Keyboard&Mouse vs. Console Gamepad

[SecondTalon]

Carrying on from the Halo thread....

Keyboard and Mouse is an unbeatable combo. The precision that a mouse gives you due to use of your entire hand vs. a single thumb on an analog stick is.. well, unbeatable.

In my personal experience, I know of plenty of folks who've never really played a console FPS, so.. they don't count. Myself, I played through Halo with a friend over the course of two or three nights on the old style giant X-Box controllers. While I got pretty good towards the end of that, I still felt slow and unwieldy. I also don't recall if there are ways to adjust the stick's sensitivity like you can with a mouse, so I really can't weigh in on this.

I know several folks who have played FPS games on both consoles and on computers, and while they are excellent with the joystick skillz, they lament the lack of keyboard & mouse.

I know of several people who have only played console FPS games, and only occasionally have delved into the computer keyboard & mouse side, usually giving up as they just can't seem to get the hang of it.

I know of no one who plays both console and computer FPS games who prefers a gamepad over a keyboard & mouse. If there's anyone here, I'm interested in knowing why you prefer the analog sticks over a mouse and WASD.

[JayDee]

I had such fond memories of the controls from Goldeneye / Perfect Dark. Then I tried to play them again last year. Could not remember, could not figure out. I'm sure I could wrestle with it and learn again for a couple of hours, but screw that.

I went back to Thief 2 / System Shock 2 and had no loss of ability with the keyboard / mouse combo. This would be the more intuitive combination then.

That said, I'm playing Ultima Underworld and System Shock again, and I have no trouble adjusting to mouse and keyboard with no mouselook. I'm also curious to see how keypad + stylus feels on the DS.

[CrackTheSky]

I had such fond memories of the controls from Goldeneye / Perfect Dark. Then I tried to play them again last year. Could not remember, could not figure out. I'm sure I could wrestle with it and learn again for a couple of hours, but screw that.

This happened to me as well. It's one of the biggest reasons I just can't and don't play console FPSes. I'm not very good at video games to begin with, but trying to be quick and accurate with a controller just is not possiblefor me, period. Console FPSes just aren't any fun.

[zenten]

For a FPS or an RTS, you're right. Most other games though work better with a Gamepad.

And of course everything works better with a Wiimote

[SecondTalon]

Really? Baldur's Gate, Master of Orion, and Minesweeper are better with a gamepad?

I think it's a little larger than just FPS and RTS... throwing out the games that don't allow you the option of using a gamepad (the three I mentioned), the games that work better with a gamepad are platformers or console ports. And even then, some console ports work better with Keyboard and Mouse.

[socynicalsohip]

I agree that for FPS on PC that mouse and keyboard is better.....

But I prefer the console experience of my huge HD screen, immersive sound from my awesome soundsystem all experienced from the the comfort of my huge comfy couch hunched over either my Dualshock3 or Xbox360 controller. I spend enough hours in the office using the mouse and keyboard double team at my desk; the last thing i want to do is assume the position for my lesiure pursuits. [ooo errr missus].....

[flame] That and PC games are a big pile of poo anyhow [/flame]

[aion7]

The only non-PC fps' that I played in any large amount are Metroid Prime Hunters, Metroid Prime 3: Corruption and Halo and Halo 2 with friends. I'll always be better with PC controls. I tried playing Halo 3 at a party a while ago, and the controls did not work for me. I lost about 25 to 3 against someone who isn't that good. If we had been playing Team Fortress 2, or even a PC FPS that I had never played before, I would have beat everyone by a large margin, but it might just be whatever you're used to.

[SecondTalon]

But I prefer the console experience of my huge HD screen, immersive sound from my awesome soundsystem all experienced from the the comfort of my huge comfy couch hunched over either my Dualshock3 or Xbox360 controller. I spend enough hours in the office using the mouse and keyboard double team at my desk; the last thing i want to do is assume the position for my lesiure pursuits. [ooo errr missus].....

