[ QUOTE ]
PfhorRunner: Halo1s slowdown over the person is not significant in the least bit. Halo 2's is very significant, which is why H2 blows
[/ QUOTE ]
PC = No slowdown > Halo1= little slowdown > Halo2= more slowdown > Halo3 = ?
See the pattern of "dumbing down" there? And it gets progressivly worse
But to be honest I don't really care, heck most the time I play obscure open-source/indi games on my Linux box (btw Ubuntu 7.04 just got released). Or I use my GP2X to emulate some arcade consoles
But it is funny how you can turn such a boring "didn't we have this discussion already ten million times" thread, into a happy flame fest with just a bit of eloquent trolling here on polycount. Even up to name calling
I dunno, slowdown gives you more to, as a player, compensate for. When planning a precise shot you have to adjust for your movement, your target's movement, your aim sensitivity, and then your decreased sensitivity over the target.
Stupid, yeah, but definitely more complex -- and dumbed down is usually defined as simplification, isn't it?
Well the slow down was put in the game to increase sensitivity over the target not to decrease it.
Edit: Let me refrase that: When you crosshair speed decreases, it automaticly gets stuck over the player and you can slowly aim at the head etc, Thus it works as a kind of auto aim where you are kind of forced to aim on a player.
And I guess that is somewhat of a simplification at least for the "casual" gamer.
If you want a fine example of a dumbed-down game insulting the predecessor game's audience intelligence then look no further than Deus Ex Invisible War. They had to do this for the console audience because
1. they whined about complex stuff
2. they whined about serious characters
3. they didn't think it was "COOL" enough
You can't make a 'smart' game without lots of sales anymore because you 'need' to put it on the console ending up simplyifying alot of the sophisticated fun things of the gameplay to format it for a standard gamepad controller if you want some sales.
With games like Alpha Prime coming out showing how proudly cliches can get there's no doubt there is going to be another video game crash due to game monotony from feature sacrifices, buggy engines and bloom-laced overhype, along with online 'streamtailers' becoming another technological trap for the coming two decades.
[ QUOTE ]
And I guess that is somewhat of a simplification at least for the "casual" gamer.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's not why. The reason is because a thumbstick is an inherently less precise input device than a mouse. With a mouse, you move it X amount in Y direction and it causes the crosshair in the game to also move X amount in Y direction. Therefore, you have direct control over the crosshair's position. With a thumbstick, on the other hand, you can only indirectly control the crosshair's position by adjusting the speed and direction in which it moves.
So I wouldn't say it's "dumbing down" the controls, it's just compensating for the inferior capabilities of a thumbstick, and I think Halo does a decent job of it. When it comes to FPS aiming, the mouse is obviously superior, but the thumbstick excels at other controlling functions like steering and character movement.
[edit] After skimming through some of your earlier posts, apparently I basically just reiterated your point about "precision" of the mouse vs thumbstick... but I still don't think it's fair to say the controls are "dumbed down," it's just working with what you got to make the controls work
I ment simplification in the sense of the auto aim. Imagine noticing that someone shoots on you but you don't know where from. With the slowdown system all you have to do is turn until it slows down and then press the button to shoot, thus it is a major simplification.
[ QUOTE ]
Well the slow down was put in the game to increase sensitivity over the target not to decrease it.
Edit: Let me refrase that: When you crosshair speed decreases, it automaticly gets stuck over the player and you can slowly aim at the head etc, Thus it works as a kind of auto aim where you are kind of forced to aim on a player.
And I guess that is somewhat of a simplification at least for the "casual" gamer.
[/ QUOTE ]
True dat'. Official lexicon calls it "sticky crosshairs".
I hate to join in on the bitching and moaning, but it's certainly interesting where gaming has gone over the last few years. (I just came to the realization that this is far too broad a topic to sum up in a post, so I separated some of the points.)
