Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

PC Gamers Crush Console Brethren

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the not-very-sportsmanlike dept.

PC Games (Games) 387

l_bratch writes "Since December 22nd DICE have been running a competition between each target platform of their latest Battlefield expansion — Bad Company 2: Vietnam. Players were required to complete a large number of 'team actions' in game, in order to unlock a hidden, remastered version of the Operation Hastings map from the original Battlefield: Vietnam. PC gamers have completed the task, whereas gamers on both console platforms are only about halfway there."

cancel ×

387 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Who rules America? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717022)

THERE IS NO GREATER POWER in the world today than that wielded by the manipulators of public opinion in America. No king or pope of old, no conquering general or high priest ever disposed of a power even remotely approach- ing that of the few dozen men who control America’s mass media of news and entertainment.Their power is not distant and impersonal; it reaches into every home in America, and it works its will during nearly every waking hour. It is the power that shapes and molds the mind of virtually every citizen, young or old, rich or poor, simple or sophisticated.

The mass media form for us our image of the world and then tell us what to think about that image. Essentially ev- erything we know—or think we know—about events out- side our own neighborhood or circle of acquaintances comes to us via our daily newspaper, our weekly news magazine, our radio, or our television.

It is not just the heavy-handed suppression of certain news stories from our newspapers or the blatant propagan- dizing of history-distorting TV “docudramas” that charac- terizes the opinion-manipulating techniques of the media masters. They exercise both subtlety and thoroughness in their management of the news and the entertainment that they present to us.

For example, the way in which the news is covered: which items are emphasized and which are played down; the reporter’s choice of words, tone of voice, and facial ex- pressions; the wording of headlines; the choice of illustra- tions—all of these things subliminally and yet profoundly affect the way in which we interpret what we see or hear.

On top of this, of course, the columnists and editors remove any remaining doubt from our minds as to just what we are to think about it all. Employing carefully developed psychological techniques, they guide our thought and opinion so that we can be in tune with the “in” crowd, the “beautiful people,” the “smart money.” They let us know exactly what our attitudes should be toward various types of people and behavior by placing those people or that behavior in the context of a TV drama or situation comedy and having the other TV characters react in the Politically Correct way.

Read more [natvan.com]

Re:Who rules America? (-1, Offtopic)

Ex-MislTech (557759) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717444)

Bernays said it best.

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ...We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. ...In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons...who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.[1]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_(book) [wikipedia.org]

Re:Who rules America? (2)

Dr Herbert West (1357769) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717712)

Can we have this guy and the nitwit who posts excerpts from "Turner Diaries" go fight it out on some deserted island somewhere?

Somewhere without internet, of course.

So PC gamers are better... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717034)

... no shit?

Re:So PC gamers are better... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717300)

No, they just have the controllers more suited to first person shooter games.

Re:So PC gamers are better... (1)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717370)

Are racecar drivers better at going fast than kids on tricycles?

Re:So PC gamers are better... (1)

dakameleon (1126377) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717746)

No, not if you include all the externalities. If you're measuring a race car against a trike going from a standing start on the line, then yes, the racecar wins. If you measure it from "wake up in the morning", the trike gets going a whole lot quicker, for a whole lot cheaper.

(note: please don't take this too seriously. it's just a thought exercise.)

Anonymous Coward (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717038)

first

PC gamers in a rush to play another shit map (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717040)

DICE really need to hire some new map designers, because BC2/BC2 Vietnam are some of the most shitty, linear, choke-point ridden maps I've ever had the misfortune of playing. I guess funnelling groups of players down invisible tunnels is one way of maintaining the illusion of 'teamwork'.

Re:PC gamers in a rush to play another shit map (1)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717574)

RIGHT? Having visions of Stalingrad and the propaganda officer shouting pep talks to the cannon fodder.

Shocking news: (5, Insightful)

The Master Control P (655590) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717062)

Players with superior input devices do better. More as this story develops.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

cyberstealth1024 (860459) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717130)

mod parent up. I am far better at most games (esp. FPS-types) by using a keyboard and mouse. Perhaps this is never because I had a N64, Playstation, or XBox growing up...I had never honed my analog stick skills. ...or perhaps the keyboard/mouse combo is just easier to learn and master.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717256)

A keyboard/mouse combo is better for online first-person shooters, I'll grant. But that doesn't mean it's better for everything. For instance, is it better for fighting games? And what do players 2-4, who are visiting your home but A. happen not to have brought laptops or B. happen to have bought different games from you, use?

Re:Shocking news: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717308)

Gamepads are better for some things (driving games for one), which is why it's good that PCs can use them as well.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717344)

No, for driving games a wheel is what you need.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

Eudial (590661) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717474)

No, for driving games a wheel is what you need.

That is the best option, obviously. But a gamepad with "triggers" like the xbox360 controller is okay, as it at least allows you to control acceleration, braking and turning in a smooth fashion. Keyboard+Mouse is the worst sort of atrocious. Everything is either full on, or full off. Either you slam the pedal, or you take your foot off it completely.

