Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by nariusseldon

What's wrong with aim-assisting? It works beautifully. In fact, i put a console xbox style controller on my PC to play action games.

I'm sure it works fine, that's not really my objection to it.

The problem (for me) is that auto-aiming detracts from the challenge of an FPS. I don't know if it's a matter of preference or aptitude, but if you're used to playing a mouse-based FPS game to a high standard, then controllers just feel limited and clunky.

I don't find console FPS games to be any less challenging than PC fps games at all. The auto aim is pretty tame, and besides: How often do you actually die due to a lack of precision? In most cases I die due to a lack of reflex speed or strategic error. 

Well it's not really any more or less challenging, it's mostly the limited/clunkiness.

It's sort of like if you drove a sports car every day, then traded down for a cruddy beater.  They both get you places, but one is significantly more enjoyable.  It's because of the tighter feedback loop between input and output.

Put the tech issues to one side, even though PC's win hands down.

You are playing with a input system that does not have any more buttons than the number of fingers you have. No mouse and in most cases no joystick.

And this does not result in the game being dumbed down? Like I said though if they start using those mini keyboards as a game control, that would start to rebalance the issue.

---

Originally posted by Scot
Put the tech issues to one side, even though PC's win hands down.
You are playing with a input system that does not have any more buttons than the number of fingers you have. No mouse and in most cases no joystick.
And this does not result in the game being dumbed down? Like I said though if they start using those mini keyboards as a game control, that would start to rebalance the issue.

---

Keyboards are a non-issue. Consoles have had perfectly good keyboard support since the previous generation. I have always used a keyboard with my PS2 when playing Final Fantasy XI.

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

I'd like to see a well made AAA console MMO.

If only to annoy the elitist PC gamers.

The keyboard and mouse is still a dealbreaker for me though.

whats AAA mean?

---

Originally posted by Pinkerl

---

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

I'd like to see a well made AAA console MMO.
If only to annoy the elitist PC gamers.
The keyboard and mouse is still a dealbreaker for me though.

---

 
whats AAA mean?

---

Of high quality. You might avail yourself of a search engine before asking, however.

Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by nariusseldon

What's wrong with aim-assisting? It works beautifully. In fact, i put a console xbox style controller on my PC to play action games.

I'm sure it works fine, that's not really my objection to it.

The problem (for me) is that auto-aiming detracts from the challenge of an FPS. I don't know if it's a matter of preference or aptitude, but if you're used to playing a mouse-based FPS game to a high standard, then controllers just feel limited and clunky.

I don't find console FPS games to be any less challenging than PC fps games at all. The auto aim is pretty tame, and besides: How often do you actually die due to a lack of precision? In most cases I die due to a lack of reflex speed or strategic error. 

If we're talking FPS comparison between consoles and PC, this comment pretty much shows you've never done anything remotely competative.  The difference between the top skilled PC and console FPS gamers is night and day due to the far superior mouse aiming and reactions.  I used to FPS a lot on console (ranging from 64 through 360) and nothing can compare to the responsiveness and precision of a mouse.
 

To comment on the "PC elitism" mentioned, it's more along the lines that MMO's for consoles are seemingly far more restricted and must fit within certain guide lines graphically/technilogically.  Consoles provide limitations in a genre that is built upon "limitless" possibilities (exaggerating here but you get the point).

Originally posted by Angorim

Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by nariusseldon

What's wrong with aim-assisting? It works beautifully. In fact, i put a console xbox style controller on my PC to play action games.

I'm sure it works fine, that's not really my objection to it.

The problem (for me) is that auto-aiming detracts from the challenge of an FPS. I don't know if it's a matter of preference or aptitude, but if you're used to playing a mouse-based FPS game to a high standard, then controllers just feel limited and clunky.

I don't find console FPS games to be any less challenging than PC fps games at all. The auto aim is pretty tame, and besides: How often do you actually die due to a lack of precision? In most cases I die due to a lack of reflex speed or strategic error. 

If we're talking FPS comparison between consoles and PC, this comment pretty much shows you've never done anything remotely competative.  The difference between the top skilled PC and console FPS gamers is night and day due to the far superior mouse aiming and reactions.  I used to FPS a lot on console (ranging from 64 through 360) and nothing can compare to the responsiveness and precision of a mouse.
 