PCs have become niche in comparison:
Depending on your tastes, this could suck or not matter. In the N64 era, GPU manufacturers weren't involved in console production, and 3d graphics were already the mainstay on computers, giving them a strong graphical edge. It's important to keep in mind that they were still expensive as fuck. There are a few large factors that contributed to why PCs haven't had the same boom as consoles. Merging markets. GPU manufacturers began collaborating with console manufacturers, leveling the playing field for graphical quality when the Xbox era hit. Console ownership was growing at a steady rate. The DVD boom had happened. The average computer spec had greater range. Piracy was growing exponentially. (Don't Copy That Floppy didn't do its job.) With the graphical playing field not being as lopsided as it was before, large publisher/developers saw it much more worth it to develop a multiplatform title. With that, the lowest common denominator for complexity in controls and graphical detail was the consoles. (Graphically, as well as computers with old graphics tech.) When that happens, the rest is obvious, PCs lose their edge with complex gameplay and though the graphics could still be better, it wasn't to the same drastic extent it used to be. (And lunch is over, so I can't harp on about it anymore.)
Games Have Changed:
[Back In My Day] The industry has changed drastically, and depending on your tastes, that can be awesome, or sad. Few years ago, a game like Fallout or Mechwarrior 3 was considered a blockbuster, and the PC had an almost completely separate target audience. A controller and core market have a large impact on games, and the PC had the one with the most buttons and a particularly adult audience. (Not to say there weren't kids playing on PC.) Because of this, it's arguable why PC had a good share of 'sim-esque' games and for some people, these kind of games were great.
Might rant more after work, this is largely unfinished.
I will buy games for PC if they're raved about long enough past their launch date (hey, I can wait). There are tons of games for PC that suck and very few that will actually appeal to me.
I will buy console games depending on the game. I don't wait so long for console games because they're cheaper, and I have a little more faith in them because there aren't as many bad computer games as there are bad console games.
For me, the bottom line is that both PC and console are good, it just always comes down to the games (and the price).
I would agree auto-aim is a small simplification, but it doesnt mean you cant aim precisely, if you had played it enough you would descover that. If your half decent at it you dont even notice auto-aim.
Lol @ poo cheerio's
I like where this thread is heading, if Arsh were only here to speed it along...
Wow this thread got more posts than my new portfolio! I guess I need to work on my art but not my conversational topics. So I don't really remember stating anywhere that I thought consoles were better than pc's. And I'm not sure where this whole keyboard mouse thing came from as I never made mention that the controller was better, in fact I said I'm going to "TRY" and enjoy half life2 on 360 "TRY" and enjoy it and see if it works out for me. "TRY" it to see if I can aim with a stick instead of a mouse.
JKMakowka, let me clarify again since you seem to be missing the point of my posts. FUCK YOU. YOU ARE A FUCKING CUNT. Or was I asking a question on top of a question that time too? Oh wait wait, let me post those little guys sticking their tongues out too. Fucking loser.
To call games like Gears of War and Rainbow 6 vegas "Dumbed down" would be a pretty stupid thing to say. Its not like they make them easier, I could cockslap my keyboard for 4 hours and clock Quake 4 on hard. Gears of wars combat system is far more complex, original and realistic then anything of the same graphical quality currently on PC.
Gameplay-wise with complex cover systems and controls, console games are pushing the way gamers play as a character to a whole new level. FPSers on PC have hardly changed since wolfenstein 3d, both in overall gameplay and player control, thats dumb.
Edit: That's not what buzzwords mean in the fruit basket industry, Asmuel. I think your choice in fruit baskets is terrible. In fact, mixing bananas with pears is something that was done long before you mentioned it. A light mix of berries and a butternut squash is clearly the superior mix. Renounce your poor tastes and I *might* forgive your disturbance.
Edit: I reread the post in the morning and I guess I was being too volatile. : P I'm sorry Asmuel. Don't worry, I'll make it up to you.
