14 gaming myths exposed... sorta

While I agree that FPS games can be played on consoles, the only truly way to enjoy the games are on a PC's keyboard/mouse combo.

I've played FPS with controllers all my life and never once wanted to use a crutch, oh I mean keyboard and mouse. Key/Mouse is fake and is as close to cheating in an FPS as you can get. It's simply NOT REAL, you can't pivot and shoot like that in real life. This debate has been going on for a long time and with the 360 and PC gaming coming together it is going to be interesting to see how the 2 play. So Jon your only true way to play FPS is a bunch of crap..

"NEVER buy retail warranties"
Bull. That should read "Never buy retail warranties, unless it's a product from a manufacturer that has a known history of defects."

You can be sure that I jumped at the chance to insure my PS3 when I bought it. Having to buy three PS2s throughout the console's life taught me all I needed to know about Sony's love of faulty laser pickups.

Sony's not alone, though. Every time I perceive even the slightest glitch while playing my 360 I'm convinced that I'm going to find the dreaded red ring 'o death.

So in conclusion, getting a warranty for a game or a pack of batteries is foolish. A warranty for an expensive piece of electronics that has features that are known to wear out over time? Not so much.

Jon, let me introduce you to 'The Wii'.

Someone at Gaming For Dummies, er, GamePro must be smoking the crack if they think ANYONE believes that third-party controllers are as good as the real things. The last time that was actually the case was back in the early 1980's, when ALL game controllers sucked and it was a quest of epic proportions to find the one that sucked the least.

JR

I also don't like playing FPS on the PC. I would much prefer us a controller than a keyboard / mouse!

Jon, the PC elitist, to the rescue!!

You dual analog people are kidding yourselves.

While I'm sure you are "good" at using dual analogs in FPS games, a keyboard/mouse is the most precise you will ever get.

Razer, you just suck at using it is all. Playing FPS has absolutely nothing to do with realism.

boo mouse/keyboard yay controller

Playing a FPS is about realism if thats why you're playing it.

Razer: Games are inherently fake.
As if aiming with thumbsticks is more realistic. Right.

Hmm... keyboard and mouse is cheating cause its not real. That's a new one. Razer, I didn't know that using two analog sticks was the realistic way to play an fps. Its not the control medium that makes a game realistic, its the game design. Can you jump and snipe at the same time? If so, then the game design is flawed in my opinion. This is regardless of controller. The only system that may have a realistic controller for FPS is the Wii. Then again, if you're playing a game like unreal tournament one isn't too concerned about realism.

The article citing Shadowrun as an example is just stupid. The devs already stated that they are balancing the game by giving console owners auto aim. This game in no way proves that gamepad control is equal to mouse/keyboard.

Listen, I enjoy playing my 360. I enjoy GoW on it. The gamepad isn't a worthless way to play fps games. I would rather play on the computer though as I really do prefer my mouse setup. Not only is aiming more enjoyable but zoom on scopes and binoculars is also more intuitive with a mouse wheel.

"Key/Mouse is fake and is as close to cheating in an FPS as you can get. It's simply NOT REAL, you can't pivot and shoot like that in real life."

News flash: you're playing a game. These aren't meant to be simulations. Unless you agree with Jack Thompson's point of view of FPS games being "murder simulators", which is the only other position you can take. They're either simulators or they aren't.

If you accept the premise that they're games (and you should), then the point is what's the most *fun*, not what's the most realistic. And the key/mouse combo offers a lot more precise, quicker control.

It's akin to arguing that using an arcade stick for a fighting game isn't as "realistic" as using a gamepad because you can move too fast. It's a ridiculous argument, both because these games have got basically nothing to do with realism and because the whole genre of the fighting game was *built* around the control of an arcade stick. Same with fps's and the key/mouse combo. They were quite literally made for each other.

Stop being tools and comment on the rest of the Article.

I for one am glad Gamepro isn't putting out the usual boring (for lack of a better word) crap that I can find more comprehensive coverage on in EGM.

As a very uneducated gamer when it comes to HD gaming, I found this to be very helpful in my quest for Hi-Def gaming, and their tip on the video Cards have just shaved off 200 dollars from my build a PC budget.

Of course any real gamer knows buying 3rd party controllers is crap.

