Support NeoGAF

[Ysiadmihi]

It doesn't matter how responsive your controls are if you have a good squad working together.

Your squad won't be working well together when they're all dead.

The excuse that "Battlefield isn't about shooting" has gone beyond stupid at this point.

 

[CountAntonius]

That's nice. So why do you watch those things?



True story, he claimed Scout was his most played class.

I watch them cause I am entertained by tactics as well as skillful shooting(which believe it or not does happen in consoles shooters as well). I also watch them to learn map movements and strategies. If you follow the Quake scene you know for a fact it's not dominated by aiming but by map movement and management.

I know the depth of Quake 3 is beyond any shooter even on PC but going by the mentality most on here that skillgap is everything Quake 3 should probably be the only game hosting tournaments at all cause even on PC BF's skill ceiling is laughable compared to Q3A. However every game has it's home and it's community and it's ok for that community to have their own scene.

 

[Nex Superne]

TF2 really isn't an aim intensive game either. Medic, Heavy, Soldier, Engineer, and Pyro are very acceptable when it comes to aiming, so I could see pad playing being more acceptable, but not ideal.

Not Soldier. Decent ones need to be able to rocket jump/strafe seamlessly and nail airshots/aerials reliably. Not possible on a controller.

 

[Danne-Danger]

Of course it's about skill. It's like watching a game of extremely high level ping pong players when you want to watch tennis and then complaining about it. Do I think someone who is good at ping pong would get destroyed if they hopped onto a tennis field holding only a paddle? Absolutely.

No it isn't, it's (in this case) BF3 vs. BF3. The rules are the same, the gameplay is the same, the tactics are the same, the control methods are different, one is better.

 

[computers putin']

I watch them cause I am entertained by tactics as well as skillful shooting(which believe it or not does happen in consoles shooters as well). I also watch them to learn map movements and strategies. If you follow the Quake scene you know for a fact it's not dominated by aiming but by map movement and management.

I know the depth of Quake 3 is beyond any shooter even on PC but going by the mentality most on here that skillgap is everything Quake 3 should probably be the only game hosting tournaments at all cause even on PC BF's skill ceiling is laughable compared to Q3A. However every game has it's home and it's community and it's ok for that community to have their own scene.

quit pulling my tail bruh!

 

[LCGeek]

Controllers are not a gimped control scheme for gamers who have only ever played with a controller or those comfortable playing FPS with them.

They are gimped

When a fps game needs to be redesigned in terms of hitboxes, speed, and damage around a gamepad it's gimped no matter what bs semantics you bring in to the picture.

 

[Teknopathetic]

"Your squad won't be working well together when they're all dead."


Bingo. All this BS about SQUADS, COORDINATION, HIGH LEVEL PLAY, etc. is just that. In an FPS your strategy is only as good as your ability to execute it and that means being able to frag. If your opponents are majorly outfragging you, it doesn't really matter how high level your strategy happens to be, it still revolves around you being able to kill your opponents.

 

[Fjordson]

It might bother you, sure. But how much pro-gaming have you actually watched?

Eh? Bother? Was simply marveling at how silly this thread is.

 

[Jburton]

They are gimped

When a fps game needs to be redesigned in terms of hitboxes, speed, and damage around a gamepad it's gimped no matter what bs semantics you bring in to the picture.

What about a console only shooter then.

No redesigning there.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

I watch them cause I am entertained by tactics as well as skillful shooting(which believe it or not does happen in consoles shooters as well). I also watch them to learn map movements and strategies. If you follow the Quake scene you know for a fact it's not dominated by aiming but by map movement and management.

I know the depth of Quake 3 is beyond any shooter even on PC but going by the mentality most on here that skillgap is everything Quake 3 should probably be the only game hosting tournaments at all cause even on PC BF's skill ceiling is laughable compared to Q3A. However every game has it's home and it's community and it's ok for that community to have their own scene.

And that's all fine. Honestly, at this point what you're arguing against is that people like me and a lot of other posters in this thread are of the opinion that competitive FPS gaming with controllers would be boring to watch and are expressing that opinion. Considering that you are admitting here that the skill ceiling does indeed cap out at a lower level with controllers, I'm not sure why us stating that opinion is so traumatic for you.

The reality is that we're on GAF and a wide range of opinions exist here. Maybe you think that people not interested in this tournament should fuck off? That's cool! But if that's the case then you should just say that instead of getting into a debate about the merits or otherwise of the different control schemes.

