By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Is Halo CE is ONE of the best FPS ever but not THE Best FPS ever?

Reasonable on 21 July 2009
FaRmLaNd said:

Too few people have played Deus-Ex...

It's one of my favourite games of all time, however I don't count it as an FPS, to me FPS is Half Life, Counter Strike, Team Fortress, etc.

Deus Ex and System Shock 2 belong to a much more interesting niche I believe, and represent the pinacle of such titles so far.

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
Reasonable on 21 July 2009
Squilliam said:
Reasonable said:

K&M is quantifiably 'better' due to the mechanics of the input vs a gamepad for pinpoint accuracy.  This has nothing to do with FPS and applies to any input action where it is desirable to rapidly pinpoint something on a screen.

Remove the games element, which adds emotion, and consider it like this: if there was a program putting up random, tiny white dots on a black screen, in tests a K&M would allow you to more rapidly select them and select more of them in the same amount of time than a gamepad.  It's just an input mechanism which is faster and more accurate for that.

Of course, in games where the movement, aiming, etc. can be tuned you can get great control with a gamepad, and if you play on console only you're naturaly going to favour it as it's what you trained yourself with.

However a K&M will always be a more accurate input device for 'point and click' which is what you're actually doing at the heart of an FPS, pointing at an area of the screen and clicking to shoot.

However, gamepads do have advantages for controlling speed of movement, etc. and in less frenetic moments are arguably more immersive due to this - which is why I prefer titles like Fallout and Oblivion on consoles vs PC (although graphics look better on PC).  However, for pure shooters, while consoles are great, and have made playing FPS titles both SP and MP much more affordable (which I think is a good thing) the K&M combination does allow for better accuracy of aiming.

 

So would a direct brain interface be better because all I would have to do was think 'Reasonable headshot'? And then I would get one. How is speed and accuracy making a game 'better'? If all people had to do was 'think' then obviously the gameplay mechanics would have to be adjusted. Like for example its the reason why you pretty much have to aim for a 3 by 6 pixel head representation on the screen and why body shots are so ineffective in games but even more extreme than that.

 

 

Oh you devil's advocate you.

Note I said remove the game element and focused on the input mechanism!

Besides, in shooting, speed and accuracy is definately important!  Unless of course you want to be the loser in a duel.

So for FPS, if you want the most 'real world' feel and responses, K&M is arguably better.  Might not make gameplay as fun, etc. but that's another topic. (except in FPS it does, as the glory of Half Life, Counter Strike, etc. testify).

Also, the brain interface would be better of course, as a strict input, however of course it removes the physical mechanic of aiming yourself, which K&M and gamepad don't - hence why its fair to compare them directly since they represent two different, physical based input devices for the same task.

BTW no Chris Pine avatar ever?

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

SnesTea on 21 July 2009
CDiablo said:

No, as a moderately seasoned PC FPS gamer I was hoping for big things, but what I got was a very average affair with no online multiplayer support. When I got my XBOX it was one of the first games on my to do list and was a big letdown. I will admit the games last stage rocks though.

 

I still bought Halo 2 after the letdown that 1 was due to online support. I couldnt even stomach the single player. The multiplayer was great for the short time I played it, but then I got Battlefront 2 and Halo 2 was never played again. I learned my lesson and never bought another Halo game again.

Then why didn't you get it on PC?



Squilliam on 21 July 2009
Reasonable said:
Squilliam said:
Reasonable said:

K&M is quantifiably 'better' due to the mechanics of the input vs a gamepad for pinpoint accuracy.  This has nothing to do with FPS and applies to any input action where it is desirable to rapidly pinpoint something on a screen.

Remove the games element, which adds emotion, and consider it like this: if there was a program putting up random, tiny white dots on a black screen, in tests a K&M would allow you to more rapidly select them and select more of them in the same amount of time than a gamepad.  It's just an input mechanism which is faster and more accurate for that.

Of course, in games where the movement, aiming, etc. can be tuned you can get great control with a gamepad, and if you play on console only you're naturaly going to favour it as it's what you trained yourself with.

However a K&M will always be a more accurate input device for 'point and click' which is what you're actually doing at the heart of an FPS, pointing at an area of the screen and clicking to shoot.

However, gamepads do have advantages for controlling speed of movement, etc. and in less frenetic moments are arguably more immersive due to this - which is why I prefer titles like Fallout and Oblivion on consoles vs PC (although graphics look better on PC).  However, for pure shooters, while consoles are great, and have made playing FPS titles both SP and MP much more affordable (which I think is a good thing) the K&M combination does allow for better accuracy of aiming.

 

So would a direct brain interface be better because all I would have to do was think 'Reasonable headshot'? And then I would get one. How is speed and accuracy making a game 'better'? If all people had to do was 'think' then obviously the gameplay mechanics would have to be adjusted. Like for example its the reason why you pretty much have to aim for a 3 by 6 pixel head representation on the screen and why body shots are so ineffective in games but even more extreme than that.