Wireless keyboard and mouse, some sort of stiff article to place them on (like a board) on your lap, most HD TV's I've seen have multiple video inputs.....

/just sayin'

[socynicalsohip]

I know we have a Windows Media Centre set up with that config too with a wireless mouse+keyboard [which I prefer to hide as I'd loathe my living room setup to looking anything like a workstation]. Additionally having a board for the purpose of gaming in situe strikes me as tragic, don't get me wrong i'm a geek but please.

Gamepads represent immediate gratisfaction[sic] to me, as opposed to keyboards which remind me of terminal interfaces and the windows explorer shell.

[pieaholicx]

Mouse & keyboard is my preferred choice for FPSs. My experience with console FPSs is that the controls with dual analogs isn't very well thought out. For example, the fact that one stick only controls movement, while the other controls your view is very hard to play (at least to me). While this does make it easier to look up and left at the same time, for the most part I won't be looking vertically, which makes turning against my natural instincts.

[cypherspace]

There's a big difference between "more accurate" and "better". For the purposes of aiming, a mouse is far more accurate than a joypad, of course. That doesn't necessarily make it better. It's funny that no mouse/keyboard users comment on the relative accuracy of the keyboard for movement. WASD is a digital movement system and a joypad's analogue, so it's more accurate. Again, that doesn't necessarily make it better.

But I prefer the console experience of my huge HD screen, immersive sound from my awesome soundsystem all experienced from the the comfort of my huge comfy couch hunched over either my Dualshock3 or Xbox360 controller. I spend enough hours in the office using the mouse and keyboard double team at my desk; the last thing i want to do is assume the position for my lesiure pursuits. [ooo errr missus].....

Wireless keyboard and mouse, some sort of stiff article to place them on (like a board) on your lap, most HD TV's I've seen have multiple video inputs.....

/just sayin'

Sure, or I could just pick up a joypad. Wow, how easy was that? For me, the difference is barely noticeable in most games. I've played through HL2 with both keyboard and mouse and a joypad, and had just as much fun both times, and never missed the relative accuracy of the mouse.

[MFHodge]

It's funny that no mouse/keyboard users comment on the relative accuracy of the keyboard for movement. WASD is a digital movement system and a joypad's analogue, so it's more accurate.

Good point. So do you think that the best overall might be something like a mouse + Wii nunchuck? I could get on board with that.

[SecondTalon]

It's funny that no mouse/keyboard users comment on the relative accuracy of the keyboard for movement. WASD is a digital movement system and a joypad's analogue, so it's more accurate.

Could be because movement in your average FPS isn't like trying to land a plane.. digital movement is usually all that's required, though analog movement would be nice for games that reward you being slow/sneaky. When Flat-Out Running and Imprecise Movement is rewarded and slower, precise movement punished (Getting to cover quicker, no reward for stealthy movement beyond "Don't be seen", absence of precise jumping/cliffhanger puzzles) you really don't need analog movement. Or that's how I see it.

Anyway, Cypherspace, assuming I understand what you're saying correctly... you are the aformentioned person I've never met.. that is, a person who's played FPS with both a keyboard&mouse and a gamepad and prefers a gamepad?

If so, I'm genuinely curious as to the whys of it. Secondarily, I suppose I'd be useful to know which one you picked up first.

[Jessica]

Not a fan of gamepads for most things.

But, I also HATE WASD. Fuck WASD. WASD can die in a fire.

[Endless Mike]

Wireless keyboard and mouse, some sort of stiff article to place them on (like a board) on your lap, most HD TV's I've seen have multiple video inputs.....

/just sayin'

Enjoy.

On topic: I don't really play many PC games in general, but mouse and keyboard works fine when I do. But when you get to thinking about it, it's because many people use a mouse and keyboard in their day to day work ANYWAY, so it will naturally seem more intuitive. Using WASD isn't really all that intuitive to someone who hasn't actually played an FPS, however, but that's irrelevant, since a gamepad isn't intuitive to someone who hasn't used a gamepad. Since the vast majority of my gaming is console gaming, a gamepad feels just as intuitive to me, especially now that console FPSes have largely standardized the controls (one stick to move, one to freelook/aim, trigger/shoulder to fire, face buttons for jumping/item use/whatever). But yeah, certain things still work BETTER with a mouse, but aren't really REQUIRED and don't really enhance things other than speed, like Minesweeper or MOO.

