for my meals =-
Dr Manette
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jan 2006
Location: BioFox Games hq
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 22:33
WASD was horrifying to them!? So they haven't played any games since the 90s? Anyways, I think that the ability to sit down and play is a lot more attractive on the consoles than when you have to enter a cd-key, install whatever, and then get patches for games.

Bio Fox...four guys, one computer, games like nobody's business. Join our forum: http://biofox.aceboard.com
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 23:29
Quote: "Are they? Seems to me like you just put the DVD in and click 'Next' till the game starts."


Autorun has been part of Windows since 1995, and 'next' installers even longer. So that's hardly "new" technology that makes things easier.

Sure each OS upgrade for Windows seems to hide administration controls, but this honestly just makes it more difficult to change things when you need to.

While Vista makes things easier, there's so much more technology in it that makes it far more resource heavy and options for each application have greatly increased.

Games still need to be installed, despite optical media being more than large enough to store and run games.

As far as computers go, you need to upgrade every 2-3years due to new Operating System requirements and/or because games and applications have become that much more complex they need the additional processing power. There's no cap on what resources are honestly available, so developers work on what is comming not what is available... often means that optimisation is an after-thought if even thought about.

Personally I've found my consoles to have a much much longer shelf-life than any of my desktop computers. The way that you never have to worry about specifications, or installation space, etc.
On the whole the desktop PC is just more a waste of space, especially as the majority of PC users only use it for e-mails, office work, and games.

For me optimisation toward these sort of aspects of computing within a system that you can be guarenteed atleast 5years of use out of without costing you your first born.

But this said, this isn't so much about my opinions but those of everyone else as I already know what I think.

Intel Pentium-D 2.8GHz, 512MB DDR2 433, Ati Radeon X1600 Pro 256MB PCI-E, Windows Vista RC1 / XP Professional SP2
Gamedesign er20
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: The one place you would never look...
Posted: 30th Oct 2006 23:41
WASD is annoying, but I usally use a joystick. That's why my main concern about the PC controls is not the comfortablity, but the limitations. By that i mean controllers like the Wii controller will provide a much newer experience for the Wii compared to the PC and it's keypad/joystick.

Cocacola and Pepsi aren't that differnt. Deal with it.
FoxBlitzz
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Nov 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 00:00
Gamedesign er20, how can one not praise The Holy Four? Seriously, WASD and Mouselook is the best FPS control method you will ever use. Also, I especially hate gamepads because it's a terrible pain to aim with them. This explains my frustration in aiming with a gamepad:

"Okay, I need to aim at this guy's head so I can snipe him. I'll just move my sight over him with the joystick."

"Augh! I moved too far, now I have to move back over him!"

"No, now I moved too far back over him! I'm going to move this stick more gently now!"

"Argh! Even when I just lightly pushed the stick, I still zoomed past him! This thing is possessed!"

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+
1GB DDR-SDRAM (May increase to 2GB one day)
512MB ATI Radeon X1800 Series - Finally! A card that does pixel shaders correctly!
Krilik
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Mar 2006
Location: Arizona, USA
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 01:55
The precision of FPS controls on consoles varies greatly I think. Because there is a lot more to consider than just the controller itself. While that may be "hard" for some people to get used to dual joysticks, the movement is natural to me. I can play some FPSers on consoles just as well or better than I can using a WASD + Mouse setup on the PC. The problem with dual joysticks is you have to have LOTS of custimization in order to suit people's gaming habits. A joystick bases its movement on how far, and long a joystick is being pushed, not how fast you can move. So for instance using a mouse you can have extrememly low sensitivity in order to make really hard shots, but be able to turn really fast due to being able to lift the mouse and move it in any direction as fast as your hand can move. Its the opposite for a joystick, in order to turn you have to hold the joystick over until you get done turning. So developers need to add in acceleration settings, look sensitiviy, and dead zone sensitivity in order to compensate. A lot of them don't, and FPS controls on consoles cannot be the same all around.
Bizar Guy
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Apr 2005
Location: Bostonland
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 03:39
Seriously, the mouse and keyboard is the greatest control scheme ever for any genre. The potential is so underused in nearly every genre that it's ridiculous. Only the obvious ones like fps and rts seem to thrive on the pc. Only the Wii looks like it will be out doing the pc setup, and still not in the fps and rts genres.

