Who says console games are more popular than PC: BC2 team actions stats

Reus said:
Handhelds? Bleh. Yeah I'm a crusty old timer at age 31, but I really don't understand the mobile computing obsession. Generally, when I am out and about it is because I have things to do, not roam the streets while gaming. Staring into shitty little screens compared to what I have at home? No thanks. Sadly you might be right. But "consolitis" has regressed gaming a lot in both technical advancement and actual depth of gameplay, I dread to see the garbage that would spawn from handheld focused gaming.
Click to expand...

I agree. Handheld gaming is shit. Its a bit more mainstream with things like iPhones, but its no replacement for consoles/PCs.

I personally think handheld games are better when they're simple skill testers ala NES/arcade games anyway. So the best handheld games are going to be the sort of shit indie developers can whip up, not the sort of shit your big name games publishers like EA and Activision are going to be producing.

Handheld gaming is more like replacing crossword puzzles and comics and stuff, not consoles/PCs. Even if its a bit of a fad, people will realise "oh shit, gaming on a 55" TV is better than gaming on a 3" handheld!"
 
I think you guys missed the part about handhelds replacing consoles by being as powerful as consoles and plugging into your TV when at home. I could see something like a Sony/Nintendo/MS console that's the size of a cell phone, but connects to your TV wirelessly when at home to game on your TV. Maybe over the next decade or so.
 
pigwalk said:
I think you guys missed the part about handhelds replacing consoles by being as powerful as consoles and plugging into your TV when at home. I could see something like a Sony/Nintendo/MS console that's the size of a cell phone, but connects to your TV wirelessly when at home to game on your TV. Maybe over the next decade or so.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but you'll always be able to get arse loads more power out of an actual console that has the size to house larger components and dissipate heat, so I dont see them being replaced. There's a long way to go before handhelds can play at HD resolutions and by then I'm hoping PCs and consoles are so much more powerful again that game devs wont want to take the backwards step of going to handhelds into TVs.
 
Tudz said:
Maybe, but you'll always be able to get arse loads more power out of an actual console that has the size to house larger components and dissipate heat, so I dont see them being replaced. There's a long way to go before handhelds can play at HD resolutions and by then I'm hoping PCs and consoles are so much more powerful again that game devs wont want to take the backwards step of going to handhelds into TVs.
Click to expand...

I think the overarching point is that all consumer level computing seems to be heading towards handhelds, not just gaming. Your pdas or netbooks these days can take care of email, presentations, documents, communication, media playing etc. Gaming is just another aspect of computing which will shift towards the handheld sector.

In practical terms, what we see happening with current gen consoles and PC gaming will happen again. Right now, the industry sees growth and revenues in the console gaming sector, so they focus on that. It doesn't matter if the PC has enough memory to handle high resolution textures... developers will only create textures that can fit into the console's memory limitations. It doesn't matter if the PC can run it at 60fps at 1080p, because developers will focus on creating it to run at 30fps at 720p. So while PC gaming hasn't 'gone anywhere', it has most definitely taken a backseat when it comes to what the industry focuses on. This same kind of shift will happen again towards handhelds... Consoles won't disappear, but the future is in handheld and small devices.
 
60 091 462 TEAM ACTIONS SO FAR PC

31 569 163 TEAM ACTIONS SO FAR 360

LMAO!!!
 
These stats do not really show a whole lot.

PC gamers stick with one game over a long period of time. Just look at WoW. There are many more games out for consoles and for that reason alone, most console gamers stick to one game for a few weeks at most and then move on.

Also, even if ONE game sells more on PC than console, it does not mean much, take the total number of dollars spent on console games vs PC games and that is really the number which shows market size comparison.
 
Staples said:
These stats do not really show a whole lot.

PC gamers stick with one game over a long period of time. Just look at WoW. There are many more games out for consoles and for that reason alone, most console gamers stick to one game for a few weeks at most and then move on.

Also, even if ONE game sells more on PC than console, it does not mean much, take the total number of dollars spent on console games vs PC games and that is really the number which shows market size comparison.
Click to expand...

That's not true, to an extent.

Their are still people playing PC games that are 10+ years old and between. BF2? Still being played. UT? Still being played. Quake III? Still being played. TF2? Still being played. The list goes on. While PC games do stick with one game over a long period of time, this doesn't help PC sales.

I don't see how being loyal to old ass games can do anything but hurt PC gaming.
 
Skillz said:
That's not true, to an extent.

Their are still people playing PC games that are 10+ years old and between. BF2? Still being played. UT? Still being played. Quake III? Still being played. TF2? Still being played. The list goes on. While PC games do stick with one game over a long period of time, this doesn't help PC sales.

I don't see how being loyal to old ass games can do anything but hurt PC gaming.
Click to expand...