[cypherspace]

When Flat-Out Running and Imprecise Movement is rewarded and slower, precise movement punished (Getting to cover quicker, no reward for stealthy movement beyond "Don't be seen", absence of precise jumping/cliffhanger puzzles) you really don't need analog movement. Or that's how I see it.

Anyway, Cypherspace, assuming I understand what you're saying correctly... you are the aformentioned person I've never met.. that is, a person who's played FPS with both a keyboard&mouse and a gamepad and prefers a gamepad?

If so, I'm genuinely curious as to the whys of it. Secondarily, I suppose I'd be useful to know which one you picked up first.

I agree that analogue movement isn't really necessary, but my point is that neither is the extra accuracy the mouse gives you. It's a nice thing to have, but it's far from essential.

And it depends. Yes, I've played with both a keyboard/mouse (used to play Counterstrike/TF/UT2003 regularly) and a joypad. I started gaming with the NES/C64/Megadrive, first experience with an analogue joystick was Goldeneye on the N64 (which incidentally I actually used with a digital movement system). Started playing PC games regularly mid-90s, started playing CS/TF at college (98-2000) and got my own PC in 2001. Played regularly on that while at uni until it became essentially obsolete. Got an Xbox/GC when they were released (whenever the hell that was) and currently have an Xbox360/Wii. I've been playing Call Of Duty 4 on Xbox Live a lot recently, which is the first time since Counterstrike that I've found a game I really enjoy solo online, and I use a pad for that. Does it detract from the experience? Hell no!

What I prefer is the ease of use of a console. I sit on my sofa, pick up my pad and play away on a 42" HD screen with surround sound, instantly. Yeah, you can do it on a PC, but that's not what it's built for, I don't have to fiddle with graphics settings and it's not as simple to hook up. I also much prefer the online system for the Xbox 360 - I can jump in to join my friends at any point, see what they're playing, avoid certain people and any cheating can be punished by banning. I've found it much, much better for playing on than random PC servers.

So most of my preference isn't down to the control system - but I do not find using a joypad any worse at all than using a mouse and keyboard.

Good point. So do you think that the best overall might be something like a mouse + Wii nunchuck? I could get on board with that.

Yes, it probably would if you could incorporate enough buttons onto the nunchuk.

[Amnesiasoft]

I agree that analogue movement isn't really necessary, but my point is that neither is the extra accuracy the mouse gives you. It's a nice thing to have, but it's far from essential.

Do you play without any auto aim? If you do, try saying that after trying without the auto aim on.

I don't have to fiddle with graphics settings and it's not as simple to hook up.

fiddling with graphics settings isn't a requirement. In fact, most games make an effort at autodetecting the best settings for your system, and it's becoming more common (and they're finally managing to get the resolution part in there too). And what do you mean not as simple to hook up? Physically hooking the computer up? It's matching shapes and colors. Hooking it up to your TV? Considering you have an HDTV there is probably a VGA or DVI port on it anyway, and even if there isn't, one adapter dongle is not complex. Then there is the fact that ATI's newest cards have built in HDMI ports.

any cheating can be punished by banning. I've found it much, much better for playing on than random PC servers.

We have things called Punkbuster and VAC for that. They work just fine from what I can tell. You are clearly just the unluckiest person alive if you've had problems.

[cypherspace]

Do you play without any auto aim? If you do, try saying that after trying without the auto aim on.