Im talking about you sucking your boyfriends cock while trying to correct peoples grammar incorrectly on the internet, and calling people names when they had no beef with you.
Dont really care enough about the topic for a rebuttal, like Daz said there's no real argument. I agree with some points you made, and others werent relevant to what I said and/or were wrong, but the topic is lame. You win, I've got games to work on
How did it even turn into this? A few people posted that they are starting to like console games more because PC games are too much of a hassle then it started into a dookie fight because someone can't stand the idea of a PC gamer switching to play consoles? Maybe playing with you kind of people is what made me quit gaming on the PC so much.
I too feel like console's are a bit slower paced to fit the functionality of analog sticks. Case in point: GTA games are more enjoyable (to me) on PC than on console simply because the aiming is better. Yes, GTA has a lock-on system but it isn't very 'natural'. Where's the skill in that?
If/when we see Gears released on a PC those who've played the 360 version will most likely see the intensity increased with the aiming being more intuitive with a mouse/kb combo. Will it make the game more FUN? Possibly. Easier to use? Doubtful as PC games tend to be more of a 'bitch' to get up and running. But you never know.
Also - this seems to be focused primarily on FPS gaming. A genre who's line is being more and more blurred between console and PC. What about RTS's? I've played an RTS on console and felt like putting a gun in my mouth. Talk about tedious and slow! Yeesh. RTS', for now, are definitely not cut out for console gaming.
I second the notion that consoles are easier to get up and going. They had better be! They're specifically made for gaming! Whereas a PC is made for everything... so its no wonder issues arise.
I'm a console AND a PC player and don't favour one over the other.
I'm just wondering why a bunch of people who's job is to make video game art, let their pc's get so out of date that games don't run on it. I have a laptop, and it still runs every game out there (quadro 1500m essentially a 7900 gt). If you're making million poly mudbox models and using 2048's and having to create next gen models, your pc should be beefy enough to handle the games that use those assets in them. I personally am only a PC gamer. I don't own any consoles, I just find it too annoying to carry around since I'm living a nomadic lifestyle, but I always have my PC with me. However 360s are getting tempting!
yes, a very odd thing to say. Personally, i get to use a enormously powerful machine to do work on, but would probably get talked to if i sat there all day playing another company's games on it.
on the console/PC question : my telly is a hell of a lot bigger than my monitor, and the sofa is more comfortable too
this whole argument reminds me of those infomercials: "do you love the taste of fresh brewed tea but hate the difficulty in preparation? Hot scolding water and wrist strain from dunking?"
I think its as simple as developers\publishers want to make the most $$ A 360 game for example has an install base of say 8-9 million. Even more if it gets ported to other platforms. So you will tend to see more of the "big" games leading with the 360sku, then being ported to PC\ps3 for the next while.
-PCs still rule at sims, rts, and even fps, but I just feel like the quality "big" titles are going to consoles these days.
-on the other hand I'm curious to know what is the installed base of medium to high end gaming PCs. ? Anyone know?
I have a feeling that the majority of people's beef with console v. pc isn't the games themselves, or the hardware, but the method of input. So, what would happen if consoles started coming with mice and keyboards as an alternative to the handheld controller (as I could easily see XBox 360 supporting a full on keyboard and mouse setup if they wanted to)?
[ QUOTE ]
I have a feeling that the majority of people's beef with console v. pc isn't the games themselves, or the hardware, but the method of input. So, what would happen if consoles started coming with mice and keyboards as an alternative to the handheld controller (as I could easily see XBox 360 supporting a full on keyboard and mouse setup if they wanted to)?
[/ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't make a difference. The games would all still be designed with the analog sticks in mind as they are the default option. Designing for analog sticks is more than just increasing the pace of the game. It reflects itself in level design, AI behaviour, weapon types, interface navigation, and base gameplay decisions. That means the entire game is geared towards the analog stick controls, which means using a mouse with it would just the same as porting the game to PC. It can work, but it will never be great.
