Anyone saying controller doesn't matter is retarded. It's like arguing that a keyboard + mouse isn't superior at all to a controller (Hint: It is). If both players were equally as skilled then the advantage would go to the PC player.

That being said, the PS3 controller does not respond nearly as well to twitch reactions as the 360. I'm not insulting Sony's system, but there is a very good reason why Microsofts flagship game is an FPS

@dorbin2009

Dont insult other people because they don't agree with you

BTW: Comparing controllers to a Keyboard+ mouse NOW that's retarded :P

But when the controllers are so similar, it doesn't matter. Plus people aren't staring at each other 100% of the time in the game so super fast aiming only comes into play when they aren't. Plus me and hundreds of other players can kill about anyone that passes through our sights.

People can adapt to different controllers.

If you don't think that, then you are a retard.

I'd say 360 with more FPS fans and more of them with mics would give them a definite edge.

I do think the controller difference is being overblown quite a bit and wouldn't make as much a difference as people say.

Anyway this will never happen so it's a pointless debate.

umm, no. I play MUCH better with a controller. I would destroy you if you had a mouse and a keyboard, and I had my Xbox controller.

@NKAJ, I think I know where you want to go, but trust me, that's pointless because it doesn't matter who had the most downloads, the 360 community reached the goal first. BUT, more importantly, I misread the OP and didn't see the part about co-joining XBL and PSN for a tournament, so my point has really nothing to do with the thread.

Ironman, if we played an fps and you used a 360 controller and i had m+k, im pretty sure id rip you apart every single time. So if you could beat him, then he must suck with m+k, also if ure better with a controller than m+k, im willing to bet you suck with a m+k.

I Do! Which is why I do better with a controller. And I am pretty sure that you would be left crying at the end of our match, while I walk away with a huge smile on my face.

Only chance of me left crying is feeling bad for totally destroying you :P. Seriously though, i highly doubt youd beat me with a controller, youd just be too slow. Ive played fps on pc and consoles. Console gamers are without a doubt a lot slower. I do better on pc than consoles. So thats pretty much saying id be too quick for ya.

hmm, well, I guess you will leave with dry eyes!

When did we start compairing console and PC games speed? That is irrelevant to the console argument. I can plug an Xbox controller into a PC and move just as fast, so speed in not an issue.

A lot of the arguments responding to the OP are really poor :(

If it's the best of the best... what does controller or population have anything to do with it!?

In a best of 10 it would probably go 5 / 5.


Also if you consider the average population, the average gamer has an average amount of skill. It would even out if you normalized it based on population.


Skill depends on a lot of things but time spent playing the game is a big factor. Even if X360 is known for having FPS fans, a skilled Halo player is not necessarily a skill COD4 player. At a high level game mechanics are different. Also that skilled Halo player can be skilled at COD4 as long as they spent the time learning the high level mechanics. Having multiple FPS titles does not mean that the general population is better at COD 4.