Re:Shocking news: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717846)

A pistol-grip R/C car style controller would actually work great. (Something like this [rccartips.com] . Provide a few changes with extra buttons and better ergonomics, and it'd be perfect.) But for one dumbass reason or another, finding one that's affordable and readily available on the market is next to impossible. Instead we're stuck with either really fiddly thumb nubbin analog sticks, using single analog stick more appropriate for aircraft sims, or seriously overpriced and bulky steeringwheel and pedal rigs.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717346)

Gamepads are better for some things (driving games for one), which is why it's good that PCs can use them as well.

So I've got a PC with a 32" Vizio monitor, and I plug in four gamepads through a USB hub. Why is the PC game only reading the first gamepad?

Re:Shocking news: (1)

brainboyz (114458) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717422)

Bad design? I've got several programs that let you pick which controller to use and assign whatever macros you like to each button (including completely remapping looking/moving/etc). Oddly enough, an N64 emulator from years ago is one of those programs.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717464)

I suspect he is wondering why he can't use multiple controllers all at once.

Of course the answer is probably again: "bad design".

Re:Shocking news: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717522)

Poor programming.

There's no limitation on Directinput - it will support as many gamepads as you connect to the PC. A lot of games don't bother to poll beyond the first one they find though.

It's the same reason we don't get split-screen games on PC's. They can do it - but the developers just assume it won't get used, so don't bother implementing it.

Can a developer make it worth bothering? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717834)

It's the same reason we don't get split-screen games on PC's. They can do it - but the developers just assume it won't get used, so don't bother implementing it.

If a developer were to make a PC game supporting shared-screen play with multiple gamepads (or one keyboard and one or more gamepads), and then promote this game on home theater PC enthusiast sites, would it be worth it? Hairyfeet seems to think so [slashdot.org] .

Re:Shocking news: (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717310)

No, I couldn't imaging playing platformers or fighting games sensibly with a keyboard. Maybe the grand-grandparent meant superior input device for this kind of game. And, frankly, I can't imagine playing FPS games sensibly with console controllers.

Re:Shocking news: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717332)

I dunno... I've played some driving games with a joystick or a keyboard.. It's actually easier to steer... But if you want more realism you need a steering wheel, even though it's not as easy to control. I also go to the shooting range quite often. I have yet to find any control that works anything like a pistol or a long rifle. The technology just isn't there yet to be able to sight and shoot..

Re:Shocking news: (2)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717356)

Well, there is at least one entire class of games that PC has that consoles don't: flight simulators. Some of this is due to the hardware: serious PC flight-simmers have TrackIR head tracking devices, rudder pedals, HOTAS (throttle & stick joysticks), throttle quadrants, multi-function displays (MFDs), assignable keypads, & touchcreens. These are simply not available for consoles where H.A.W.X. is considered to be the equivalent of LockOn, DCS:BlackShark, DCS:Warthog, Falcon 4, Flight Simulator X, Il;-2 1946, or even the lightweight Third Wire series. The consoles are no where near the same league for this, admittedly niche, genre - all you get are kinda basic FPS, RPG, and RTS with lousy moddability. Unfortunately most of the gamer press is mostly oblivious/uninterested in sims, which means the punters are so poorly informed they still think the one console or the other is the bees knees (understandable if you have the gaming budget of a teen).

It is a superior control system (4, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717384)

Not just easier to learn, but better. The reason is because a mouse can be both fast and precise. You can easily make quick movements, but can dial that back and be extremely precise too. This is the reason it works so well as an input device. You can get the cursor across the screen fast, but then easily zero in on a small button. Joysticks can't do that. They can be fast or precise, but not both at once. You either have to turn up the sensitivity/acceleration for fast moves, meaning precise aiming is very hard, or you have to turn it down to allow precision, but sacrifice quick movement.

So for FPSes the mouse is by far a superior control system. That is part of the reason for next to no cross platform shooters. Xbox Live makes that possible, Windows and the 360 can play against each other, however in play testing the PC users just slaughter the console users. This is also why in the exceedingly rare cross platform play titles the console users have auto aim and the PC users do not.

Not all games benefit from a mouse. I'd say platformers are easier with a controller, but FPSes do in a big way.

Re:It is a superior control system (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717764)

Keyboard and mouse may be more accurate, but better?

Try playing on a console. It feels much more natural, and realistic (yes, that seems funny to say, but it's true).
The rate of turning and aiming is closer to real world mechanics, and it helps with game immersion.

You want fast twitch scoring? You want to watch a counter go up, and get a buzz from the numbers? Sure, play a PC.

You want to feel like you're part of the action? Play a console game.

Re:It is a superior control system (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717804)

In any competitive game (such as, well, a multiplayer FPS), "better" means "more efficient".

Re:It is a superior control system (4, Interesting)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717884)

Actions rewarded here in this story aren't about "precise aiming and control". It's about hitting a button or a key to throw out a healing pack, ammo pack, or blow torch to point at a tank (about a foot in front of you, so no aiming necessary). Kills and other actions that are non-support are not counted in this statistic, making the input method irrelevant.

It seems obvious to me that there is less fragmentation on the PC right now, so everyone rushes to the new gaming experience that is finally available. On the consoles, people are spread across a number of pretty good recent games. For example, there seem to be an average of 1,000,000 playing the newest COD at any given moment on just the 360, alone.