I'm sorry but that article loses credibility when they tried to compare to thumbsticks to a mouse and keyboard. You can't beat a mouse and keyboard and sticky aiming is just flat out stupid. Kinda ruins the experience and it takes less skill. Case in point, Counter Strike for PC and Counter Strike for Xbox. Also, they tried the counsole/PC crossover with Quake on the Dreamcast but the Dreamcast couldn't compare.

@7 You're wrong about the realism. The mouse is clearly the fastest for for aiming accurately, but it is also clearly the least realistic method other than maybe using the stylus on the DS. A mouse is pojnt-n-click. The cursor stays where you put it. An analog stick require you to hold your aim steady. No, the mechanics of the aiming aren't the same as aiming a real gun, but the results are closer to realistic than a mouse.

IMO, I prefer a mouse for fast paced FPS multiplayer (i.e. Unreal Tournament/UT). As a result, if I'm interested in getting involved with serious FPS multiplayer (i.e. clans) I always go with the PC. But I hold no illusions that it's realistic, it's just fast.

But the majority of my single player/co-op FPS gaming is done on consoles because I just like gaming on consoles. I like sitting in my recliner (my PC in in my office), I like Live, and that's where most of my friends are. Dual anlog works perfectly fine, especially for slower paced/tactical shooters. It takes more skill to be accurate, but so what?

So, people are PC elitists simply because they prefer a superior control scheme? And don't even try giving the Wii Remote argument, as the Wii Remote is far less precise than a mouse. People using dual analogs or a Wii Remote will never be able to shoot and dodge with the same level of skill that a person using a mouse and keyboard will. Really, there isn't anything 'elite' about it. I can play singler-player games with a controller without any problems, but I don't see how anyone can claim to be all that great with dual analogs and NOT use a sticky cursor.

By the way, GamePro's argument against VGA isn't really all that valid, as they're looking at it from the standpoint that a conversion is taking place. If you're using a PC monitor, rather than a television, then VGA should look as good as or better than component.

@15

In most console FPS the aim assists are disabled in online play. I think you'll find that you still run into some people with amazingly quick aiming abilities. It's harder to do, but people do it.

I think the wii is going to reign supreme in the fps controlls. I dont play many pc games my logic is that games should be played on consoles. So my opinion might be a little biased.

@Vidikron

Nonetheless, they'll never be as good as an experienced mouse and keyboard user. And controller users with the level of skill that you're referring to are few and far between.

AnimalTaglits: The dreamcast version was excellent (when you used the DC Keyboard and mouse.)
:)

Also, for the record, the article is basically just saying PCs aren't the only place for good FPS games. Which is true. The millions playng FPS happily on consoles prove this. There is really is no debate had here... they clearly state the mouse is more accurate.

I use to be a pc fps gamer (back when my pc was good to run all the games lol) and now im on the 360. let me say in no way is the mouse more "percise" or "accurate" then the controller. The thing is when playing games on the pc with a mouse, you are able to do complete 180 degree turns and aim to any position on the map instantly. Where with a controller, theres a bit of "getting there" so to speak. You can be a beast with the controller and just as percise an accurate as the mouse, its just the delay will cause you to lose (the game does not allow you to turn 180 degrees). If they started making console games where it was just like the pc with super ultra sensitivty (think halo 2 sensitivity 10 x 1000), then mouse and controller would be equels. If you use a 360 controller on the pc, and have proper drivers and software to make turning instant like with a mouse, you can become as good as the mouse player. Its gonna be a hell of a lot harder because your sensitivity is through the roof, but if you can master it (if thats even humanly possilble lol), then you can take on mouse players.

Im tired of all the endless chatter about mouse beingmore percise. Get the fact... its all game design based on the unit your using.

@17

I agree. I'm just disputing the claims that it's M/KB or nothing. Dual analog works fine. It's sort of like debating using a controller for a driving game or a steering wheel. The wheel is the best, but a controller is fine in most circumstances.

Plus, as I just stated, the accuracy/speed of each really wasn't the point of the article.

Wow, just because I prefer a more intuitive control method I am now a PC elitist. I game my whole life and prefer console joypads for almost every game, except FPS. Just because I love to play my FPS on keyboard/mouse doesn't make me an elitist.

And what a dumb arguement about it being less 'real'. Gaming isn't about realism. Show me a real life weapon where you actually aim with an analog stick?