And before you crazy people misunderstand, that's:
Console shooters designed for analog sticks are great.
PC shooters designed for mouse/keyboard are great.
PC shooters on a console or vice versa are mediocre.
true dat. who here thinks goldeneye controls were poor eh?
theres exceptions to the rule though where the devs have planned ahead. I just finished rogue trooper on pc and it was a blast, no complaints about the controls or aiming.
edit: nor gameplay being affected by its console origins
[ QUOTE ]
And before you crazy people misunderstand, that's:
Console shooters designed for analog sticks are great.
PC shooters designed for mouse/keyboard are great.
PC shooters on a console or vice versa are mediocre.
Goldeneye was about 80% horizontal play. Worked great for that style but my fuck if that wasn't the most primitive way of shooters. It's like arrow keys + WASD from back in the day!
LOL at many of the above posts. I'm sorry but this thread is making my day in so many ways. Yeah I agree that plugging in a keyboard and mouse to an xbox360 game wouldn't work unless the developer prepared for it. You'd need mouse sensitivity settings for one or the experience would be ruined. Also I'm not sure how you would do analog stick walking, like walking at different speeds? Holding a key down doesn't support that. Poop I think my original post was geared towards the fact I'm not ready to upgrade my whole pc just to play one game. My home computer runs maya and photoshop fine but doesn't work so great for gaming. I doubt I could even get Stalker running on my work pc. It will be quite interesting if half life episode2 ever ships I'll make another thread and everyone can compare the flaws or benefits of playing it on the console.
[ QUOTE ]
Goldeneye was about 80% horizontal play. Worked great for that style but my fuck if that wasn't the most primitive way of shooters. It's like arrow keys + WASD from back in the day!
[/ QUOTE ]
Hrmm? I'm not understanding, but that could be because I always played using the solitaire control style .
man this thread has turned into a my cocks bigger than your cock shit tossing contest. That is just fantastic. Anyways...
I know what it's like having a wife and a kid and no money but you gotta treat yourself sometimes. I told my wife I'm getting a big ass tv for my birthday this year and she said fine. So guitar hero 2 and gears on a 70 inch is going to fucking rock, but I'll still play BF2 on my laptop or desktop and a good number of other pc games and when UT3 comes out. Well I don't even want to think about that just yet.
Well, fortunately Gearbox gives us a $1k/year home computer allowance. I used mine to buy a new widescreen monitor, an Xbox 360 and a Wii though, so I'll have to wait until next year to get the new PC.
I'm pretty much a pure console gamer, have been for years.
I've only played 2 games on PC in the last 5 years, HL2 and Dawn of War at work on the LAN with the lads I shared office space with.
Looking back it's obvious to me I've always enjoyed console games more and because of work, I find sitting a pc seems more like working than sitting on the sofa with a console.
I recently updated my home pc to one of dell's new quad core 3.2ghz beasts with all the trimmings, literally as fast a machine as you can get right now. So I'm going to install HL2 episode 1 and check it out with everything turned up to the max , but generally theres not much draws me in on the pc anymore.
Ror: I agree that gaming on a PC seems more like working. It could be the years of working in front of a computer I hate all day that pushes me away from PC gaming.
does the auto-aim system in Halo 1 lock-on to enemies once they are in the crosshair and then it automatically rotates you to keep your crosshair on the enemy even if you never touch the rotation joystick, and it only breaks the lock if that rotation speed has to be too high? i don't have the game so i can't try it.
I hear a lot of people say sitting behind a computer isn't comfortable, maybe you should make it more comfortable, you work there:) I have a nice comfy manager-chair and a huge desk, comfy enough for me, and not too expensive.
[ QUOTE ]
does the auto-aim system in Halo 1 lock-on to enemies once they are in the crosshair and then it automatically rotates you to keep your crosshair on the enemy even if you never touch the rotation joystick, and it only breaks the lock if that rotation speed has to be too high? i don't have the game so i can't try it.