It may also simply be that Bad Company is bigger on the PC than consoles (I'm not sure if it is or not, though it seems odd if it is, since Bad Company is essentially the round-edged console version of a Battlefield game). If that's the case, then it's an even less meaningful statistic. It's like saying that PC gaming is the biggest thing going, merely because so many people play WoW.

Don't get me wrong. I've been a PC gamer my entire life and I used to talk trash about consoles. I've just come to grips with the fact that we're charity cases, taking what developers pick and choose to actually give us and often as poor ports from games focused on console development and dropped on the PC as an afterthought. Telling myself that "PC gaming is bigger than ever!" isn't going to make it so.

The one benefit I would say PC gaming still has is the community of gamers. I was getting really addicted to Black Ops on the console (I finally got over the "I need WASD+M" hurdle), but I recently woke up one morning and said "I'm done. Not playing another minute of that, ever.". People on PCs are assholes, but I've never experienced anything like Black Ops on the console. Not even Modern Warfare 2 on the console was this bad of an experience. In one evening's gaming session, I would say the average person must hear about 500 racial slurs, just as many homophobic slurs, and a couple hundred death threats. And that doesn't even count the constant five year olds squealing into their microphones, assholes playing their shitty fucking rap music or country music over the mics, randomly screaming into the mics just to disturb people, or carrying on phone conversations or in-person conversations while their fucking mics are hot.

PC gaming seems to still have just enough of a hurdle to get into that it filters out a big chunk of these dipshits.

Re:Shocking news: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717132)

Except they're not playing against each other, so input device has nothing to do with it. The fact is, the Battlefield series has always been more popular on PC, the Call of Duty series has been more popular on consoles. This contest started not too long after the most recent Call of Duty release. I own both games on PS3. Currently the Call of Duty servers are swamped, the Battlefield servers aren't barren but there's not a lot of people playing. TFA says nothing about how many game hours were logged on each respective platform, but I'd wager it's significantly higher on PC.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

icebike (68054) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717382)

They aren't playing each other, but that should not affect the completion percentage rate if equal skills were brought to the table.

Even dramatic differences in the sheer number of players should not affect a measurement of Percentage of completion.

So that kind of suggests two sources for the difference, 1) the console controllers, and their effectiveness in game play, OR 2) relative skill level of the players.

The headline suggests its the skill of the PC gamers, but I'm not so sure.

(Not having played the game on either platform, I can't comment on the team coordination capabilities (voice, chat, etc) of the platforms but that might enter into it as well).

Re:Shocking news: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717416)

RTFA. There's no percentage of completion, the contest was to complete 69 million actions, it's pure grinding. Actions are all a routine part of gameplay, every game played will have X number of actions. Yes, it's possible that X is higher per game for PC players than for console players, but those numbers are not given.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

Dan East (318230) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717152)

Ironically, the Wii, which IMO has the best hardware control scheme for First Person Shooters of all the consoles, was not included in this competition. Many years ago I remember playing the Quake 2 "port" to the PS1 (wasn't really a port as much as the levels being retrofitted into an entirely different game engine - the player couldn't even duck, etc), and I remember being the most frustrated I think I've ever been playing a game. I was very proficient on the PC version, and the change to a dual-shock controller was terrible. I felt like I had to play with one hand tied behind my back. There simply is no comparison to mlook for a FPS, although the Wiimote comes very close.

Re:Shocking news: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717302)

the games was 5$ for sale on EA Store and Steam.

it was 70$ for console.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

Gulthek (12570) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717400)

Superior for playing the game better, yes. Superior for gaming comfort and realism, not for me.

If I'm playing a robot or enhanced human, sure I'll grant being able to whirl around and hit five targets in five directions in less than a second. If I'm playing a WWII soldier, not so much.

Re:Shocking news: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717512)

LOL, justify your deficiencies all you want. But maybe it's just that you suck.

One method requires actual physical skill while the other does not.

Also, replying to the OP, it's not just input devices, the hardware in general on PC's is better. Better CPU and better graphics.

Re:Shocking news: (4, Insightful)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717492)

Players with superior input devices do better. More as this story develops.

Ordinarily I'd agree with you but I'd say that it has little to do with the input devices and more to do with the skill level, courteousness and ability of the players to work together in this case which gives the PC no intrinsic advantage.

Players had to perform 69 million team actions, which include spotting, performing repairs, and healing, reviving and resupplying. Given the push button, receive medkit nature of these functions there's no difference between console and PC. If it were based on number of kills then we'd be able to say that the PC's input dev has a great advantage. The difference we have is in the kind of people who choose these respective platforms. PC players tend to work together, healing and resupplying others as they go, console players tend to be a lot more selfish, going after other players on their own rather then working as a team.

Re:Shocking news: (1)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717684)

While I don't actually disagree with you on that, this story doesn't say anything about skill. This was purely a count of "cooperative actions" - deploying a medkit for teammates, marking enemy positions, and such. Skill wasn't involved - teamwork was.

Re:Shocking news: (0)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717772)

Gamers clinging to half-dead platform grasp onto any silly statistic to assure themselves that they're still going strong and they're still the primary development platform for game studios.

Look, I'm a life-long PC gamer who hasn't even let consoles into my life until the last few years. However, I've gotten over the "WASD DURPA DURPA DURPA THUMBSTICKS" discussions and I've certainly come to accept that I'm a secondary citizen of the gaming world when it comes to PC games (except for MMOs and some RPGs and RTSes). I understand that the sales numbers for most games on consoles dwarf the same games on PCs.