So why bother getting a consol? Wii. Seriously the only console worth getting yet I think. And Handhelds are obvious, because they're handheld.
And of course the most obvious reason,
Quote: "Also, like Tinkergirl said, you can't get Zelda on PC."




FoxBlitzz
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Nov 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 04:38
Well, you can kinda get Zelda on PC, at least through emulation. Though it only works well up to the N64. We all know how slow GCN emulation is right now.

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+
1GB DDR-SDRAM (May increase to 2GB one day)
512MB ATI Radeon X1800 Series - Finally! A card that does pixel shaders correctly!
Phaelax
DBPro Master
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 08:25
Quote: "Personally, I have no interest in games console what-so-ever; they are simply expensive computers which you can never upgrade, not even to another OS"

I agree.

Quote: "Is it because of the way you can quickly boot them up"

I'm fed up with the loading times of console games these days.

"Using Unix is the computing equivalent of listening only to music by David Cassidy" - Rob Pike
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 09:23
One can't forget that most publishers don't give the PC versions of games the TLC that the consoles get.

The truth of the matter is it's in the best interest of the publisher to prioritize the PS2 & Xbox versions, *then* the NGC and/or PC versions. The PC version can always be patched after all.

Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 11:21 Edited at: 31st Oct 2006 11:24
Personally I can play consoles for longer, PC's are just a bit uncomfortable for playing games, the screen is small compared to a TV, and the extra hassles involved in PC gaming grate on my nerves.

With a console, you just slouch and play, everything is done with one controller in your hand, and there's really little chance of the game being ruined with a crash. For controls, well I always play console games differently:

PC: Aim with mouse, ducking in and out of cover with the keyboard.

XBox: Aim with both analogues, and move - the major factor being analogue straffing, use that to help you aim more accurately.

See the PC is missing a better movement control, I'd love to see a analogue joystick/paddle/gadget with a rotation control - vehicles could use the rotation to steer, but movement would be analogue and smooth. Best of both worlds I reckon. They could do so much with a basic joystick design for FPS movement, jumping, ducking, there has to be a better way than covering 15 keys with 5 fingers.

I just ordered a laser gaming mouse, it's so new I haven't seen it yet! (there are literally no images of it online anywhere) - 1600 DPI, the way I play BF2142, I think it'll make a big difference. What's a good DPI for a laser mouse these days?, 1600 sounds pretty good but I really have no clue about these things.
For the Xbox, your kinda stuck with the standard supplied controller, it's fairly precise, and buying a 3rd party console controller is usually a bad move - they just don't have the same quality. On the PC you can buy peripherals and gadgets till your blue in the face, and if your prepared to spend that extra on getting good stuff, then it'll be great quality.
For me though, the pinacle of console FPS has to be Halo, 2 player co-op with those massive controllers - I don't remember the last time a game hooked me like that, it was actually physically jaw dropping. IMO PC FPS games have a lot to compete with in Halo alone, the fun elements and co-op freedom is still un-matched. I mean, the first time you play Halo, you play it like no other FPS on PC or console, even though your health is very generously recharged, you still play it like it was your planet and life at stake - I REALLY got into Halo in case you can't tell (completed it 2 or 3 times on EACH difficulty over the years). Halo2 sucked in comparison if you ask me.

''Stick that in your text and scroll it!.''
SimSmall
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 12:18
Quote: "the pinacle of console FPS has to be Halo"


Halo on PC wasn't quite so good - no co-op that I hear mentioned, and I just couldn't aim for toffees. Single Player was great though.