[/ QUOTE ]
It doesn't lock on at all. All it does is slow down maybe 5% or so when your crosshair passes over a person. It isn't noticable whatsoever.
Yeah I have a herman miller aeron chair, at work and at home. 1000 dollar chair, it's very comfortable my ass never gets numb. Still doesn't make me want to upgrade my whole pc just to play one game.
Replies
PfhorRunner: Halo1s slowdown over the person is not significant in the least bit. Halo 2's is very significant, which is why H2 blows
[/ QUOTE ]
PC = No slowdown > Halo1= little slowdown > Halo2= more slowdown > Halo3 = ?
See the pattern of "dumbing down" there? And it gets progressivly worse
But to be honest I don't really care, heck most the time I play obscure open-source/indi games on my Linux box (btw Ubuntu 7.04 just got released). Or I use my GP2X to emulate some arcade consoles
But it is funny how you can turn such a boring "didn't we have this discussion already ten million times" thread, into a happy flame fest with just a bit of eloquent trolling here on polycount. Even up to name calling
P.S.: Yes I prefer PC gaming anyways
Stupid, yeah, but definitely more complex -- and dumbed down is usually defined as simplification, isn't it?
Edit: Let me refrase that: When you crosshair speed decreases, it automaticly gets stuck over the player and you can slowly aim at the head etc, Thus it works as a kind of auto aim where you are kind of forced to aim on a player.
And I guess that is somewhat of a simplification at least for the "casual" gamer.
1. they whined about complex stuff
2. they whined about serious characters
3. they didn't think it was "COOL" enough
You can't make a 'smart' game without lots of sales anymore because you 'need' to put it on the console ending up simplyifying alot of the sophisticated fun things of the gameplay to format it for a standard gamepad controller if you want some sales.
With games like Alpha Prime coming out showing how proudly cliches can get there's no doubt there is going to be another video game crash due to game monotony from feature sacrifices, buggy engines and bloom-laced overhype, along with online 'streamtailers' becoming another technological trap for the coming two decades.
And I guess that is somewhat of a simplification at least for the "casual" gamer.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's not why. The reason is because a thumbstick is an inherently less precise input device than a mouse. With a mouse, you move it X amount in Y direction and it causes the crosshair in the game to also move X amount in Y direction. Therefore, you have direct control over the crosshair's position. With a thumbstick, on the other hand, you can only indirectly control the crosshair's position by adjusting the speed and direction in which it moves.
So I wouldn't say it's "dumbing down" the controls, it's just compensating for the inferior capabilities of a thumbstick, and I think Halo does a decent job of it. When it comes to FPS aiming, the mouse is obviously superior, but the thumbstick excels at other controlling functions like steering and character movement.
[edit] After skimming through some of your earlier posts, apparently I basically just reiterated your point about "precision" of the mouse vs thumbstick... but I still don't think it's fair to say the controls are "dumbed down," it's just working with what you got to make the controls work
But otherwise I agree.
Well the slow down was put in the game to increase sensitivity over the target not to decrease it.
Edit: Let me refrase that: When you crosshair speed decreases, it automaticly gets stuck over the player and you can slowly aim at the head etc, Thus it works as a kind of auto aim where you are kind of forced to aim on a player.
And I guess that is somewhat of a simplification at least for the "casual" gamer.
[/ QUOTE ]
True dat'. Official lexicon calls it "sticky crosshairs".
I hate to join in on the bitching and moaning, but it's certainly interesting where gaming has gone over the last few years. (I just came to the realization that this is far too broad a topic to sum up in a post, so I separated some of the points.)
