Reasonable said:
What you've described applies to any input, K&M included. Also, no matter how much you skill up with a gamepad you'll lag the accuracy of a K&M, which is exactly why it is argued to be a better input device. Sqully's just arguing for fun. Technically a K&M is a better input for the act of aiming - there's no arguement in that it's a measuable fact. As I said myself though that doesn't equate to gameplay. The main difference I find is that on console's everything is just slower due to the way games seem to be tuned. Unreal Tournamet 3 felt faster than most on a console, but was still slower than PC. One other difference I note is that on console's the gamepad seems to steer everything to a pretty flat plane - there is very limited use of vertical space, particularly extreme angles for shooting, compared to the best FPS prior to the explosion of FPS on consoles. Of course this may be more design that function - but it's seems odd to me how artificially flat pretty much every console FPS I've played is.
|
Technically its a more accurate and faster method of input. What im challenging you is to prove that the greater accuracy and speed makes the input better. I don't dispute that the interface is faster at aiming at all.
You can easily argue that the gameplay is more fun with a mouse to you because you enjoy the interface better, but can you argue that the interface is better in a blanket statement? 
Btw all the levels in Halo 3 and Gears of War are on multiple different levels. In Halo 3 you're forced to use all the angles all the time because of people flying at you with Wraiths. So maybe you're just admiting to a carnal desire to also own an Xbox 360! 
Tease.