Depends which game. And either way - who gives a crap? Why do I have to play without auto-aim? Does it somehow make me shit at games if I use it? Is the only *proper* way to play games without auto-aim, or does it actually not matter one way or the other as long as you can do what you're supposed to be able to do and the game is still fun?

fiddling with graphics settings isn't a requirement. In fact, most games make an effort at autodetecting the best settings for your system, and it's becoming more common (and they're finally managing to get the resolution part in there too). And what do you mean not as simple to hook up? Physically hooking the computer up? It's matching shapes and colors. Hooking it up to your TV? Considering you have an HDTV there is probably a VGA or DVI port on it anyway, and even if there isn't, one adapter dongle is not complex. Then there is the fact that ATI's newest cards have built in HDMI ports.

Great. Now would you like to tell me how I can play Call Of Duty 4 in HD resolution with surround sound, on a laptop without any expansion capacity or HDMI capability, with only VGA or S-video output and stereo audio, to a TV with only HDMI, Scart or S-video input? Here's a clue - S-video isn't HD.

Now let's talk everyday use. Let's say I want to play in HD on my TV with a PC. Is the PC constantly hooked up to the TV? If so, am I using it for work, internet and music use as well? If so, when are other people in the house going to be able to watch movies/TV when I want to do work, use the internet or listen to music? Either I can have two PCs, one specifically for the living room and one for other things, or I can move my PC in every time I want to use it in the living room.

Now tell me why I would bother having two PCs when the Xbox will do everything a PC would in the living room, without any worry about specifications or graphics or sound, for less money? And if I have to move my PC in every time I want to use it, how is that just as simple to hook up as leaving a console constantly connected? I don't want to have to fiddle around with fucking connectors every time I want to play something. I want to pick up, and play. Consoles let me do that.

We have things called Punkbuster and VAC for that. They work just fine from what I can tell. You are clearly just the unluckiest person alive if you've had problems.

So you're saying there's never any cheating? That for me to have had less (that is, zero problems) on Xbox Live than on PC servers actually makes me the only person ever to be able to say this?

[Endless Mike]

Do you play without any auto aim? If you do, try saying that after trying without the auto aim on.

Depends which game. And either way - who gives a crap? Why do I have to play without auto-aim? Does it somehow make me shit at games if I use it? Is the only *proper* way to play games without auto-aim, or does it actually not matter one way or the other as long as you can do what you're supposed to be able to do and the game is still fun?

You obviously don't get it. If you're using auto-aim, you're not having fun! If you can't reasonably play in a tournament, you may as well not be playing games! You should just give up and stick to a cup and ball.

[pieaholicx]

Do you play without any auto aim? If you do, try saying that after trying without the auto aim on.

Depends which game. And either way - who gives a crap? Why do I have to play without auto-aim? Does it somehow make me shit at games if I use it? Is the only *proper* way to play games without auto-aim, or does it actually not matter one way or the other as long as you can do what you're supposed to be able to do and the game is still fun?

The point |----------------------------------------------------| You

Missed it by a mile there. What Amnesiasoft was trying to point out was that your comment on the extra accuracy of a mouse is completely wrong unless you use auto-aim. Without auto-aim every bit of accuracy is helpful.

We have things called Punkbuster and VAC for that. They work just fine from what I can tell. You are clearly just the unluckiest person alive if you've had problems.

So you're saying there's never any cheating? That for me to have had less (that is, zero problems) on Xbox Live than on PC servers actually makes me the only person ever to be able to say this?

Okay yeah, Xbox Live has one central source for working around cheaters, however for PC games if you don't play on a server running Punkbuster (or something similar) then you have no right to complain about people cheating. The fact that cheating exists isn't in question here, what is in question is that you said that there is always cheating. As for VAC, well that's Valve's service which runs on all officially run servers, and will insta-ban anybody caught cheating. I believe that's as good as Xbox Live. In either case, at least you can host private servers on your own hardware with whatever settings you'd like on PC games, can't say the same for consoles.

[cypherspace]

Missed it by a mile there. What Amnesiasoft was trying to point out was that your comment on the extra accuracy of a mouse is completely wrong unless you use auto-aim. Without auto-aim every bit of accuracy is helpful.

Actually, I think he missed my point. If I do use auto-aim, then it's not, and who cares whether I do or not?