@Daniel

On Dreamcast, Quake III Arena is much more playable with a standard controller than Unreal Tournmanet is. My roommate and I were playing it, and we were actually pretty evenly matched when we were both using controllers. At one point, though, he simply couldn't take it anymore, so he switched to mouse and keyboard, and he wiped the floor with me.

The only complaint that I have about the Dreamcast mouse is that it's a ball mouse, rather than an optical mouse. And the keyboard is kinda cheap-ish in terms of how it feels. Otherwise, it was cool being able to use a mouse and keyboard.

Honestly, I really only use the keyboard for The Typing of the Dead, though.

Vidikron, a response to your posts. The mouse aiming realism issue is really a game design issue. Sure with the mouse you can point and click but you basically do the same thing with a gun, point and click. What happens after you click is up to the game designer. An unrealistic game will allow your reticle to stay where you had it placed before shooting. A realistic game will move your reticle so you have to constantly re-aim. Just like with a real gun. I'd argue that having the constant spring tension pushing against your thumb while aiming on a gamepad analog stick is less realistic. When I have gone to the shooting range, I never experienced an external force trying to recenter my gun.

In response to your post @16, I agree there are people who do amazing things with analog sticks when it comes to aiming. I never underestimate what people can do when it comes to hand-eye coordination. I still think that the majority of them would be better on a mouse though.

HD CRT FTW

"Everybody loves ram"

Yeah, good job with that picture, considering thats a modchip for xbox.

Keyboard & mouse is the clear winner. Opinions aside -
You have access to 5 buttons alone with one hand, (realistically) up to 4 using a mouse.
You're lucky if you can use 6. I mean using just 2 thumbs to operate analogue thumbsticks AND the face buttons? You're kidding... right? Plus you get speed and precision with mouse.

It's all down to personal preference. K&M is better. I spend as much time on my PC FPS games as I do on my Wii and DS so I'm not slap bang on any side.

@mike

It isn't a matter of being able to spin 180 degrees. If your opponent isn't directly behind you, there's really very little that a spin-180-degrees button is going to do for you. You'll still have to make adjustments that will cause you to lag behind anyone using a mouse as far as performance in concerned.

@Vidikron

I agree. Dual analogs are a solid means of playing FPS games, but they're definitely not something that should be used if mouse and keyboard is an option. It's very obvious that controllers are inferior, as "balancing" Shadowrun involves giving controller users a sticky cursor. That sounds like a pretty serious means of "balancing" a game.

@jay

My roommate still uses the arrow keys to move while playing FPS games on his PC. I've always been a WASD person, myself. You make an excellent point in terms of the sheer level of control that you have with a mouse and keyboard, as it's far easier to perform a wide variety of commands, since you're using much, much more of each hand to split up the workload.

i laugh my arse off whenever i hear people talk about skills and games number 13. woo you can perform the range of movement designed to be in the game by the dev. can i sleep with you now?

Sitting at a mouse and keyboard while playing a game makes me wonder if I want to work on my resume or shoot someone in the head. In other words, it takes me out of it. If you guys prefer kb & m, then thats cool, I agree that its faster, superior, whatever. But I prefer dual analog, however inferior it is. Now I expect the usual response that I am retarded or something along those lines, so go ahead, wont hurt my feelings in the least.

I'm not a big fan of WASD but I can enjoy shooters on either platform. The real issue out of this article is what they say about extended warranties. Hardware failures are slim? Maybe on their planet. Let us not forget that only recently did Microsoft increase their warranty on the 360 from 3 months to 1 year. And this may not be a hardware issue per se, but I have seen multiple PS3 demo machines just sitting there after locking up.

Maybe the majority of people with PS3's and 360's experience no trouble at all. I can't speak for them. All I know is that I get disc read errors on my 360 at least twice a week, so you better believe I'm going to return it at some point. And with my extended warranty, I should just be able to walk in and exchange it as opposed to shipping it off to MS and waiting oh so patiently for it to return.

Unless you're buying a toaster or something that you KNOW has a good reputation and warranty, I highly recommend service plans. They're usually not as limited as manufacturer warranties and you may or may not need them. That's the point. They're insurance. Insurance policies generally seem like a waste of money until something bad happens. It's really all about risk and how much you're willing to gamble.