PCs have become niche in comparison:
Depending on your tastes, this could suck or not matter. In the N64 era, GPU manufacturers weren't involved in console production, and 3d graphics were already the mainstay on computers, giving them a strong graphical edge. It's important to keep in mind that they were still expensive as fuck. There are a few large factors that contributed to why PCs haven't had the same boom as consoles. Merging markets. GPU manufacturers began collaborating with console manufacturers, leveling the playing field for graphical quality when the Xbox era hit. Console ownership was growing at a steady rate. The DVD boom had happened. The average computer spec had greater range. Piracy was growing exponentially. (Don't Copy That Floppy didn't do its job.) With the graphical playing field not being as lopsided as it was before, large publisher/developers saw it much more worth it to develop a multiplatform title. With that, the lowest common denominator for complexity in controls and graphical detail was the consoles. (Graphically, as well as computers with old graphics tech.) When that happens, the rest is obvious, PCs lose their edge with complex gameplay and though the graphics could still be better, it wasn't to the same drastic extent it used to be. (And lunch is over, so I can't harp on about it anymore.)
Games Have Changed:
[Back In My Day] The industry has changed drastically, and depending on your tastes, that can be awesome, or sad. Few years ago, a game like Fallout or Mechwarrior 3 was considered a blockbuster, and the PC had an almost completely separate target audience. A controller and core market have a large impact on games, and the PC had the one with the most buttons and a particularly adult audience. (Not to say there weren't kids playing on PC.) Because of this, it's arguable why PC had a good share of 'sim-esque' games and for some people, these kind of games were great.
Might rant more after work, this is largely unfinished.
PS. Asmuel, who shit in your Cheerios?
I will buy console games depending on the game. I don't wait so long for console games because they're cheaper, and I have a little more faith in them because there aren't as many bad computer games as there are bad console games.
For me, the bottom line is that both PC and console are good, it just always comes down to the games (and the price).
Lol @ poo cheerio's
I like where this thread is heading, if Arsh were only here to speed it along...
Fuck PC's
J/K
JKMakowka, let me clarify again since you seem to be missing the point of my posts. FUCK YOU. YOU ARE A FUCKING CUNT. Or was I asking a question on top of a question that time too? Oh wait wait, let me post those little guys sticking their tongues out too. Fucking loser.
Oh wait, fuck you.
Go Malcolm!!
To call games like Gears of War and Rainbow 6 vegas "Dumbed down" would be a pretty stupid thing to say. Its not like they make them easier, I could cockslap my keyboard for 4 hours and clock Quake 4 on hard. Gears of wars combat system is far more complex, original and realistic then anything of the same graphical quality currently on PC.
Gameplay-wise with complex cover systems and controls, console games are pushing the way gamers play as a character to a whole new level. FPSers on PC have hardly changed since wolfenstein 3d, both in overall gameplay and player control, thats dumb.
Edit: I reread the post in the morning and I guess I was being too volatile. : P I'm sorry Asmuel. Don't worry, I'll make it up to you.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/buzzword
Gasp! And it's "fucking" not "fuckin"! I think I'll take my fruit baskets elsewhere, you brute.
Dont really care enough about the topic for a rebuttal, like Daz said there's no real argument. I agree with some points you made, and others werent relevant to what I said and/or were wrong, but the topic is lame. You win, I've got games to work on
'I'd suggest doing it on a forum that's full of fellow 12 year olds rather than people you hope to be working alongside one day' ?
Ohwait, this is polycount. Proceed.
If/when we see Gears released on a PC those who've played the 360 version will most likely see the intensity increased with the aiming being more intuitive with a mouse/kb combo. Will it make the game more FUN? Possibly. Easier to use? Doubtful as PC games tend to be more of a 'bitch' to get up and running. But you never know.
Also - this seems to be focused primarily on FPS gaming. A genre who's line is being more and more blurred between console and PC. What about RTS's? I've played an RTS on console and felt like putting a gun in my mouth. Talk about tedious and slow! Yeesh. RTS', for now, are definitely not cut out for console gaming.
I second the notion that consoles are easier to get up and going. They had better be! They're specifically made for gaming! Whereas a PC is made for everything... so its no wonder issues arise.