The fact that cheating exists isn't in question here, what is in question is that you said that there is always cheating.

Please show me where I said that. Oh, I didn't. How wonderful.

[pieaholicx]

The fact that cheating exists isn't in question here, what is in question is that you said that there is always cheating.

Please show me where I said that. Oh, I didn't. How wonderful.

I believe you did make a statement about Xbox Live cheater banning being better than playing on random PC servers. However, with the way you said it you sounded as if you meant all servers were subjected to cheating and a lesser banning system.

[cypherspace]

The fact that cheating exists isn't in question here, what is in question is that you said that there is always cheating.

Please show me where I said that. Oh, I didn't. How wonderful.

I believe you did make a statement about Xbox Live cheater banning being better than playing on random PC servers. However, with the way you said it you sounded as if you meant all servers were subjected to cheating and a lesser banning system.

Read again.

I also much prefer the online system for the Xbox 360 - I can jump in to join my friends at any point, see what they're playing, avoid certain people and any cheating can be punished by banning. I've found it much, much better for playing on than random PC servers.

[pieaholicx]

I've found it much, much better for playing on than random PC servers.

This would be the statement in question. You didn't specify how it was better, so I was under the assumption that you were referring to things such as cheating (which you did address), a lack of central server browser, seeing what friends are playing, and avoiding people. However, I would now assume that you don't play PC games at all, avoid them at all costs, and pay no attention to them, as there is plenty of anti-cheating measures (mentioned above), various server browsers (Steam, Xfire, I know BF2 at least has one built-in), and ways to see what people are playing (Steam, Xfire). Now, can we get this discussion back on to Keyboard/Mouse vs. controller, since the original bringing up of Xbox Live really had no place in here anyway.

[SecondTalon]

Questions

Answers

So you don't favor one over the other, just use whichever is more convenient at the time based on what you want to do. So, assuming I'm understanding you correctly, you're essentially neutral on the choice, the only difference is you prefer the console experience over the PC one for factors unrelated to control schemes.

While that's not quite a preference of gamepads over mouse&keyboard, it's better than nothing.

[cypherspace]

I've found it much, much better for playing on than random PC servers.

This would be the statement in question. You didn't specify how it was better, so I was under the assumption that you were referring to things such as cheating (which you did address), a lack of central server browser, seeing what friends are playing, and avoiding people. However, I would now assume that you don't play PC games at all, avoid them at all costs, and pay no attention to them, as there is plenty of anti-cheating measures (mentioned above), various server browsers (Steam, Xfire, I know BF2 at least has one built-in), and ways to see what people are playing (Steam, Xfire). Now, can we get this discussion back on to Keyboard/Mouse vs. controller, since the original bringing up of Xbox Live really had no place in here anyway.

And are all those things built into the PC as standard? No.

I don't avoid PC games at all costs, at all. I haven't played them for a couple of years because I don't have the capability. I used to play at a LAN cafe weekly back then. Either way, I was asked why I preferred console gaming over PC gaming. I answered.

So you don't favor one over the other, just use whichever is more convenient at the time based on what you want to do. So, assuming I'm understanding you correctly, you're essentially neutral on the choice, the only difference is you prefer the console experience over the PC one for factors unrelated to control schemes.

While that's not quite a preference of gamepads over mouse&keyboard, it's better than nothing.

Yes, mainly that's correct. But the reason I replied is that I don't like hearing that mouse&keyboard is /better/ than a joypad. It's not, it's just different.

[SomeoneElse]

I find it extremely difficult to play FPSes on consoles, mainly because I never owned a console myself until i got my 360. Before that, PC games all the way.

Analog sticks are just nowhere near as good compared to the speed and accuracy you can get with a mouse. You can move a mouse exactly the amount, the speed, and the direction that you want. With a stick, you're limited to a certain speed, and the acceleration rate is whatever the game decides it to be.

But still, each to his own. I just wish i could use KB&M on a console.

[pieaholicx]

And are all those things built into the PC as standard? No.