Developers need to get off of their butts and turn the Wiimote into the ultimate FPS controller. Only then will we have a control scheme that could possibly beat the legendary keyboard/mouse.

Seriously, stop giving this horrible site credit for anything. The story is full of no-brainers trying to masquerade as legitimate journalism. Even worse, all of the HDTV-related info is culled directly from Wikipedia. If this is what passes as games journalism these days, the industry is in serious trouble.

@ #3

""I've played FPS with controllers all my life and never once wanted to use a crutch, oh I mean keyboard and mouse. Key/Mouse is fake and is as close to cheating in an FPS as you can get. It's simply NOT REAL, you can't pivot and shoot like that in real life. This debate has been going on for a long time and with the 360 and PC gaming coming together it is going to be interesting to see how the 2 play. So Jon your only true way to play FPS is a bunch of crap..""

For those arguing that in real life, you can't instantly turn 180deg, that's true. But it's not a concern of the mouse/kb. Game devs could easily put a cap on how fast you can spin. Ie, if u spin the mouse even on ultra-sensitive setting, it would still take about .75 to 1s to fully turn 180deg. You would be able to go from looking straight to shooting a target 50m to the left and 20m high up b/c in 'real life', one would just have to lift their arms rather than turning their whole bodies

The key to the "realism" of FPS controls depends on if the game has crosshairs or not. Tripwire's Red Orchestra doesn't, and it's the most realistic FPS on the market today.

IMO the biggest edge keyboard/mouse has over dual analog thumbsticks is that keyboard/mouse measures acceleration in a more logical manner. Acceleration in thumbsticks is measured by how far the thumbstick is pushed in a certain direction which I don't like.

Keyboard and mouse is for browsing web pages. You can only aim faster on PC if the game allows it. If the game speed is around the same as Halo 2 I really don't see the advantage. The Xbox 1 controller was flawed for FPS because in Halo 2 you had to release the right analog to melee with B. However on the 360 with 4 shoulder buttons there should be no need to release the analogs.

Any sniper in Halo 2 with a legitimate rank of 32 and above can tell you that there is no way to aim faster unless the game is naturally faster. Can't wait to hear the verdict on Shadowrun.

Keyboard and mouse is for browsing web pages. You can only aim faster on PC if the game allows it. If the game speed is around the same as Halo 2 I really don't see the advantage. The Xbox 1 controller was flawed for FPS because in Halo 2 you had to release the right analog to melee with B. However on the 360 with 4 shoulder buttons there should be no need to release the analogs.

Any sniper in Halo 2 with a legitimate rank of 32 and above can tell you that there is no way to aim faster unless the game is naturally faster. Can't wait to hear the verdict on Shadowrun.

MYTH: Porn will settle the next-gen DVD war.

Puhh-lease. As important as adult films were in trailblazing the home videocassette movement in the 70s and 80s, porn is hardly a kingmaker. In fact, if you judge by recent sales data showing Blu-ray soaring ahead of HD-DVD, it looks like video game systems like the PlayStation 3 will do more to settle the next-gen DVD war than mere smut.

I have to disagree here.

Fact: Porn offered video on demand before anyone else.

Fact: UMD sales soared after the PSP. Soaring sales does not equal sustained sales.

Really, I don't think anyone outside of hardcore videophiles even cares about HD-DVD or Bluray. I personally could care less.

Wow, a GamePro articles that I actually agree with... But I also agree with you kevenski. If there's no conversion, VGA is equal/better than component.

"So, people are PC elitists simply because they prefer a superior control scheme? And don't even try giving the Wii Remote argument, as the Wii Remote is far less precise than a mouse."

Way to measure a control scheme that's been established for YEARS versus something have only a couple month's experience with. :P

Anyways, maybe it's less accurate more because of the human element more than ever. You get excited, your hand shakes, you're breathing hard, etc.. Or you just forgot to calibrate the controller before playing the game.

In defense of the dual-analogue fans, they don't mean "more real", they mean that mouse-ing over an enemy and clicking makes it much easier. The same can be said for the DS. Obviously the games that are made for specifically console and PC are adapted to consider the respective control scheme, so the points on both sides are moot.

That'd be funny if there was a gun shaped like a keyboard-mouse combo. Heh.

Okay, seriously. If you're playing the game and having fun, who cares how you do it? Is playing DJ Max Portable somehow the "cheater" way of playing a game like Beatmania just because you don't have the turntables and such?