 

 

Oh you devil's advocate you.

Note I said remove the game element and focused on the input mechanism!

Besides, in shooting, speed and accuracy is definately important!  Unless of course you want to be the loser in a duel.

So for FPS, if you want the most 'real world' feel and responses, K&M is arguably better.  Might not make gameplay as fun, etc. but that's another topic. (except in FPS it does, as the glory of Half Life, Counter Strike, etc. testify).

Also, the brain interface would be better of course, as a strict input, however of course it removes the physical mechanic of aiming yourself, which K&M and gamepad don't - hence why its fair to compare them directly since they represent two different, physical based input devices for the same task.

BTW no Chris Pine avatar ever?

 

I was saying than speed/accuracy != best interface. Because the best interface by that definition is an infallible one. The fun comes from the fact that the interface is fallible which creates the challenge and enjoyment.

Clint Eastwood could still get in a dual with his old western movie buddies!

Real world = inaccurate, mouse = deadly accuracy. Theres a significant difference.

A brain interface is an input its just that its perfect see above.

Sorry, only Kirk for me!



Tease.

Mendicate Bias on 21 July 2009

Exactly Squillam!

I would argue that a aiming with analog sticks takes far more skill than using a mouse. The difficulties of aiming with an analog stick represent a real world scenario far more closely than instantly zeroing in on your opponents head.

The fact that you have to train yourself to be able to make small muscle movements and miniscule adjustments makes playing on a controller far more enjoyable to me since you can visibly see an aiming improvement as you play more. Ironically due to the ease of aiming in pc shooters, it's not the aiming that becomes better as a player gets more experienced but a knowledge of how to exploite a map.



                                           

                      The definitive evidence that video games turn people into mass murderers

Around the Network
disolitude on 21 July 2009
Reasonable said:
FaRmLaNd said:

Too few people have played Deus-Ex...

It's one of my favourite games of all time, however I don't count it as an FPS, to me FPS is Half Life, Counter Strike, Team Fortress, etc.

Deus Ex and System Shock 2 belong to a much more interesting niche I believe, and represent the pinacle of such titles so far.

 

I played it on the PS2 and found it qutie boring sadly... Maybe PC version is better but what I played on PS2 wasn't really a shooter...more like an shooting talking rpg.



uadfa on 21 July 2009
disolitude said:
Reasonable said:
FaRmLaNd said:

Too few people have played Deus-Ex...

It's one of my favourite games of all time, however I don't count it as an FPS, to me FPS is Half Life, Counter Strike, Team Fortress, etc.

Deus Ex and System Shock 2 belong to a much more interesting niche I believe, and represent the pinacle of such titles so far.

 

I played it on the PS2 and found it qutie boring sadly... Maybe PC version is better but what I played on PS2 wasn't really a shooter...more like an shooting talking rpg.

The PS2 version is lackluster compared to the original.



Reasonable on 21 July 2009
Mendicate Bias said:
Exactly Squillam!

I would argue that a aiming with analog sticks takes far more skill than using a mouse. The difficulties of aiming with an analog stick represent a real world scenario far more closely than instantly zeroing in on your opponents head.

The fact that you have to train yourself to be able to make small muscle movements and miniscule adjustments makes playing on a controller far more enjoyable to me since you can visibly see an aiming improvement as you play more. Ironically due to the ease of aiming in pc shooters, it's not the aiming that becomes better as a player gets more experienced but a knowledge of how to exploite a map.

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.

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

rapsuperstar31 on 21 July 2009

GoldenEye was the only 1st person shooter that I played for over a month. I played GoldenEye all the time with my friends back in the day. I would say it took me about 2 years or so of playing GoldenEye before I got bored with it. I played both Halo 1 and 2 in college with my friends and they were okay while drinking beers but nothing special. I have played Killzone 2 and Resistance Fall of Man and got bored of both of them in less than a week. I played Bioshock and after I beat it never went back to it. I played TimeSplitters on the ps2 and hated it. I would say the only 1st person shooters that I have truly enjoyed were GoldenEye, Duke Nukem 3D and to a lesser extent the 1st Turok game.



Squilliam on 21 July 2009
Reasonable said:
Mendicate Bias said:
Exactly Squillam!

I would argue that a aiming with analog sticks takes far more skill than using a mouse. The difficulties of aiming with an analog stick represent a real world scenario far more closely than instantly zeroing in on your opponents head.

The fact that you have to train yourself to be able to make small muscle movements and miniscule adjustments makes playing on a controller far more enjoyable to me since you can visibly see an aiming improvement as you play more. Ironically due to the ease of aiming in pc shooters, it's not the aiming that becomes better as a player gets more experienced but a knowledge of how to exploite a map.

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.