What kind of gamer are you?

[KingBran]

No Virtual Boy either, forgot that one, though a buddy of mine had it I think.

I know the SNES thing is a bit crazy but I was bitter after "hearing rumors" that it would be backwards compatible with my 100+ game NES library, and then I played NHL hockey on Genesis at a friends house and went the Genesis route

Genesis was a great system too! They had quite a few exclusive games that SNES didn't get that deserved more recognition than they got. My friend had one as well and I had SNES. We would swap systems every so often so it worked out well.

 

[The Nuge]

Am I the only one that strongly disagrees with this? I have NEVER thought to myself that a keyboard and mouse is a better control set-up for anything compared to a console controller (no matter what controller it is). I just can't get over how awkward and clunky it is. I'm surprised that more people don't see it this way and that I seem to be in the minority.

I'm the exact same. Clunky is a great word for it. Controllers just feel like such a natural extension of your body that keyboard and mouse doesn't make sense to me. I only ever play games like the sims and town of Salem on PC.


I've mostly just had whatever console I liked the most. I went NES>N64>PS2>PS3/360>PS4/XBone. I also had a WiiU because the wife thought she might like it, but I just couldn't find any games I like.

 

[Commander Clueless]

I assumed that was what he was talking about... the argument remains the same.

If you stuck a pair of people in a Quake 3 server and had one of them use a mouse + keyboard and one of them use a controller, the m+kb player would win a race around the map by a mile. Movement only, no shooting involved. If they were allowed to rocket jump, then the m+kb player would run ten laps around the map before the guy with a controller finished his first one. What it boils down to is most people aren't telepathic and need to look in the direction that they're moving in in order to move most effectively. So by being better able to change where you're looking, you are better able to move around.



A mouse can provide nearly as much of an advantage to movement as it does for aiming. The only reason most people don't notice this is because games are no longer built that way, and the reason games are no longer built this way is because they cater to the console market.

I agree the mouse control for the camera is far superior in all regards (I believe used the term "aiming", but didn't just mean aiming your gun ), but I was specifically talking about the ability to more precisely regulate your movement with the analog stick vs the keyboard keys.


Although, as you mentioned, the potential movement advantages to the mouse are not nearly as advantageous in modern games.


I find the camera controls so much nicer with the mouse that I can get frustrated with the camera on console sometimes.

 

[Unaffiliated]

FWIW the Source engine has a movement mechanic/exploit/whatever that I think would be near-impossible with a controller.

http://flafla2.github.io/2015/02/14/bunnyhop.html

 

[Devourers]

On the topic of specific genres on PC vs Console I'll give my personal breakdown.

Real Time Strategy - unplayable on console IMO. Even ones that find clever ways to make them more playable are simply far inferior than they would've been on PC. These types of games are designed with KB/M in mind and your speed and playability of the game is seriously hindered on a controller.

Turn Based Strategy - Playable on both. Have played X-Com on console and found it to be just as good. Since in these games you have the time to make your move and they've been optimized for use with a controller I see no real difference. I think Civ V and VI would do fine on a console.

Sim - It's just a vast term, but most of them I think would be fine on console. The obvious ones that just work no problem are farm sims (Stardew Valley), The Sims, Racing Sims (With a wheel, it's the same, without a wheel, I prefer controller vs KB/M), Building Sims (Cities Skylines) I haven't tried on console in a while, but I can't see it being too bad. Basically anything where speed doesn't become an issue like an RTS should be okay.

FPS - Vastly better on PC. Some games that have server based online use match making on console which just ruins it for me. KB/M is better to aim. Console is still playable, you're on an even playing field, I just much prefer PC.

3rd person shooter - See FPS, it's pretty similar IMO.

Obviously each genre depends on how well the devs optimize the game for one or the other, like Batman Arkham Knight could easily be better on PC where you have the choice of KB/M or controller, but it isn't due to the game being a bug ridden mess. It goes the other way too, with some games being so poorly optimized for console that they dip to single digit fps at times. (iirc this was happening with Dead Rising 3 on Xbox one)

For when I want to lay in bed and just play games console is awesome. Will never understand the whole #PCMR thing. I'm into high end PC gaming, when I build a rig I want the 1080Ti with 7700k etc. Overclock all the hardware, try to push it to its absolute limit etc. But consoles have their place too, for me graphics and performance aren't everything. Sometimes you just want to be able to lay in bed with a controller and play games. Although, having a mini-PC in my bedroom does sound like a lot of fun

 

[KingBran]

I think that's what made Halo and CoD so popular. They made FPS games work really well on consoles. Anyone can pick up Halo or CoD at a buddies house and sit on the couch and within 10 minutes they may not be the best player in a match but they can compete.

To me it's just about what is fun. Regardless of medium, graphics, time it takes to beat the game, difficulty... etc. Bottom line, is the game fun? Some people think its fun to play FPS or even strategy games on consoles (Red Alert 3 was a really fun game on Xbox in my opinion) some people will only play such games on PC. To each their own.