In the old days of say '94, PCs had a huge factor that consoles have only recently got, that being multiplayer that's not split screen. For games like Descent, it was compulsory, since in pure keyboard mode, which I played in required like 25 - 30 buttons, you still don't really have that many buttons of gamepads even today, so to be sharing your keyboard with 3 other players would have been impossible.
A few years ago, I played TimeSplitters 2 on a friends console, and for one hated the dual-analog control sticks - couldn't remember which one moved and which aimed! Over-turning when aiming which has already been mentioned was another downside. As I'd played quite a bit of Tribes 2 and Swat 3 on the PC, I found it horrible, and even worse the old memories of split-screen returned.
He also showed my Splinter Cell. I couldn't believe how long it took to load -- and how smooth the progress bar was, amazingly it didn't even seem to be reading the disc, making me think it was all an elaborate hoax. That and the controller constantly vibrating in my hands, shaking my aim when I'm trying so hard to aim myself - I think I'm off consoles for life before I've even owned one.
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 12:34
I won't suggest Metroid on the NDS then .

Not many handhelds can do FPS right, but that's one glaring example of how it should be done.

A lot of people simply can't get on, just like a lot of people simply can't get into using the mouse to aim, or get motion sickness playing FPS altogether!. There's been a lot of evolving over the last decade, like Quake2 on the PSX, now I loved that game, played through it, played a hella lot of split screen - playing it these days though and I'm toast - I think that was due to myself being the only player that could move and aim properly, the controls were god-awful (Left trigger 1 to look up, right trigger 1 to look down, left trigger 2 to jump, right trigger 2 to run - FFS!). For me, the turning point was Quake3 and Unreal:Tourny on the Dreamcast - I always hated PS2 controllers, I know what you mean about getting confused. It's like the analogues are too far down, your thumbs trying to aim down there is just not comfortable.

The DC had a digital pad in just the right place, and an analogue movement pad in just the right place - and the controller was very comfortable. If not for the DC I don't think console FPS would have evolved so quickly - I'm glad M$ went large on those first xbox controllers, they could have gone small and useless, like the PS2 controller.

''Stick that in your text and scroll it!.''
BatVink
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Apr 2003
Location: Gods own County, UK
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 12:51
PC all the way for me. But then I prefer strategy games where keyboard is a more essential tool.

My son has a PS2, and I play now and then. But if you've played Quake on a PC and a console there is no competition whatsoever - it has to be PC!



indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 13:23
I have a playstation 1 but im guessing its..

instant satisfaction when you just whack a disk/cartridge in.

instant gratification when you just start playing the game.

no nagging pop ups or errors to do with spyware.

no nagging extra things to click or tweak just to play it.

lounge room politics vs computer room politics.

multiplayer or multiple players in the comfort of your lounge or game den

usually the size of the lounge room display is larger as well.

the speakers or sound system might be better in the lounge room as well.

keeps the kids off the computer so dad can download his interests.

or

the feel of a crappy moulded joystick whose actual stick has been replaced with a wobbly blob they
expect you to use.

the fact that you cant cheat as much on pcs

the fact that your home computer is a dog compared to the new game console.

your overweight and not married and addicted to coronas and cigarettes and have a nasty habbit of playing vice city in your jocks eww. not me

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 13:35 Edited at: 31st Oct 2006 13:38
I've only ever owned a mega drive 2 which I bought 2nd hand I think. When was that? About 12 years ago or so, I think. Not sure when they were around.

Apart from that I'm quite against consoles. They give you a lot of hardware for your money and the simplicity of them is cool, but I've not seen many games on them that have really appealed to me. It's only recently that the console game market seems to have diversified, as they've always seemed very pigeon holed to mindless games.

One of my pet hates with consoles is FPSs. There are loads on consoles, and the play like a bag of crap. The AI is either heavily dumbed down, or their is an auto-aim feature, because it's just not possible to control them well on console controllers. The whole joystick aim approach is annoying, and whenever I go round a mates house and am offered to play an FPS, I decline, because they're crap! The delay before an ememy shoots you on a console version compared to a PC version of a game is sometimes like 4 seconds compared to half a second on PC, just to compensate for the difficulty of aiming. Lame!