If you play any Steam game, you'll get all of Steam's benefits (including VAC), because they force you to use Steam to play the game. As for Punkbuster, that's setup at the server level, not the PC level, so it's up to you to choose a server running it. As I mentioned, at least BF2 has a server browser built in to it, so that's standard. As for Xfire there's no reason for complaining about not having it's benefits when you choose not to use it (unless you're trying to conserve memory, but even then it doesn't use up much). It's a very small program(between 10-30MB, excluding any files you download through it) which has a ton of functionality. Everything that can be done on Xbox Live can be done through PC services, and most of them are standard or easy to get to. The reason that Xbox Live has them all in one place is because Microsoft owns a monopoly on online Xbox play, and as such gives you no choice in what services to use (so if something turns out to no work properly, or somebody could do a better job, you're fucked).

[ZeroSum]

Steam's most recent Friends work even makes that usable in-game.

[cypherspace]

If you play any Steam game, you'll get all of Steam's benefits (including VAC), because they force you to use Steam to play the game.

The reason that Xbox Live has them all in one place is because Microsoft owns a monopoly on online Xbox play, and as such gives you no choice in what services to use (so if something turns out to no work properly, or somebody could do a better job, you're fucked).

And if it's not a Steam game? Live works for all online Xbox games. Every one of them.

I agree, but it does work properly. Funny that you say Xbox Live has them all in one place because Microsoft has a monopoly that forces you to use Live and that seems to be a bad thing, yet being forced to use Steam to play a game is apparently a good thing because it gives you Steam's benefits. What's the difference exactly? If you're not saying that I apologise, but that's what seems to be implied.

[pieaholicx]

If you play any Steam game, you'll get all of Steam's benefits (including VAC), because they force you to use Steam to play the game.

The reason that Xbox Live has them all in one place is because Microsoft owns a monopoly on online Xbox play, and as such gives you no choice in what services to use (so if something turns out to no work properly, or somebody could do a better job, you're fucked).

And if it's not a Steam game? Live works for all online Xbox games. Every one of them.

I agree, but it does work properly. Funny that you say Xbox Live has them all in one place because Microsoft has a monopoly that forces you to use Live and that seems to be a bad thing, yet being forced to use Steam to play a game is apparently a good thing because it gives you Steam's benefits. What's the difference exactly? If you're not saying that I apologise, but that's what seems to be implied.

I believe I've pointed out what to do for non-Steam games, as most of them have built-in functionality that you get from Steam. Again, there's Xfire which covers most of the benefits (except for anti-cheat, but they can't do that) for a very small amount of space/memory, for nearly 1000 games.

There's a big difference between Steam and Xbox Live. If you want to play online games on a PC you don't need Steam, but you won't be able to play Valve's games. However, on Xbox Live it doesn't matter who makes it, you have to use Xbox Live. The difference is choice. I can choose not to use Steam, but I can't choose to not use Xbox Live.

[cypherspace]

There's a big difference between Steam and Xbox Live. If you want to play online games on a PC you don't need Steam, but you won't be able to play Valve's games. However, on Xbox Live it doesn't matter who makes it, you have to use Xbox Live. The difference is choice. I can choose not to use Steam, but I can't choose to not use Xbox Live.

How can you choose not to use Steam to play Team Fortress 2 online? If you want to play a Valve game, you have to use Steam. If I want to play an Xbox game, I have to use Live. You can choose not to play a Valve game. I can choose not to play an Xbox game. Either way, we can't play the game. If we do, we have to use the system the manufacturer wants us to use. That seems to me to be the same amount of choice.

[pieaholicx]

There's a big difference between Steam and Xbox Live. If you want to play online games on a PC you don't need Steam, but you won't be able to play Valve's games. However, on Xbox Live it doesn't matter who makes it, you have to use Xbox Live. The difference is choice. I can choose not to use Steam, but I can't choose to not use Xbox Live.