I'm a console AND a PC player and don't favour one over the other.
/done
I'm just wondering why a bunch of people who's job is to make video game art, let their pc's get so out of date that games don't run on it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let me answer this question for myself with a little mathematic formula:
Wife + Kid = -$$$
on the console/PC question : my telly is a hell of a lot bigger than my monitor, and the sofa is more comfortable too
Wife + Kid = -$$$
[/ QUOTE ]
That's a videogame right there! Too hard for me though, endless leveling, n00bs, nerfs, etc.
-PCs still rule at sims, rts, and even fps, but I just feel like the quality "big" titles are going to consoles these days.
-on the other hand I'm curious to know what is the installed base of medium to high end gaming PCs. ? Anyone know?
I have a feeling that the majority of people's beef with console v. pc isn't the games themselves, or the hardware, but the method of input. So, what would happen if consoles started coming with mice and keyboards as an alternative to the handheld controller (as I could easily see XBox 360 supporting a full on keyboard and mouse setup if they wanted to)?
[/ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't make a difference. The games would all still be designed with the analog sticks in mind as they are the default option. Designing for analog sticks is more than just increasing the pace of the game. It reflects itself in level design, AI behaviour, weapon types, interface navigation, and base gameplay decisions. That means the entire game is geared towards the analog stick controls, which means using a mouse with it would just the same as porting the game to PC. It can work, but it will never be great.
And before you crazy people misunderstand, that's:
Console shooters designed for analog sticks are great.
PC shooters designed for mouse/keyboard are great.
PC shooters on a console or vice versa are mediocre.
theres exceptions to the rule though where the devs have planned ahead. I just finished rogue trooper on pc and it was a blast, no complaints about the controls or aiming.
edit: nor gameplay being affected by its console origins
I'm just wondering why a bunch of people who's job is to make video game art, let their pc's get so out of date that games don't run on it.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's pretty easy if you have a Work PC and a Home PC to let the Home PC slip. Especially if you don't use it that much for poly pushing.
And before you crazy people misunderstand, that's:
Console shooters designed for analog sticks are great.
PC shooters designed for mouse/keyboard are great.
PC shooters on a console or vice versa are mediocre.
[/ QUOTE ]
you win
Goldeneye was about 80% horizontal play. Worked great for that style but my fuck if that wasn't the most primitive way of shooters. It's like arrow keys + WASD from back in the day!
[/ QUOTE ]
Hrmm? I'm not understanding, but that could be because I always played using the solitaire control style
I know what it's like having a wife and a kid and no money but you gotta treat yourself sometimes. I told my wife I'm getting a big ass tv for my birthday this year and she said fine. So guitar hero 2 and gears on a 70 inch is going to fucking rock, but I'll still play BF2 on my laptop or desktop and a good number of other pc games and when UT3 comes out. Well I don't even want to think about that just yet.
otherwise about this thread. uhm, i have a 360 and a PC. Both is fun. I win.
I've only played 2 games on PC in the last 5 years, HL2 and Dawn of War at work on the LAN with the lads I shared office space with.
Looking back it's obvious to me I've always enjoyed console games more and because of work, I find sitting a pc seems more like working than sitting on the sofa with a console.
I recently updated my home pc to one of dell's new quad core 3.2ghz beasts with all the trimmings, literally as fast a machine as you can get right now. So I'm going to install HL2 episode 1 and check it out with everything turned up to the max , but generally theres not much draws me in on the pc anymore.
r.
does the auto-aim system in Halo 1 lock-on to enemies once they are in the crosshair and then it automatically rotates you to keep your crosshair on the enemy even if you never touch the rotation joystick, and it only breaks the lock if that rotation speed has to be too high? i don't have the game so i can't try it.
[/ QUOTE ]
It doesn't lock on at all. All it does is slow down maybe 5% or so when your crosshair passes over a person. It isn't noticable whatsoever.