Also, £50 for a 360 game! 50 SMACKERS! PC games are pretty much exactly half the price. You basically get raped on console game prices.

But having said all that, if I had money to burn, I would buy one. I think they're great as social machines, with say 4 people on the couch playing Pro Evo. You cant get that on PC unless you have your own hyper LAN room, and even then you have to boot 4 PCs up and often own 4 copied of the game to run it on the LAN.

So, positives and negatives. I like the idea of the Wii with its clever controller. That might make FPSs really good.


Crazy Ninja
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2005
Location: Awesometon
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 14:24
i personally don't see why you guys have so much trouble with FPSs on consoles!(some of you that is) I and most of the people i know are decently good at using the analog sticks. but i can see that if you don't play consoles a lot then it might be hard since it takes some practice. That and i don't know if teens are just sometimes better at video games than adults, unless if those older people play the the games 24/7. Then again, what i just said could be completely moronic.

____ ____ ____ ___ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ ____
|___ |--< |--| /__ Y | \| | | \| ___| |--|
Bizar Guy
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Apr 2005
Location: Bostonland
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 17:43
What everyone is saying is that controling an fps with a gamepad is like trying to talk to someone by splashing them with water in morse code.

Metroid on the ds is the next best thing to a computer fps. It's one of the very few fps games I enjoy and one of the even fewer I'm good at.

Wii fps's will be good when they get rid of the stupid targeting box, and make it work more like a pc setup.

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 17:51
My mates are good at controlling FPSs with the analogue stick and infact when I played TimeSplitters on my mates PS2 a while back, I got fairly good at it. But the games themselves, from what I've seen, are really watered down to compensate. The response times of the AI seem a lot longer, and they miss a whole lot more when shooting at you, just to make up for the less precise analogue stick compared to the mouse.


SimSmall
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Aug 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 18:45
I reckon I'd be more forgiving of analog stick aiming if I played console FPS's first - as it happens, I entered the world of PC Descent, Tribes, Swat, Unreal Tournament and recently Quake. I wish I'd picked up Quake earlier, as I barely stop playing it.
Quake 4 on XBox 360, don't know how they'd manage that... as like UT I don't like using cycle weapon buttons; instead my left-hand fingers make a lightning fast movement as far over as the zero, before almost instantly returning to the movement keys.

But realistic AI that misses more frequently, doesn't sound bad - on pc games, it basically does a db 'point object'.. Never moves even 1 pixel too far, and does it instantly, not over a short period of time. Consoles MAy, (just may) win me over 1 day). Consoles may be leading the way in gaming technology currently, but PCs always start the technology push, really, consoles just upgrade to keep up with PCs. I believe the PC will always be more versatile, so I'm sticking by it...

and to go agsinst my own gaming habits... Have you ever seen anything like WoW on consoles? Personally I don't like the game, but millions do... If there is a console game like WoW out there... I've never heard of it, which quite clearly dictates its quality.
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 31st Oct 2006 23:12
I used to be in the camp of people who said FPS' don't and will never work on consoles. That was until I played Halo. Now if there's a choice, I'll buy the console version of my future FPS purchases, and that includes Halo 3, Fear, Prey, etc. In single-player mode I just prefer console controls, and YES you can do exact controlling with the console. It just takes practice, but then it becomes second nature

Bizar Guy
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Apr 2005
Location: Bostonland
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 00:36 Edited at: 1st Nov 2006 00:37
You must die now, Jeku! ...

um,

Well, yeah. I don't like the fps genere as a whole enough to learn it all over again with inadiquite console controls. I supose the best gaming option is to have a media pc in your living room hooked up to your tv, with a nice pad on you lap for your wireless mouse and keyboard.

Edit: exept for rts games. I think those are actualy better to play at a decktop.