Just my opinion.

What about a console only shooter then.

No redesigning there.

No need! The game already aims for you and is designed around it.

Or was that not your point?

 

[CountAntonius]

Nah it's not traumatic nor do I think anyone should "fuck off" I just see this argument often and like to play devil's advocate. Opinions should be expressed on both sides and I'm doing my part. But as someone who has followed e sports for a number of years I will say at that level of play what makes it fascinating to me is not the input methods(all pro players have godlike aim/execution in fighters) the mind game and strategy is what makes it great. But well that's one man's opinion.

also before anyone talks about pad's in fighting games there was a pad user in the top 10 at evo(Wolfkrone).

 

[Jburton]

And that's all fine. Honestly, at this point what you're arguing against is that people like me and a lot of other posters in this thread are of the opinion that competitive FPS gaming with controllers would be boring to watch and are expressing that opinion. Considering that you are admitting here that the skill ceiling does indeed cap out at a lower level with controllers, I'm not sure why us stating that opinion is so traumatic for you.

The reality is that we're on GAF and a wide range of opinions exist here. Maybe you think that people not interested in this tournament should fuck off? That's cool! But if that's the case then you should just say that instead of getting into a debate about the merits or otherwise of the different control schemes.

Just my opinion.

You are not interested in this tournament, you have stated this already .....so kindly!


In fact PC players have shit up this thread so much that the tournament itself has fuck all to do with the discussion.

PC elite talking about how great PC gaming is and how amazing the mouse is for FPS.


This thread is like an old, tired whore ..... its been fucked in all different holes by the same dicks ........ and that bitch ain't any closer to cumming!

 

[LCGeek]

What about a console only shooter then.

No redesigning there.

That's like asking me to use a go kart vs something with quite a bit more power. If you're fps is designed to make aiming easier in a variety of ways who cares if there is little to no auto aiming mechanism when the design of enemies, hitboxes, and the like is lenient instead of precise.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

The contest is about console people vs console people right?

Sure people with mouse will have a leg up on people with controllers, but that's not a factor here.

The fact that EA might not get much viewers because it's console only is up to EA to deal with. There are plenty of PC contests to go around. I'm sure EA will get enough entries to fill out the contest though hah.

Also teams will not die too fast because they are using controllers. There will be plenty of time to coordinate strategies. Socom 2 allowed it, it was a blast with gaf. I had fun with BC2 as well, though it wasn't Battle Field 2.

 

[RiccochetJ]

No it isn't, it's (in this case) BF3 vs. BF3. The rules are the same, the gameplay is the same, the tactics are the same, the control methods are different, one is better.

Yep the rules are the same. But the number of players and map are smaller (24 vs 64). Tactics may be different. And yes, there is a different input scheme.

Is one better? How do you define that? Is there a chance that someone out there would enjoy one over the other?

 

[Danne-Danger]

also before anyone talks about pad's in fighting games there was a pad user in the top 10 at evo(Wolfkrone).

Well, that's more akin to someone using a slightly worse mouse than someone else in a PC environment, isn't it?

Yep the rules are the same. But the number of players and map are smaller (24 vs 64). Tactics may be different. And yes, there is a different input scheme.

Is one better? How do you define that? Is there a chance that someone out there would enjoy one over the other?

In a competitive game you'll stick to small numbers no matter what. 12v12 is a huge number. You don't just max it out because you can.

One could enjoy it yes, but he could never get to the same level as someone using the other control method, because it's better.

 

[AkuMifune]

"Your squad won't be working well together when they're all dead."


Bingo. All this BS about SQUADS, COORDINATION, HIGH LEVEL PLAY, etc. is just that. In an FPS your strategy is only as good as your ability to execute it and that means being able to frag. If your opponents are majorly outfragging you, it doesn't really matter how high level your strategy happens to be, it still revolves around you being able to kill your opponents.

You don't play much Battlefield, do you? Maybe this is true in CoD, and other FPS where kd ratio is the goal, but you can easily win BF matches while having little kills and tons of deaths. And if you're playing a game where both sides are focused on frags and can kill eachother with pinpoint accuracy as you seem to claim a good FPS is about, than you're playing a shitty ass game of Battlefield.

At least now I know for sure you guys are just wagging imaginary epeins with no concept of what high level play even is.