Nah, I play a lot of older games, doesn't stop me from buying new games. My games list on Steam proves that :p. The reason why older games are played a lot is because they are GOOD. Most of the games released today are nothing but fodder. BC2 being being one of the few exceptions. And wait until BF3 comes out with full DX11 support and massive maps and 64 players, every BF2 player will drop that game like a old towel. The difference between a PC player and the average console player is that PC players are demanding and very focused, whereas the console gamer is very much like the model of consumerism: play through something once and start looking for the same drivel in a different package to satisfy the "must have this shiny toy to fill a hole in my soul" mentality, they just want something new for newsakes.

Average console player: checkers
Average PC player: chess

'nuff said.
 
Buxaroo said:
Average console player: checkers
Average PC player: chess

'nuff said.
Click to expand...

Love it. LOL

While I do agree, to an extent again. However, I know many PC gamers that refuse to move onto newer games and stick to the older games. Some have never even played a different game before, like some of my old clan mates from my UT days, they just don't venture outside of LGI 155/55 CTF in UT. :rolleyes:
 
Um, this only means that PC gamers are better team players, not that more PC gamers play BC2.

Both XBOX and PS3 have more hours played than PC on their own:

Global PC Statistics

TOTAL TIME PLAYED (HRS) 54,403,819

TOTAL RESUPPLIES 334,526,184

TOTAL REPAIRS 148,194,628

TOTAL REVIVES 164,089,452

TOTAL SPOTS 90,316,420

Global XBOX360 Statistics

TOTAL TIME PLAYED (HRS) 94,527,791

TOTAL RESUPPLIES 324,543,640

TOTAL REPAIRS 205,366,280

TOTAL REVIVES 216,737,604

TOTAL SPOTS 70,360,937

Global PS3 Statistics

TOTAL TIME PLAYED (HRS) 89,704,314

TOTAL RESUPPLIES 317,408,208

TOTAL REPAIRS 161,786,600

TOTAL REVIVES 192,534,824

TOTAL SPOTS 85,699,416

Per hour breakdown:

PC

RESUPPLIES/HR: 6.1

REPAIRS/HR: 2.7

REVIVES/HR: 3.0

SPOTS/HR: 1.7

XBOX360

RESUPPLIES/HR: 3.4

REPAIRS/HR: 2.2

REVIVES/HR: 2.3

SPOTS/HR: 0.7

PS3

RESUPPLIES/HR: 3.5

REPAIRS/HR: 1.8

REVIVES/HR: 2.1

SPOTS/HR: 1.0
Click to expand...

http://www.battlefieldbadcompany2.com/globalstats?platform=pc
http://www.battlefieldbadcompany2.com/globalstats?platform=360
http://www.battlefieldbadcompany2.com/globalstats?platform=ps3
http://bfbcs.com/
 
Did anyone ever think that maybe it's just easier to hit the hotkey on the keyboard (running around and just tossing a random resupply) and console gamers can't be fucked to press anything but fire on the controller.
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
Did anyone ever think that maybe it's just easier to hit the hotkey on the keyboard (running around and just tossing a random resupply) and console gamers can't be fucked to press anything but fire on the controller.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is a kb/mouse setup is > a controller setup?
 
ShadowStriker said:
Try explaining how to use TWO bloody joysticks to aim! :mad: Reason why I can't stand console games, moving and aiming are a bitch.
Click to expand...


like i said in my original post some where in this thread it really depends on what you grew up with. if you grew up playing console FPS's on modern consoles its pretty damn easy and its the same for people that grew up playing FPS's on PC.

but either way its not actually that hard on console, the bitch is that the joysticks are far less sensitive so try to do precise movements when your sniping is a pain in the ass.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
like i said in my original post some where in this thread it really depends on what you grew up with. if you grew up playing console FPS's on modern consoles its pretty damn easy and its the same for people that grew up playing FPS's on PC.

but either way its not actually that hard on console, the bitch is that the joysticks are far less sensitive so try to do precise movements when your sniping is a pain in the ass.
Click to expand...

Its definitely harder to do on a console. Even if you're better than the average console player, you're still hamstrung by a controller in FPS games. Its like playing a racing sim with a keyboard. Yeah, you might get a bit quick, you might get quicker than other people using a keyboard, but you'll still get beaten by people using an actual wheel no matter if you grew up on the keyboard or spend lots of time practicing.

PC FPS games with kb+mouse, even a newbie can get by without the aid of auto aim after a few minutes practice, you have quite a bit of practice to get by on double joysticks without auto aim.

That said, if you enjoy your FPS games with a controller, more power to you. I've definitely had fun playing a few different FPS games on console, especially a couple of games with split screen co-op, something you dont see on PC. But none the less, controller is an inferior method of control for basically anything that requires fast and accurate control. ;)
 
But the argument should be, is it just as fun?

The answer is a huge yes. Since when has not being able to afford a super sports car stopped anyone from racing a souped up Civic?

Never. This argument that consoles are inferior because of a different controller is just plain stupid. It isn't as if you are playing against opponents with a mouse.