How can you choose not to use Steam to play Team Fortress 2 online? If you want to play a Valve game, you have to use Steam. If I want to play an Xbox game, I have to use Live. You can choose not to play a Valve game. I can choose not to play an Xbox game. Either way, we can't play the game. If we do, we have to use the system the manufacturer wants us to use. That seems to me to be the same amount of choice.

Ah, but Steam narrows it down to a publisher choice. Xbox is a console choice. For example, I can choose to play Call of Duty 4 with or without Steam. However, as you said I can't choose to play TF2 without Steam. However, I have to play both Halo and Call of Duty 4 through Xbox Live on my 360, despite the fact that CoD4 has nothing to do with Microsoft.

[cypherspace]

There's a big difference between Steam and Xbox Live. If you want to play online games on a PC you don't need Steam, but you won't be able to play Valve's games. However, on Xbox Live it doesn't matter who makes it, you have to use Xbox Live. The difference is choice. I can choose not to use Steam, but I can't choose to not use Xbox Live.

How can you choose not to use Steam to play Team Fortress 2 online? If you want to play a Valve game, you have to use Steam. If I want to play an Xbox game, I have to use Live. You can choose not to play a Valve game. I can choose not to play an Xbox game. Either way, we can't play the game. If we do, we have to use the system the manufacturer wants us to use. That seems to me to be the same amount of choice.

Ah, but Steam narrows it down to a publisher choice. Xbox is a console choice.

So? It's still a choice to make. You make out that there's no choice involved in playing Xbox games. I don't have to play on an Xbox. I have chosen to. The majority of games are available on other systems, which I could choose if I wanted to. I've chosen the Xbox format because it's the most convenient. To say there's no choice is rubbish.

[Indon]

In regards to FPS'es, I don't view either as being neccessarily superior playing among each respective group - For one, I have the joy of actually being able to aim, and in the other, I get the enjoyment of things like tactical use of three-point turns.

Only when console and keyboard/mouse players are playing directly against each other would the keyboard-mouse combination have the obvious advantage.

[chaosspawn]

Don't consoles now have USB ports? Why don't developers let you plug in a keyboard and mouse? It seems like it'd a pretty useful thing to have, especially if you wanted to use any of those built in browsers. I mean you always could plug in a game pad into a computer i you preferred it that way, so why not the reverse?

I prefer the mouse keyboard setup. Though the nunchuck/wii-mote does work quite effectively as well. The fact of having a keyboard lends so much more versatility to the games you can play. Also I feel that the mouse is much better suited to aiming than a control stick, because it feels more analagous to your on screen action.

Also I have taken a HCI (Human-Computer Interaction) course. Part of the class involved taking measurements to see how long it took users to accomplish a task. If I remember correctly the time it took to move a mouse to a certain area was proportional to the distance and inversely proportional to the size of the area. I forget the numbers in the equation though. I wonder if you could set up something to check which control scheme took longer. This would allow a claim that one method was 'better' (at least as far as aiming at a specific point).

I will add the blasphemy that I've used trackballs for playing FPS's with.

So? It's still a choice to make. You make out that there's no choice involved in playing Xbox games. I don't have to play on an Xbox. I have chosen to. The majority of games are available on other systems, which I could choose if I wanted to. I've chosen the Xbox format because it's the most convenient. To say there's no choice is rubbish.

I think that the argument is that then you've made a single choice while the PC user gets to make additional choices. This is a tradeoff that everyone needs to make, because more choices will tend to make things more complex. However, conversely lack of choices will ultimately be limiting.

I realize you value the Xbox because of the plug-n-play nature, but at the same time I value the PC experience even if it requires more of an investment of my effort. The control scheme allows me to play games requiring a more complex interface. Also I can make more choices as to how I choose to experience the games, like playing with the display settings, or choosing a third-party team speak program. Also laptops and LAN parties allow my computer to offer a much wider range of experiences than sitting at home playing on my couch.

[cypherspace]

I think that the argument is that then you've made a single choice while the PC user gets to make additional choices. However, this is a tradeoff that everyone needs to make, because more choices will tend to make things more complex. However, conversely lack of choices will ultimately be limiting.