I'm also not so delusional that I'm going to cling onto this number as proof that PC gaming is thriving, when it's obviously more likely that it's the difference between gamers on the PC having fewer modern choices to focus their attention on, while the console gamers are spreading their attention across many games.

Skillz. (1, Flamebait)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717066)

pc is some serious shit. pcers generally play with keyboard wasd and function keys and mouse, which requires greater coordination, attention, and dedication (tiring). therefore, they are more honed in their gaming 'skillZ' (tm) than people playing with consoles with easy to use, ergonomic designed controllers. moreover, the pc gamers play full spectrum of games with that keyboard and mouse, as opposed to console-friendly games made for or ported to consoles, further increasing their skills regarding coordination and gaming.

Re:Skillz. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717140)

u mad, bro?

Full spectrum? In my PC? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717282)

the pc gamers play full spectrum of games with that keyboard and mouse

Games made for PC don't necessarily cover the full spectrum of genres. (In before Zed Ecks jokes.) For example, what's the closest PC counterpart to Mario Party series, Super Smash Bros. series, 4-player Tetris Party, and Super Mario Galaxy series? Sure, MySims can replace Animal Crossing series; who can think of other titles to convert Wii fans to PC gaming?

Re:Full spectrum? In my PC? (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717352)

all of the games you speak of, are available on pc directly or through emulators.

"Games made for PC" (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717448)

Games made for PC don't necessarily cover the full spectrum of genres.

or through emulators.

Games that require emulators aren't "games made for PC", unless perhaps you count Flash, Java, .NET, and DOSBox as emulated environments. Besides, with Retrode sold out, how is one supposed to dump his own game cartridges to ROM files for use on a PC?

Re:Full spectrum? In my PC? (1)

Draek (916851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717824)

Rayman Rabbids and the rest of the Rayman series cover, respectively, the Mario Party and Mario Galaxy niches. I've never played Tetris Party, but if it's a simple multiplayer version of Tetris there's hundreds of freeware titles doing it, even some Free Software ones. SSB however, I've never heard of such a thing, I'd be interested in it too, in case somebody is aware of one.

Re:Skillz. (-1, Flamebait)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717336)

It sounds more like people who play on consoles likely also do other things, like have a life. That is why they bought a console to play games and didn't bother building their own high performance liquid helium cooled gamer PC. Meanwhile PCers spend all their time in their rooms (or parents basement) modding their PCs and playing games. If that is all you do with you life, then you will be good at it. Frankly, I'm not sure I'd be so proud about this achievement.

Re:Skillz. (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717360)

It sounds more like people who play on consoles likely also do other things, like have a life.

eewwwwwwwwww 'have a life' card was called. im out of the juvenile-destined discussion at this point. come back when you are grown up enough to know that there is no such thing as 'having a life' or the opposite.

Re:Skillz. (1)

Killjoy_NL (719667) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717396)

Exactly, as if people enjoying their leisurely pursuits is not having a life.
If this is the case, the same would go for all people playing sports instead of going to bars or whatever "having a life" requires in the narrow mind of people like "theshowmecanuck"

Re:Skillz. (2)

Draek (916851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717866)

Actually, it's the other way around. Consoles are expensive systems, you only buy one if you're certain you'll spend a significant amount of time with it as otherwise it'd be an useless waste; meanwhile, many PC gamers are simply professionals who already own computers as part of their jobs, and decide to spend $60-80 on a relatively modern-ish GPU in order to play BluRay movies more smoothly on their PCs as well as play the odd game or two.

That's why nearly all driving and flight sims, the most realistic FPS and strategy games are all PC exclusives and why none of them require the high-end GPUs commonly owned by console-gamers-turned-PC, because their core market is composed of grown adults and they, by and large, aren't ready to spend $400 on a device built solely to play videogames.

Though that probably doesn't apply to TFA though, given that Bad Company isn't *quite* to the level of Operation: Flashpoint in terms of realism.

It doesn't say that at all. (1)

Jason Pollock (45537) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717100)

It doesn't say anything about the ability of the players.

Now, assuming that the player populations are of equal size, with equal numbers of hours played...

It might be construed to say that PC players are more team focused, willing to do things other than shoot the enemy.

Of course, it is just as possible that someone's programmed a bot on the PC version and the _bot_ is doing the running around, or that the PC players play 10 hours vs the console gamer's 1, or some other difference between the platforms.

Re:It doesn't say that at all. (2, Interesting)

RoadDoggFL (876257) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717174)

Now, assuming that the player populations are of equal size, with equal numbers of hours played...

That may be quite an assumption, since the hours played since team actions have counted towards unlocking the map isn't listed (at least it wasn't when I checked). Considering that BC2 is a bit of a darling on PC in light of Activision's actions of late, it likely has a much larger portion of the online population on the PC than the consoles (where most players are probably playing CoD, Halo, or Resistance/Killzone). That being said, PC gamers are still faring a higher actions per hour rate since launch, but with the possibility of a larger population on PC it's likely this was never going to be close.