To comment on the "PC elitism" mentioned, it's more along the lines that MMO's for consoles are seemingly far more restricted and must fit within certain guide lines graphically/technilogically.  Consoles provide limitations in a genre that is built upon "limitless" possibilities (exaggerating here but you get the point).

The only advantage that the mouse gives is more precision, but from my experience precision isn't always a contributing factor to winning or losing.

There is simply only so much precise you can get. Just take a look at this

www.youtube.com/watch

They don't seem to miss this so call "Lack of responsiveness and precision" when they are no scoping headshots.

There have only been 2 console mmos released: Everquest Online Adventures and Final Fantasy Xi. To call them restricted based on 2 games is just silly, especialy as Final Fantasy XI, a Playstation 2 games, had better graphics than PC MMORPGS when it was first released, better than games such as Everquest, Dark Age of Camelot and Asherons Call.

There are very, very few mmorpgs released nowadays that are built for high end pc's. most want to appeal to mid end pcs as well.

I don't think people are complaining about the graphics available to a console mmo, but rather the amount of inpu options of a console controller vs a keyboard/mouse combination.

Many developers who are working on cross platform PC/Console mmos keep repeating phrases like "you have to keep both platforms in mind when developing the game".  It really sounds like the console has put some limitations on what they can create. 

I'm not sure I would call it dumbing down gameplay.  Maybe, maybe not.

Originally posted by fennec12

I don't like picture 31:

They are saying that since the PS3 is harder to code to, they should actualy start with that, and then migrate the PS3 code to X360... That means their MMO is tailored to PS3, and ported to 360, so we can expect a "not so great" version on X360. (take that 360 fanboys)

And are they actualy saying that Blu-ray is worse than dvd?? Guess it must be load/seek times or something like that... (take that PS3 fanboys)

I am eagerly waiting for the first "real" MMO's to hit the consoles in the next year or two. Just hope there are a few good titles among them, because I realy hate sitting bent over the pc/laptop. Much better to sit in the couch with a controler. And no, a laptop in the couch is NOT the same, because it fries my "very very very private area". Not good...

lol... know why they call it an xbox 360? 

because you turn 360 degrees, and walk away lololol!one11i!!

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

I'd like to see a well made AAA console MMO.

If only to annoy the elitist PC gamers.

The keyboard and mouse is still a dealbreaker for me though.

 Use voice chat. Problem solved. If console FPS can be good, without a mouse, a console MMO can be good too.

It's not a communication issue.

It's more a case of just not liking the lack of responsiveness in controllers. I don't even play console FPS games anymore since they are all so dependent on aim-assisting.

I have extremely good hand-eye coordination and manual dexterity which is something that really shows through in FPS games on the PC because the mouse can accommodate it. Controllers just can't; I feel like I'm playing underwater and waiting for the controller to catch up.

Take your pick.

Originally posted by plaguess

Champions Online shows why porting an MMO to a console is a bad idea. Because of the limitations of a console, the devs for champions (and age of conan) had to put in mirrored instancing (shards) in their game design.

so right off the bat, there is your proof that console mmo limits development options.

And I disagree with Turbine on the future of mmo's being console.

 

What limitations? Not having to develop for billions of configurations of hardware? Developing for a known set of features and bandwidth? Developing for a huge market penetration?

Or, are you referring to controllers? Because uh, all recent consoles support them, ITS THE GAMES that need to.

The reason those games use instances HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH CONSOLES.

The reality is, the computing power of the newer consoles will out perform most of the people here's computers.

Originally posted by silkakc

My daughter is gonna freak if the rumor holds true...that it's a Harry Potter MMO console game.

And if it is a HPotter game, Turbine is gonna rake in friggin MILLIONS . Time Warner won't scrimp on advertising and that's who they are working in conjunction with with this future MMO.

I hope it comes before all the Potter movies are done! Gotta capitalize on the frenzy:)

I will buy a 360 for this

Originally posted by Swoogie

Originally posted by silkakc

My daughter is gonna freak if the rumor holds true...that it's a Harry Potter MMO console game.