 

[kokujin]

Is one better? How do you define that? Is there a chance that someone out there would enjoy one over the other?

It's not a discussion of preference, it's about fact.

 

[Jburton]

It's not a discussion of preference, it's about fact.

In your opinion.

 

[CountAntonius]

Well, that's more akin to someone using a slightly worse mouse than someone else in a PC environment, isn't it?

Not saying it's the same compared to the Mouse+kb/pad discussion I just heard it being brought up numerous times in this thread and wanted people to know there are some very talented pro players on pad.

and agreed with your point of 12 v 12 being huge for a comp game. They tend to never go over 4 v 4 cause it's really cuts into the amount of teams that show up for tournies. I have always seen BF as more of a pub series. Which is why I find this thread funny as if BF has any real competitive merit. This is a 1.6 million dollar advertisement to move some cod console players over to the BF series.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Naughty, naughty. I've already been goaded into spending an hour arguing with someone who I have on ignore, and that's a violation of jim-jam's rules for GAF-ing 101.

Nah it's not traumatic nor do I think anyone should "fuck off" I just see this argument often and like to play devil's advocate. Opinions should be expressed on both sides and I'm doing my part. But as someone who has followed e sports for a number of years I will say at that level of play what makes it fascinating to me is not the input methods(all pro players have godlike aim/execution in fighters) the mind game and strategy is what makes it great. But well that's one man's opinion.

Hey, and it's an opinion I agree with. Like ghst said earlier, the psychological game you see playing out in Quake is spectacular when you know what's going on.

To me though, you can't really separate that mind-game from the skill element. They play off one another. For example, in Q3A there are players who need to be kept away from certain weapons or they'll steamroll their opposition. I find the fact that their opponent is keeping them away from the weapon entertaining, sure, but I also enjoy watching the techniques which they employ to get the job done.

 

[computers putin']

Well, that's more akin to someone using a slightly worse mouse than someone else in a PC environment, isn't it?

it's a larger discrepancy than that, way larger

 

[LCGeek]

Yep the rules are the same. But the number of players and map are smaller (24 vs 64). Tactics may be different. And yes, there is a different input scheme.

Is one better? How do you define that? Is there a chance that someone out there would enjoy one over the other?

Enjoyment has little to do with a tourney loaded with this amount of cash. It's insult to a game that has been heavily pc since inception to get dogged on a tourney with a huge pot potential. There is no reason why all 3 platforms can't be linked with big games considering both console have enjoyed cross platform games with the pc and in the genre.

If EA/Virgin fears a balance problem nothing that a few console commands won't fix.

 

[alphaNoid]

PC elitists out in full force

 

[Teknopathetic]

"You don't play much Battlefield, do you? Maybe this is true in CoD, and other FPS where kd ratio is the goal, but you can easily win BF matches while having little kills and tons of deaths. And if you're playing a game where both sides are focused on frags and can kill eachother with pinpoint accuracy as you seem to claim a good FPS is about, than you're playing a shitty ass game of Battlefield.

At least now I know for sure you guys are just wagging imaginary epeins with no concept of what high level play even is."


I've actually played a lot and very little of COD. Yes, KD isn't the goal. The goal is to capture and hold (or attack/defend) points on the map. And your opponents will be there trying to prevent you or attack you. To achieve your goal, you're going to have to be able to kill your opponent.

At least I know for sure you don't even understand the basic concept of how this game works. Laughable that you'd talk about "high level play."

 

[Ploid 3.0]

That's like asking me to use a go kart vs something with quite a bit more power. If you're fps is designed to make aiming easier in a variety of ways who cares if there is little to no auto aiming mechanism when the design of enemies, hitboxes, and the like is lenient instead of precise.

kart race.jpg

They are fun, we had kart races in gaf. Stock car races, etc. Skill will be revealed in this contest. There will be no luck only grand winner (if so please let it be me).

 

[Ysiadmihi]

but you can easily win BF matches while having little kills and tons of deaths.

You missed the point entirely. Dead players can't complete objectives.

Though I'll grant killing means a lot less on console since you're not getting hit nearly as much while trying to capture points or plant charges.

 

[Danne-Danger]

You don't play much Battlefield, do you? Maybe this is true in CoD, and other FPS where kd ratio is the goal, but you can easily win BF matches while having little kills and tons of deaths. And if you're playing a game where both sides are focused on frags and can kill eachother with pinpoint accuracy as you seem to claim a good FPS is about, than you're playing a shitty ass game of Battlefield.