Just play the games for crying out loud.

Good god. Where do they get their info?
1) true enough for the most part, but not always. Logitech makes some equally good controlers for example
2)CRT typically display 480i, 480p, and 1080i. Games are render in 720p most often. LCD and plasma displays are normally 720p native. Sure they have better PQ when adjusted properly, but their native resolutions make them suffer for gaming.
3)True enough and why 2 is false.
4)There is alot more to a system than memory for sure. Texture size or no we always had a easier time squeezing performance out of the xbox than the ps2.
5)Absolutely!1080p is a waste right now for games at least.
6)Maybe not, but dont underestimate the effect porn has on sales.
7)Only good place. I suppose what you define good as. There is little doubt the PC is a BETTER place to play shooters. Much more massive (and free) multiplayer and better controls. Not to even get into the hardware issues...
8)True. Extended warrenties are generally a bad idea.
9)true. It can handle 1080p. The question is why bother.
10)true. QA codes.
11) False. It comes down to how fast you want to move. Wired controlers can poll the USB port much more often than wireless. That can be several additional MS of lag. Also Wireless tends to max out its move rate quickly if you use large movements while playing (like a couple feet) People who perfer to use low dpi mice should stay away from wireless.
12)Sorta. A sub $200 video card wont let you turn on all the options with AA at any real resolution. I guess if you're happy with less detail, or gaming in 1024x768.....
13)true. How did even get to be a rumor? s-video sheesh.
14)Actually this one is true. VGA can typically handle a higher bandwidth than you component connection can. For 720p it doesnt make a difference, but at 1080p alot of TV's will refuse the signal over component, and accept it over VGA.

If you are buying a 360, definately get the extended warranty. I have gone through one already, and I didn't have to wait for a box, then wait for it to be fixed. I simply took it to the store and swapped it out for a new one to be up and playing again the same night. Half the people I know with 360s have had them die. I know people on here will doubt that or say it's an isolated case, but it will happen to you or someone you know soon enough. I guarantee it (and yes, mine is VERY well ventilated and not placed on carpeting or any other stupid crap).

I can't believe there is still an argument about mouse/keyboard versus analog sticks. It is no contest: the mouse/keyboard is 100% better.

The reason why is because of the type of movement required to use them. A mouse uses absolute adjustments - if I move my hand 3 inches to the left, my character will swing his view around a known number of degrees. It doesn't matter how fast I do it, one movement on the mouse corresponds to one movement in the game, it is a direct translation.

With a controller on the other hand, the movement is not a translation, it is a function of how far you tilt the stick, and how long you hold it there. Not only are you relying on the accuracy of your thumb (I believe the wrist is far more accurate, though I can't support that) but also on your ability to get the timing correct.

For precise aiming, the direct translation will always beat having to combing slight movements with timing. This doesn't even mention the fact that the analog stick can only move your view as fast as a full tilt of the stick will allow, where a mouse can move as fast as your wrist.

Have you ever tried to use one of those little red nipples that come on IBM laptops? Those are bad pointing devices compared to mice for the exact same reason.

The whole PC/console FPS argument is flawed on both sides. I will deconstruct the two main arguments easily.

Console is more realistic: You could program a PC game to only allow you to turn up to a certain speed. You could have crosshairs that open up so when you quick aim you have to wait a second for them to close back up to shoot accurately. This is done on many console and some PC games already.

PC is faster: PC is faster for a 1:1 gotta put your crosshairs on the target control scheme. But that doesn't make it more fun, necessarily. It just makes it different. So many PC elitists come in and say, "you are an idiot, PC is clearly faster". Nobody is really arguing that it isn't. It is just that some people don't see faster and easier as the most important thing.

Some people will naturally prefer different schemes. I like analogs and mouse both, but prefer analogs. I could go into reasons why, but the bottom line is that I just enjoy it more. It is a more comfortable experience.

The only people that are "wrong" are the ass clowns that try to say "you have to be stupid to prefer the scheme that I don't like." Then you are a moron. I think that my favorite current shooters, Gears of War and Rainbow six vegas, would not work very well on a PC. I also think UT 2007 won't be nearly as good on console as PC. If a game is built on having to aim really fast, then PC is the way to go. Otherwise, console imo.