And if it is a HPotter game, Turbine is gonna rake in friggin MILLIONS . Time Warner won't scrimp on advertising and that's who they are working in conjunction with with this future MMO.

I hope it comes before all the Potter movies are done! Gotta capitalize on the frenzy:)

 

I will buy a 360 for this

I think this is the main issue here, not the controllers, as you can have mouse and keyboard for the console.

IF they don't put automated stuff to make things easier for the people not using mouse and keyboard. Which is very possible now that I think about it.

Anyway, imagining an MMO just similar to AAA MMO PC,  if you don't own a console already (I don't) you have to buy the console + controllers + cables +  memory card + online service + some other random shit, to play an MMO. A big toll to pay for the pure Pc gamers.

Originally posted by altairzq

Originally posted by Swoogie

Originally posted by silkakc

My daughter is gonna freak if the rumor holds true...that it's a Harry Potter MMO console game.

And if it is a HPotter game, Turbine is gonna rake in friggin MILLIONS . Time Warner won't scrimp on advertising and that's who they are working in conjunction with with this future MMO.

I hope it comes before all the Potter movies are done! Gotta capitalize on the frenzy:)

 

I will buy a 360 for this

 

I think this is the main issue here, not the controllers, as you can have mouse and keyboard for the console.

IF they don't put automated stuff to make things easier for the people not using mouse and keyboard. Which is very possible now that I think about it.

Anyway, imagining an MMO just similar to AAA MMO PC,  if you don't own a console already (I don't) you have to buy the console + controllers + cables +  memory card + online service + some other random shit, to play an MMO. A big toll to pay for the pure Pc gamers.

Just buy a PS3. It comes with the controller, the network is free (unlike 360) and there is no such thing as a memory card anymore, its called a hard drive.

$299 and your ready.

Where the xbox is 299 + wireless adapter + network fee + giant fisher price controller.

Console MMOs would be fine with me, youd get:

1. less hacking
2. less bugs and crashes due to common operating environment
3. can play on your couch =)

Other than that there really would not be much of a difference.

It's not like the whole MMO is gonna be on 1 DVD so it would have to be downloaded along with updates and expansions, the only thing limiting you there is the size of your replacable HDD.  You could still use a keyboard and mouse, although even that would not be required, a cleverly designed UI could make use of even just a standard controller, except for text chat.  Latest gen consoles have good enough graphics to be viable platforms for MMOs. 

For someone like me who values gameplay over graphics, cannot tolerate cheaters, and would be right at home with a ps3 controller, console MMOs might actually be an improvement.

Consoles are becoming more like PC’s. With that is an up and downside. We now have consoles with keyboards. But they also increasingly have hacks and bugs. What happened to the PC happened to the consoles once they went online. You went from a game being launched on a disk and it had to be perfect, no chance of an update unless the company was happy to issue every buyer with a replacement. Now virtually no game, PC or console is released in its finished state. They all need to be patched online.

So becoming more like a PC is not always an advantage. All we need for competition is two formats; PC plus one console would be fine, it is the multiply console format which has fractured gaming and causes so many delay and porting issues.
 

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Originally posted by nariusseldon

What's wrong with aim-assisting? It works beautifully. In fact, i put a console xbox style controller on my PC to play action games.

I'm sure it works fine, that's not really my objection to it.

The problem (for me) is that auto-aiming detracts from the challenge of an FPS. I don't know if it's a matter of preference or aptitude, but if you're used to playing a mouse-based FPS game to a high standard, then controllers just feel limited and clunky.

I don't find console FPS games to be any less challenging than PC fps games at all. The auto aim is pretty tame, and besides: How often do you actually die due to a lack of precision? In most cases I die due to a lack of reflex speed or strategic error. 

 

Well it's not really any more or less challenging, it's mostly the limited/clunkiness.

It's sort of like if you drove a sports car every day, then traded down for a cruddy beater.  They both get you places, but one is significantly more enjoyable.  It's because of the tighter feedback loop between input and output.

First game i bought for my PS3 was The Orange Box. I do not see the "clunkiness"  you speak of.  The controls for Half-Life 2 are very smooth to me.