The only people who keep rehashing this argument are the PC fanboys who can't bare to spend half an hour learning a new control scheme. They LOVE the easy as shit to pick up and play mouse controller. The funniest thing is that they complain about consoles making every game pick up and play and not like their deep precious PC games of the past.
 
This argument that consoles are inferior because of a different controller is just plain stupid. It isn't as if you are playing against opponents with a mouse.
Click to expand...
Not much of an 'argument' if it's an opinion. I don't like playing FPS on consoles because I don't like to use a controller. That's my preference and my opinion. There was no mention about inferiority.
 
Staples said:
But the argument should be, is it just as fun?

The answer is a huge yes. Since when has not being able to afford a super sports car stopped anyone from racing a souped up Civic?
Click to expand...

Fun is subjective, there's no point arguing it... you can just have a poll "is it just as fun?"... there's nothing there to argue and I'm not trying to do that ;) I dont really get the relevance to sports cars and Civics, but ok.

Never. This argument that consoles are inferior because of a different controller is just plain stupid. It isn't as if you are playing against opponents with a mouse.
Click to expand...

You're extrapolating there a bit. I never said (or argued) that consoles are inferior because of a different controller, I said... "But none the less, controller is an inferior method of control for basically anything that requires fast and accurate control." and I really dont see how you can argue that point. You may not care that it's an inferior method of control for anything that requires fast and accurate control, but you're smoking crack if you think its simply "different" and not "inferior" for that purpose :p There are times a controller is better... when you dont need fast and accurate control, which is why I have a 360 controller plugged into my PC for 3rd person adventure games and a G25 wheel plugged in for racing sims.

BUUUUUUUUUUT, at no point did I say consoles were inferior and I did not say they were inferior because of the controller. Whether you like the controller and consoles is purely preference as Hydralisk mentions. Choice is awesome and its good that we have choice and its great how you can make one without having to impose your opinion on others. ;)

The only people who keep rehashing this argument are the PC fanboys who can't bare to spend half an hour learning a new control scheme. They LOVE the easy as shit to pick up and play mouse controller.
Click to expand...
You're just making stuff up now and if anything being a bit backward. Consolers have their one, simple to use controller for all games. Its typically your PC gamers who have to learn weird and interesting control styles. I spent a while playing a racing sim steering with a mouse, so there goes your argument of the people talking about double joystick being inferior for FPS games not being able to learn new control schemes. Fact is these days most PC gamers will have their mouse + kb AND a controller for the sloppy 3rd person adventure console ports and many will also have a steering wheel and/or joystick for racing/flying sims.

The funniest thing is that they complain about consoles making every game pick up and play and not like their deep precious PC games of the past.
Click to expand...

Not all PC gamers are like that, infact I'd describe myself as the opposite. With the exception of racing sims, which I love to be deep and complex, most other games I can only be bothered playing them if they are simple enough to sit down and play for a few hours and actually achieve something.
 
Staples said:
But the argument should be, is it just as fun?

The answer is a huge yes. Since when has not being able to afford a super sports car stopped anyone from racing a souped up Civic?

Never. This argument that consoles are inferior because of a different controller is just plain stupid. It isn't as if you are playing against opponents with a mouse.

The only people who keep rehashing this argument are the PC fanboys who can't bare to spend half an hour learning a new control scheme. They LOVE the easy as shit to pick up and play mouse controller. The funniest thing is that they complain about consoles making every game pick up and play and not like their deep precious PC games of the past.
Click to expand...

In regards to fps the answer for me is a huge NO. Sure you can race a civic but I bet racing a Lambo would be more fun. Just like I can play console games on my friends 19" CRT TV but its a lot more fun playing on his new 37" LED or my other friends 42" Plasma.
I play a couple fps on consoles because my friends do and it is no where near as fun because the controller isn't as good. Have you ever been annoyed by a game because of poor controls? I know I have, and in fps and rts using a controller is almost like that. I grew up on consoles and still use them for other types of games that controllers work fine for but with fps and rts its not even close.
I have a friend that plays COD on Xbox a lot (because he knows a bunch of people that do) and barely ever on his laptop. We played Spec Ops on both setups and his aim was waaaaayyyyy better on the pc (especially noticeable with the sniper rifle). And he seemed to have more fun being able to shoot so much faster and better.

And the whole not wanting to learn a new control scheme goes both ways. I know people that refuse to learn kb&m because they're so used to controllers.

I really wish a console maker would add kb&m support as a requirement for their fps games. They can add options to limit which control setup is used in multiplayer and maybe only allow their own kb&m and then there wouldn't be any issues.
 
Last edited:
I grew up on consoles, but I quickly learned that a kb/mouse is far better at FPS games.

Controller is much better suited for platform type games, it's even doable in racing games, where a kb/mouse just seems awkward.
 
Who cares? Stop trying to explain to people why they should like playing the way you do. Fine you like X because of B, I like Z because of A.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top