Re:It doesn't say that at all. (1)

Barny (103770) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717304)

http://www.battlefieldbadcompany2.com/globalstats?platform=360 [battlefiel...mpany2.com]

I know its not since they 'started counting actions', but still its a pretty telling story.

Re:It doesn't say that at all. (1)

RoadDoggFL (876257) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717392)

No it isn't, because BC2 doesn't have the draw on the consoles that it does on the PC. Activision's the bad guy to PC gamers, and they look at DICE games fondly. Neither of those things work in the game's favor on the consoles, and I'd be very surprised to see if the hours played on the consoles is comparable.

Re:It doesn't say that at all. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717734)

Well, if you'd actually clicked the link that the gp provided you might have seen that both the XBOX and the PS3 crowds have more than 90 million hours played, while the PC gamers sit at 55 million hours.

Re:It doesn't say that at all. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717232)

http://www.battlefieldbadcompany2.com/globalstats [battlefiel...mpany2.com]
Both consoles have over 90k combined playing hours, while PC gamers only accumulated 55k so far and have been nearly doubly as "efficient" in total (regarding this challenge).
Which of course makes one PC gamer 3-4 times "better" than a console gamer ;)

On a more serious note, you have superior input instruments and superior communication channels on the PC, plus the crowd is generally a bit more "savvy".

Not least due to keyboard and mouse (0)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717116)

It doesn't matter what people say trying to dress itup as some kind of preference BS...mouse and keyboard is vastly more accurate and intuitive. Yes, KB/M are available for consoles, but most people don't use them. This comes down to gamers using a more accurate input system, and pulling ahead of it because of that, nothing more/

Re:Not least due to keyboard and mouse (0)

v1 (525388) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717378)

It doesn't matter what people say trying to dress itup as some kind of preference BS...mouse and keyboard is vastly more accurate and intuitive.

While I may have to agree on the accuracy, analog controllers tend to beat keyboard/mouse in the speed department. Also, depending on the game of course, the options available for control can either be unbalanced, or just outright different.

I got a PS3 USB controller for my computer, and tried using it for call of duty. It didn't work. There was no physical way to map the controller 1:1 to the computer because the computer lacked the analog inputs. So for example, a consoler could aim by nearly instantly zipping their thumb on the one stick to the x,y of the target. The computer required the user to move the mouse, or to hold down keys to move the aim. (at a fixed speed) The stick has the k/m beat in target acquisition speed.

OTOH, once you have the crosshairs in the neighborhood, the accuracy of the mouse (trackball for me) takes over, and can make it much easier, faster, and more reliable to fine tune the aim down to the pixel for that across-the-map headshot. In that respect I think snipers would do better with k/m and melee better with a controller.

Thinking back on things, if computers more commonly came with controllers or even a joystick, more computer ports of games would have support for analog inputs. I remember having a joystick on my apple ii so long ago, and that worked so much better than keyboard with most games.

Some of it is the game mechanics itself being dictated by the controller in use. Back to COD, look at walking speed. The console player appears to be able to move at any speed in between 0 and fast, controlled by the amount you push on the stick. PC gamers don't have that luxury, they have several fixed speeds and no way to get in between them. I believe it's issues like that which are one of the main reasons we see so very few online games that allow pc and console to play together - they have different mechanics. Even if the console speed was stepped, the player can easily instantly switch between speeds, without needing to "ratchet up" or down with a double or triple tap of a key.

There are quite a few more lesser differences that also come immediately to mind, but these are some of the bigger issues. There's just too much difference between the two to make any kind of a reasonable comparison.

Re:Not least due to keyboard and mouse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717582)

While I may have to agree on the accuracy, analog controllers tend to beat keyboard/mouse in the speed department.

This is simply not true. A mouse can, and often is tuned to a higher sensitivity when 'tweak' style speed is necessary. Personally I set the sensitivity very high so that it takes about an eight of an inch to turn 90 degrees, no joke. If you can imagine the time it takes to move a mouse an eighth of and inch then you can begin to understand the advantage a mouse has over analog controllers. Accuracy at that speed takes some time to get used to master, but you'll just have to take my word for it that it can be done.

What you are referring to with Call of Duty is called "terrible console port". Mouse movements should not be at a fixed speed.

Also, there are very few, if any, tactical situations where you would need to move at less then maximum speed. Stealth situations (walking to reduce noise) are accounted for on the PC. In those situations where you would need to walk slower (positioning yourself to take out a turret in TF2 for instance) an be achieved by quickly tapping the controls. I will grant you that this isn't ideal, and maybe not quite a substitute for fine control, but this simply doesn't make up for the superior speed and accuracy of a k/m combination.

Numbers rather than skill - and that's good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717122)

This achievement has nothing to do with the superior skill afforded by mouse and keyboard versus gamepad. Rather, this achievement is due to the fact that Bad Company 2 on the PC platform has MORE PLAYERS ONLINE than on either console version. That's why this is big, and very welcome, news for PC gamers - at a time when some big publishers have whined about how the PC is no longer viable due to piracy and lower player numbers.

Re:Numbers rather than skill - and that's good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717184)

What's the daily peak player count on PS3/360?

Re:Numbers rather than skill - and that's good (1)

Shadow of Eternity (795165) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717468)

More people = more total player hours. PC players accomplished this with 55k player hours compared to the ~90 that each the consoles currently have.