I realize you value the Xbox because of the plug-n-play nature, but at the same time I value the PC experience even if it requires more of an investment of my effort. The control scheme allows me to play games requiring a more complex interface. Also I can make more choices as to how I choose to experience the games, like playing with the display settings, or choosing a third-party team speak program.

Sure, but that's my choice to make. I'm perfectly happy not having to use third-party programs because the first-party ones work brilliantly. If they didn't, I wouldn't have made that choice.

I'm not saying anyone else should have the same opinion as mine. But I think most of the objections to my choice are ridiculous.

This would allow a claim that one method was 'better' (at least as far as aiming at a specific point).

I don't think anyone would object to the idea that a mouse&keyboard is more accurate, but saying it's "better" is not the same thing, which is what I've been trying to say. It's better for certain purposes. For others it isn't.

[Endless Mike]

Sony lets PS3 developers add mouse and keyboard support to games if they choose. I don't think there's many yet. Unreal Tournament 3 and maybe a couple others. MS has straight up said that they won't allow it on the 360. I side more with them since it puts gamers more or less at parity since they're all using the same thing to play, although I'm sure their reasons have more to do with differentiating the 360 and Windows as gaming platforms. Ignoring that, some third party company made some sort of voodoo box that you can plug a mouse and keyboard into and it converts the signal to standard controller movements, but reviews have been tepid for the most part and tend to say that the game HAS to have analog sensitivity for it to work well.

[chaosspawn]

I don't think anyone would object to the idea that a mouse&keyboard is more accurate, but saying it's "better" is not the same thing, which is what I've been trying to say. It's better for certain purposes. For others it isn't.

OK if I get it, then you're saying t mouse+keyboard > gamepad cannot be stated as true, however, mouse+keyboard > gamepad (in the scope of X) can be stated. Then I would argue that in the context of current FPSs that a mouse & keyboard are better than a gamepad. In this sense better is comparing the ease at which I can control my character in the game. This is argued because although the gamepad allows better movement control, the mouse allows better aiming precision, and in these sorts of games aiming precision is more required than fine movement control.

I can see the opposite case being made for 3-D platforming. However I think that in video games, taken as a whole, the mouse and keyboard combo are better interfaces. Even if only because there are entire genres where a gamepad is a very cumbersome interface.

However, you seem to be arguing more about the relative merits of the game platform as opposed to the control input. To that I say: to each his own. For me the versatility of the computer makes for a much better experience. I like my consoles and their games, but I always tend to think of them as very stripped down computers. Though I do appreciate the fact that I can buy one and not have to worry about the hardware being obsolete for at least several years.

[HighCharity]

Carrying on from the Halo thread....

Keyboard and Mouse is an unbeatable combo. The precision that a mouse gives you due to use of your entire hand vs. a single thumb on an analog stick is.. well, unbeatable.

In my personal experience, I know of plenty of folks who've never really played a console FPS, so.. they don't count. Myself, I played through Halo with a friend over the course of two or three nights on the old style giant X-Box controllers. While I got pretty good towards the end of that, I still felt slow and unwieldy. I also don't recall if there are ways to adjust the stick's sensitivity like you can with a mouse, so I really can't weigh in on this.

I know several folks who have played FPS games on both consoles and on computers, and while they are excellent with the joystick skillz, they lament the lack of keyboard & mouse.

I know of several people who have only played console FPS games, and only occasionally have delved into the computer keyboard & mouse side, usually giving up as they just can't seem to get the hang of it.

I know of no one who plays both console and computer FPS games who prefers a gamepad over a keyboard & mouse. If there's anyone here, I'm interested in knowing why you prefer the analog sticks over a mouse and WASD.

I also don't recall if there are ways to adjust the stick's sensitivity like you can with a mouse, so I really can't weigh in on this.

There was.

Also, you can't beat the mouse's surgical precision for targeting. This as opposed to gamepads, which often require some sort of aim-assist system.

Merely opinions. And as such, there is no way to validate your statement.