At least now I know for sure you guys are just wagging imaginary epeins with no concept of what high level play even is.

If you face a team of equal tactical skill with better aim you're likely to loose, that's all he's saying.

it's a larger discrepancy than that, way larger

I used this kickass Samsung mouse once that would freak out and pull downwards if you turned too quickly, and pull slightly to the left when you left it stationary.

 

[RiccochetJ]

It's not a discussion of preference, it's about fact.

So you have empirical data proving that absolutely everyone will enjoy and prefer the PC version over consoles?
You're the one that dropped the 'fact' bomb...

 

[Anth0ny]

So, Valve did a $1 million tourney with DOTA, now there's a $1 million tourney with Battlefield.

Your move Capcom. UMVC3 $2 million tourn-BWAHAHAHAAHAHA

 

[Jburton]

You missed the point entirely. Dead players can't complete objectives.

Though I'll grant killing means a lot less on console since you're not getting hit nearly as much while trying to capture points or plant charges.

Really?

You play much on console, cause I play plenty of BC2 on PS3 ....... plenty of kills racked up, an deaths.

Way to make a generalization dressed up as a statement of fact.

 

[Jburton]

PC elitists out in full force

Something, something about needing to legitimise the expenditure.

.... its the best I swear, something,something.

 

[Danne-Danger]

Something, something about needing to legitimise the expenditure.

.... its the best I swear, something,something.

Now we're getting somewhere!

 

[CountAntonius]

Hey, and it's an opinion I agree with. Like ghst said earlier, the psychological game you see playing out in Quake is spectacular when you know what's going on.

To me though, you can't really separate that mind-game from the skill element. They play off one another. For example, in Q3A there are players who need to be kept away from certain weapons or they'll steamroll their opposition. I find the fact that their opponent is keeping them away from the weapon entertaining, sure, but I also enjoy watching the techniques which they employ to get the job done.

I can agree with that. Which is why I probably wouldn't watch a Quake tourney played on pad. However quake is of a time before console fps popularity. With modern games like CoD and BF3 from a spectators standpoint you aren't really missing much(not that I care to watch these games competitively). Quake's strafe jumping, rails, prediction rockets are things that modern gaming simply doesn't embrace anymore. The FPS competitive scene has been dead to me for years(aside from QL). Take pad's out of the equation completely and the gimping started years ago when Valve released CSS. I don't think there will ever be a game with the depth of Q3A again cause all these new players won't get a single kill, get frustrated and never pick it up again.

But well that's a rant for a totally different topic. =(

 

[AkuMifune]

Really?

You play much on console, cause I play plenty of BC2 on PS3 ....... plenty of kills racked up, an deaths.

Way to make a generalization dressed up as a statement of fact.

This whole thread is generalization dressed up as a statement of facts.

You could have a whole team of wicked snipers focused on killing the other team, and they would lose just as hard as PC Defense Force GAF are losing their minds.

 

[shintoki]

Enjoyment has little to do with a tourney loaded with this amount of cash. It's insult to a game that has been heavily pc since inception to get dogged on a tourney with a huge pot potential. There is no reason why all 3 platforms can't be linked with big games considering both console have enjoyed cross platform games with the pc and in the genre.

If EA/Virgin fears a balance problem nothing that a few console commands won't fix.

Opi stated earlier about how the PC tournaments are far more popular than the console side. The community for professional play is stronger on PC. With all the pushes you see EA, MS, Activision, and MLG give to the console side. They still got their ass whooped by the recent DOTA2 tournament.

So stiffing the PC side, in favor of hyping up the console side for your MW3 fight. Seems pretty shortsighted when the chance for a larger and more long term following will come from PC. Even more when the title is supposedly PC first, with consoles second. Its telling a lot more than they hope.

 

[computers putin']

You missed the point entirely. Dead players can't complete objectives.

Though I'll grant killing means a lot less on console since you're not getting hit nearly as much while trying to capture points or plant charges.

Maybe because there are more players on PC shooting at you, but if you're referring to accuracy I don't think that's true. Judging from the top players stats on PC and XBOX 360 (http://bfbcs.com) the accuracy values among all the players are pretty similar. Me personally, on Xbox I have an accuracy values ranging from 20 to 30% amongst all of my weapons if you wanna use that as a point of comparison.