Obvious explanation (0)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717128)

PC gamers have completed the task, whereas gamers on both console platforms are only about halfway there.

Consoles have to be tied to a television - there are lots of distractions in a shared family space. It's much easier to concentrate if you're all alone in your parent's basement.

Tied to a television, which is a computer monitor (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717316)

Consoles have to be tied to a television

In the era of LCD HDTV, when gaming PCs have HDMI or DVI-D out and Best Buy's sales floor is littered with 720p and 1080p monitors that take composite, component, VGA, and HDMI in, what's the difference between a "television" and a "computer monitor" anymore?

It's much easier to concentrate if you're all alone in your parent's basement.

Consoles are easy to pick up and move down to the TV monitor in the basement, a lot easier than a typical minitower PC in my experience.

Re:Tied to a television, which is a computer monit (1)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717402)

The difference is DPI. TVs are massive because they're meant to be viewed from a distance by several people at once, while monitors tend to much smaller, and more suitable for reading text at non-eye-straining distances.

Re:Tied to a television, which is a computer monit (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717762)

TVs are massive because they're meant to be viewed from a distance by several people at once, while monitors tend to much smaller

So "monitors" are better for single-player and "TVs" are better for multiplayer. Now all we have to do is figure out how to convince the less geeky crowd to connect "TVs" to PCs for use with Hulu and PC games. In fact, the networks appear to be making it easier by blocking Google TV.

and more suitable for reading text at non-eye-straining distances.

I figured out the formula for how to set a usable DPI [pineight.com] for surfing the web from your couch, given the TV size, resolution, and seating distance.

Re:Obvious explanation (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717428)

It's much easier to concentrate if you're all alone in your parent's basement.

I'm sure this will come as a crushing blow, but the majority of gamers today are in the 30-45yr old bracket, married, and have kids. You can do searches on your favorite search engine and read all about it.

Maybe you should have said, "It's much easier to concentrate, if you're all alone, the kids aren't yelling and you're hiding from your wife, kids, and enjoying me time."

hold on there (4, Insightful)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717158)

Not to defend the console gamers but:
1) This is based on one game.
2) This assumes that the ports were equivalent
3) This was a count of collective actions of a community not averaged over the individual. The same tournament held between various PC OSes would have resulted in Microsoft crushing Linux's gamers simply because there are more of them on the PC platform.

Re:hold on there (5, Informative)

bryonak (836632) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717260)

1) agree
2) agree
3) http://www.battlefieldbadcompany2.com/globalstats [battlefiel...mpany2.com] [battlefiel...mpany2.com]
Both consoles have over 90k combined playing hours each, while PC gamers only accumulated 55k so far and have been nearly doubly as "efficient" in total (regarding this challenge).
Which of course makes one PC gamer 3-4 times "better" than a console gamer ;)
So your Microsoft analogy doesn't fit the case at all

Re:hold on there (5, Interesting)

mjwx (966435) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717560)

I doubt you read the fine article.

1) This is based on one game.

OK, but it's a fairly popular game.

2) This assumes that the ports were equivalent

The players were required to perform certain "team actions" which are healing, resupplying, repairing, reviving, spotting and assisting. With the exception of assisting all of these actions are simple and require no aiming or other complex action to perform, put simply push button, receive medkit.

3) This was a count of collective actions of a community not averaged over the individual. The same tournament held between various PC OSes would have resulted in Microsoft crushing Linux's gamers simply because there are more of them on the PC platform.

Yes, but you're logic is flawed. I would bet there are slightly more players on Console then on PC as DLC tends to sell better on consoles. This has less to do with the number of gamers and more to do with the way gamers on the respective platforms work together. PC gamers tend to be less "STFU NOOB" and more working as a team. I've played BF BC2 for a while and I've yet to suggested to perform any sexual acts on my progenitors. I mean the other day this guy accidentally ran over me with a tank as I was getting out, he even apologised.

Re:hold on there (1)

Rifter13 (773076) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717598)

This is an old fight. One that has seen the console players trounced time and time again. Quake 3 anyone?

Re:hold on there (4, Informative)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717610)

1) Correct - it is false to conclude from this alone that PC > consoles. However, it's definitely evidence in the favor. 2) They're pretty much identical, except for input device and, on the PC, more configurability on the graphics. 3) Data does not support this - there are more players on the XBox version or the PS3 version than on the PC. So, then, it's even more surprising that the PC showed more cooperation.

Re:hold on there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717790)

That reminds me so much when Quake 3 was available on PC and Dreamcast.
Dreamcast players would just complain that they always get crushed by PC players and then they got their own servers to play against other console players.

It's really not a new debate.

TFS Lies! (0)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717196)

Console gamers are not our brethren. They are The Unclean Ones.

Breaking news! PC-spawned genre played more on PCs (1, Insightful)

Peganthyrus (713645) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717200)

Mostly this shows that the kind of people who like to play first-person shoot-em-ups prefer to play on a computer.

I wonder how much the sales numbers reflect this? Or are the kind of people who like to play FPSs also the kind of people who don't bother to pay for games they get a lot of enjoyment out of?

Re:Breaking news! PC-spawned genre played more on (2)

Gulthek (12570) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717412)

The sales numbers don't reflect it at all, because that simply isn't the case. See Halo series sales.