_Nemesis_
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Nov 2003
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 19:00
Quote: "I find that if you've never purchased a game console, then you have a negative stigma and refuse to buy the hype. But if you've purchased one or two consoles in the past, you can see the benefits of owning them usually outweigh the detriments.
"

In my case, I totally disagree. I owned an N64 and a PSX before my friend gave me an old Xbox when he got a 360. I've no use for them. I got the N64 and the PSX because the games were unique, they were things you didn't tend to see on the PC and, well.. the controllers were funky. After the PSX, I've never bought a new console, there's nothing exiting in one and really, I can play all the games I want on my PC as quite often now, games come out for consoles and PC.

I'm never going to buy a console again, waste of money. I'd rather put my money towards a new graphics card, which will last me another 3 years for about a quarter of the price of a new console.

And in regards to FPS games: impossible on a console. I've got halo for my xbox and halo for my pc. It's so much easier to play as the xbox controller doesn't enable you to get the accuracy and speed that a keyboard and mouse combo does.

[url="http://www.devhat.net"]www.devhat.net[/url] :: Devhat IRC Network.
Current Project: ASP Content Management System
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 21:00
Quote: "And in regards to FPS games: impossible on a console."


Of course there will always be two sides to this argument. I enjoy FPS' on consoles immensely, as I would much rather be shooting it out on my nice TV with a great controller (360s of course).

RTS' are another genre that has been said will never work properly on a console.... that was until BFMEII was released on the 360. Quite possibly one of the top achievements this year, and the fact that EA spent years tuning the controls for a console. It actually works pretty good! I will still prefer to play RTS' on my laptop, but PC people should never say never

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 21:29
I'd say that the consoles are all dependant on the developer.
For example, 007 Nightfire... truely horrible FPS, but Killzone/Halo are very good.

Not because of the actual gameplay elements but 100% on the control systems. The same can be said about FPS on the PC as well, I can name a few real tragic PC FPS. This said most PC FPS use a known FPS-Engine, like Half-Life or Quake.

Intel Core 2 Duo E6400, 512MB DDR2 667MHz, ATi Radeon X1900 XT 256MB PCI-E, Windows Vista Business / XP Professional SP2
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 21:35
What's so good about Killzone? I never understood it's reputation.

Seems like Sony wanted a 'Halo Killer' so just picked a FPS and hyped it.

-= Out here in the fields, I fight for my meals =-
David R
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2003
Location: 3.14
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 21:51
Yeah, and what's with Killzone 2? It's got very very quiet as of late... me thinks that's either going to end up drastically crapper than it was made out to be *cough* not how the pre-renders looked *cough* or it'll just be vapour ware...

Krilik
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Mar 2006
Location: Arizona, USA
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 22:14
Quote: "BFMEII was released on the 360"

Sorry for the stupidity, but what is BFMEII? Haven't been keeping up with games as of late.
Quote: " What's so good about Killzone? I never understood it's reputation.

Seems like Sony wanted a 'Halo Killer' so just picked a FPS and hyped it."

What's so good about Halo? I never understood it's reputation either. Killzone was overrated for sure, but it's a cult hit.
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 22:41
Battle For Middle Earth II.

If you want to know what's good about Halo, read the Edge review. They don't use that zero key often.

-= Out here in the fields, I fight for my meals =-
PowerSoft
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Oct 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 22:53
I liked Nightfire controls on PS2,

The crazy
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jan 2005
Location: Behind you
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 23:28
Quote: "why do people purchase an Xbox360 over a new PC?
"


I got an xbox 360 AND a new computer

Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 1st Nov 2006 23:53
Ditto. And soon a Wii. It doesn't have to be black and white, dudes. You *are* allowed to enjoy both consoles and PCs

Dr Manette
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Jan 2006
Location: BioFox Games hq
Posted: 2nd Nov 2006 00:21
Amen to that.

Bio Fox...four guys, one computer, games like nobody's business. Join our forum: http://biofox.aceboard.com

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-17 23:52:21
Your offset time is: 2024-11-17 23:52:21