I'm going to look into this further, I remember this being a topic on the battlefield forums....

 

[kokujin]

So you have empirical data proving that absolutely everyone will enjoy and prefer the PC version over consoles?
You're the one that dropped the 'fact' bomb...

I meant in terms of accuracy and speed, not preference.

 

[Danne-Danger]

You could have a whole team of wicked snipers focused on killing the other team, and they would lose just as hard as PC Defense Force GAF are losing their minds.

You're arguing that because someone has good aim they can't be good tactically? Why does one exclude the other?

Indeed the elitist bullshit from PC GAF in this thread is crazy.


But its fact, so we must endure.

I just can't wait to see what happens next.

 

[Jburton]

Now we're getting somewhere!

Indeed the elitist bullshit from PC GAF in this thread is crazy.


But its fact, so we must endure.

 

[Jburton]

You're arguing that because someone has good aim they can't be good tactically? Why does one exclude the other?

It doesn't ..... your implying it.

 

[AkuMifune]

You're arguing that because someone has good aim they can't be good tactically? Why does one exclude the other?

Most of the arguments here are that tactical skill is irrelevant when faced with an opposing force that has a more responsive control input, which is pretty stupid to argue.

My assertion is that there's a greater or at least equal contingency of teams with excellent tactical skill on the consoles. I agree they would lose head to head vs kb/m players most of the time, but to dismiss a console BF tournament as not having any skilled or top tier play strictly based on control input is to loudly proclaim you have no idea what a good BF match would look like.

 

[Jburton]

You're arguing that because someone has good aim they can't be good tactically? Why does one exclude the other?

I just can't wait to see what happens next.

Do tell!

 

[odin toelust]

You def get hit more trying to move around the map and camp objectives in PC because with a M+KB set up the time it takes to see and opponent, aim (this is the big one) and shoot all happens much more quickly and precisely.

I think the best analogy for M+KB and a controller is like driving a clutch vs and automatic transmission. Sure automatic works well and all, but if you want true performance it needs to be manual.

 

[Cipherr]

You must not've heard about the horror stories of what went down on the DC's quake 3 servers when people found you could patch your Q3A to play with DC users.

Shit, I was there, I was introduced to Q3 via online dreamcast play. It was all good then the DC patch maps circulated to the PC gamers and they fucking destroyed us. LOL, I bought a better PC just to play the game and was floored at how much better the game played. I did some PC gaming then too but I did much more console gaming back then.

Ironically I spent some time on enterthegame IRC and on Q3 pubs getting better with KB&M, promptly found and downloaded the DC patch and paid the horror forward. That probably wasnt kind, but I was trying to help them follow the path...

This thread is like an old, tired whore ..... its been fucked in all different holes by the same dicks ........ and that bitch ain't any closer to cumming!

What a charmer you are. Quite the torchbearer. Try and not fill eeeeeevery stereotype while your busy being annoying k champ?

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Let's all just curse EA and drop the battling.

PC gamers may be feeling left out since Battlefield's home was always on PC, now this new console hotness comes along and get the attention with this contest.

Console gamers seem to be trying to say that controller gamers can somehow win against the best mouse + keyboard PC players.

The whole issue is with EA not having the contest on PC as well. First wanting to come back to PC gaming with Orgin, now this? I think EA's main focus has been console for a long time. They are giving PC gamers less attention, but at least BF3 on PC isn't weak. It will most likely make use of your future PC hardware.

 

[Jburton]

I think the best analogy for M+KB and a controller is like driving a clutch vs and automatic transmission. Sure automatic works well and all, but if you want true performance it needs to be manual.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080502074051AAOTPWb

 

[Danne-Danger]

Most of the arguments here are that tactical skill is irrelevant when faced with an opposing force that has a more responsive control input, which is pretty stupid to argue.

I don't think anyone did that, what was said was that you can have the greatest tactic in the world but it won't help if your team is dead because the other side outgunned you. Aim skill plays a HUGE role in high-level play, along with tactics.

Do tell!

I won't spoil it!

 

[odin toelust]

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080502074051AAOTPWb

lol. Performance =/= going fast. While your post has some merits it is pretty similar to the cod aim assist video in relevance. I was more referring to something like a rally car race, you would never see an automatic.

 

[-GOUKI-]

DICE " PC is the lead platform"