But really we're all one big happy gaming geeky segment of the population.

Re:Breaking news! PC-spawned genre played more on (3, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717618)

More likely what it means is that console players don't know how to play real FPS games. The controllers just don't support any game made from Quake or so on. I remember prior to Quake pretty much everybody played with keyboard only, then quake came out and people started to use keyboard and mouse other wise they were going to get crushed by the competition.

Comparatively speaking the controllers that these games are designed for on consoles fit midway between keyboard and keyboard/mouse combo. They require special tweaks and assistance to work which aren't necessary on PC.

Doesn't mean that console FPS can't or aren't fun, but it does mean that they're the equivalent of arcade race games to the PC's race simulators.

Color me not surprised... (1, Insightful)

BulletMagnet (600525) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717218)

You need a decently powered PC to push DICE software, ergo your average PC gamer is probably NOT living in his Mom's basement and has a real job to afford nice toys such as said PC and is probably not the typical 14 year old idiot you hear screaming obsenities at you over $ConsolePlatformOfYourChoice....

So 14 year old ADD kid or older person with disposable income - who do you think would get done first?

What I'd like to know (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717222)

Is more details behind it. There are two major thing I see that could be influencing this that I'd find interesting:

1) Number of copies sold. If there are more players, well then there's gonna be more points earned. This would be interesting particularly what with a number of publishers hating on the PC and claiming nobody buys games, they all pirate, etc, etc. If that is not the case (pirated copies are probably not happening here, since the servers are all controlled by trusted hosts and they check) it would be good to know. Perhaps for some games PC sales exceed any single console platform, or perhaps all the platforms. I suspect that may happen and EA (who publishes Battlefield) may know it as they've had a big PC gaming push as of late.

2) Number of online players. Even if copies sold are equal, the people who play online may not be. I wonder if there is a difference between players online and offline. Bad Company 2 DOES have a single player game, it sucks, but it has one. Perhaps consoles are still far more single player platforms. Doesn't mean people don't use them to play online, but perhaps PC gamers are far more in to online gaming whereas more console gamers are content to just play single player.

Knowing those would be very interesting, and also you could then control for them to get a better idea of another factor: Team play. Do PC gamers tend to team play more? Perhaps the people who tend to wards that platform are also more interested in cooperation than console gamers.

Either way, interesting given a number of the recent "OMG PC gaming is fucked!" stories that have been published. It would appear that for some games at least, people still want to play.

Misleading summary title (4, Insightful)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717228)

I read the summary title and thought - for once - some insane game company had enabled PCs to play in the same games with consoles. But no... PC gamers just performed more "team actions" in their own isolated world than console gamers did in theirs.

The game could be more popular on PC than consoles, or perhaps just more "serious" (and maybe older) players on PCs. Hell, maybe the PC version just got cracked and it didn't involve many players at all. Who knows. Slightly interesting, with so little data, only slightly.

Re:Misleading summary title (1)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717488)

Can someone shed some light on why it is that the same game on different consoles don't interoperate for multiplayer? I suspect it's a requirement of the respective console companies' network policies, but I don't know for sure.

Re:Misleading summary title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717530)

Can someone shed some light on why it is that the same game on different consoles don't interoperate for multiplayer? I suspect it's a requirement of the respective console companies' network policies, but I don't know for sure.

because some platforms are superior to others in different areas

No need to have anybody discover that their favorite gaming platform sux at some game

Re:Misleading summary title (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717640)

Could be, or more likely it comes in terms of the difficulty of insuring that bugs on one system don't lead to problems playing with each other. Bugs can be a serious problem which lead to people having an unfair advantage. Plus, there's a tendency to tweak the ports to play well on a given system. Trying to test cross platform ends up being tough at times.

Re:Misleading summary title (1)

Endophage (1685212) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717766)

I believe it was Sony that tried pitching PC gamers against consoles (although I could be wrong... it could have been MS). The result was that the power of a keyboard and mouse over a console controller sent the console gamers home with their tails between their legs. In short, PCs pwned consoles!

Re:Misleading summary title (1)

imunfair (877689) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717624)

Shadowrun tried that and the PC gamers destroyed the console players even though the console players had auto-aim. I doubt anyone is crazy enough to try that again in a FPS

So, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717230)

And in other news, console gamers couldn't care less.
Maybe it's about fun rather than competition. Go with the platform you like, whether it's "more accurate" or not.

Re:So, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717482)

butthurt.

No kidding..its the interface stupid.. (2)

Rytr23 (704409) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717236)

Skill at gaming might actually be equal, but the interface is not. I believe someone from MS said at one time they had Xbox and PC FPS shooters(i forget the game) sharing servers and found that PC gamers always smoked the console gamers. KB/M > gamepad for FPS or RPG or RTS with hotkeys/macros/accuracy via mouse vs toggling a stick to move your reticle around and limited buttons. I thought this was common knowledge..

Re:No kidding..its the interface stupid.. (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717408)

KB/M > gamepad for FPS or RPG or RTS

But not for all genres. Could a co-op platformer similar to New Super Mario Bros. Wii have been done on a PC? There's Trine, which is sort of like The Lost Vikings from what I've heard, but that's it.

Re:No kidding..its the interface stupid.. (1)

Killjoy_NL (719667) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717410)

I believe you 100%, but can you provide a link, so that I can twap other people around the head with it ??

Pop caps, pop handbags, pop life (1)

hennyjack (1933170) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717254)

music caps [voguecaps.com] , red bull caps [voguecaps.com] , monster caps [voguecaps.com] , music caps [voguecaps.com] red bull caps [voguecaps.com] monster caps [voguecaps.com] music caps [voguecaps.com] red bull caps [voguecaps.com] monster caps [voguecaps.com] LV handbags [handbagsexport.com] , Hermes Handbag [handbagsexport.com] , Fendi handbag [handbagsexport.com] , LV handbags [handbagsexport.com] Hermes Handbag [handbagsexport.com] Fendi handbag [handbagsexport.com] LV handbags [handbagsexport.com] Hermes Handbag [handbagsexport.com] Fendi handbag [handbagsexport.com] mac 180 color eyeshadow [sellingmac.com] , mac wholesale [sellingmac.com] , mac makeup [sellingmac.com] , mac 180 color eyeshadow [sellingmac.com] mac wholesale [sellingmac.com] mac makeup [sellingmac.com] MAC 9 color eyeshadow [sellingmac.com] MAC 12 color eyeshadow [sellingmac.com] MAC 21 color eyeshadow [sellingmac.com] http://www.sellingmac.com/ [sellingmac.com] our email:sellingmac@hotmail.com http://www.voguecaps.com/ [voguecaps.com] our email:voguecaps@hotmail.com http://www.handbagsexport.com/ [handbagsexport.com] our email:handbagsexport@hotmail.com

Uhh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717556)

Also the massive steam sales over the last few days so the huge influx of players has probably helped. Core game for $6.80 + Expansion for $15 compared to $15 expansion for console + still $20-30 used core game.

Rather extreme title... (0)

supersloshy (1273442) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717558)

So... PC gamers with better input devices for the style of game (FPS) beat console gamers at one specific task in one specific game, and it qualifies as "PC Gamers Crush Console Brethren"? Seriously? This is news to some people, sure, like those who had the experiment in the first place, but this isn't even close to /.-worthiness.

moD down (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717570)

NETBSD POSTS ON PARANOID CONSPIRACY those uber-asshole driven out by the it there. Bring the longest or 4osts. Therefore Long term survival completely before

Enough with the fanboyism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717644)

Objectively, a mouse is always going to be superior for aiming than a traditional console controller. It's a pointing device - a thumbstick is not. Thumbsticks are direction-strength based - good for defining velocities; things like character movement/driving etc (much better than a PC keyboard). For FPS games, accurate aiming makes more of a difference than accurate character movement. It really is as simple as that.

Holy cow Batman! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717688)

People still buy PC games? I for one learned my lesson when I caught some publishers installing secret drivers on my system years ago. Now anything I buy is from the used market at rock-bottom prices. This way, even if a new game that comes out contains malware, I won't be funding them.

Also, if I pay $50 for a game, the developer better stick around and patch it for at least a year or I will never buy from them again. Case in point: games from 2004 that don't behave properly on multi-core systems.

I has... (1)

Endophage (1685212) | more than 3 years ago | (#34717744)

Uber Micro!

The real truth from a FPS gamer of 15 years. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717862)

Whenever this tired argument breaks out I never hear mention of the REAL reasons why PC FPS gamers are better then consolers.

Yes, it is true that the k/m combination is much better then an analog controller for FPS games, but this has wider implications then just simple accuracy and speed. The fact is the tactics used by PC gamers are more sophisticated because of the better controls. PC gamers an defend themselves from flank attacks much better because of the ability to turn quickly. If you cannot turn 90/180 degrees in a tenth of a second or faster with a mouse then you need to set your sensitivity higher and practice some more. A consoler has far fewer options when defending from such attacks. How long does it take for a consoler to turn around when being shot in the back? Since such limitations exist, the defensive skills to utilize turn speed are never developed in consolers.

A large part of a master FPSer is superior situational awareness. Knowing where the enemy is at all times involves the ability to make quick visual checks at all times. You virtual 'eyes' should be darting around looking and checking every corner of your field of view AT ALL TIMES. This is what separates the proficient gamers from those with real talent. It is harder to get the element of surprise on a person who has the ability to see in all directions and uses it. This is achieved through the use of high mouse sensitivity. The distance a mouse should travel to turn 90 degrees should be much less then an inch. You should shoot for an eighth of an inch of physical space traveled to turn 90 degrees. If you can maintain accuracy at this speed, and I assure you this is very possible with practice, then your turning movements should be very near instant.

The contribution of situational awareness to the skill-set of a gamer cannot be understated. The poor response of analog controllers ensures that console gamers will never develop proper situational awareness skills.

The PC gamer has a much larger set of tools, so to speak, and so he or she learns to use these tools and becomes efficient with them. Console gamers don't have effective tools and so learn inferior tactics and are unable to capitalize on the awareness afforded by a better input device.

Consoles are for kids, real gamers use PCs! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34717882)

There are no consoles at Quakecon.

Besides, to own a console is to be owned.

Corporations are evil. Avoid them at all cost.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>