|
I have played SC1 on my PS3 with Helios Linux and VisualBox before Sony released the patch that took away "Other OS" booting. It was fun, I used a Keyboard/mouse. With RTS games like Halo Wars, Red Alet 3, and End War on consoles would you guys/gals buy or play SC2 on a console? Would you like to see Kinect or Move implemented (this sounds hilariously stupid)? Would cross MP be fun? Would this help get SC2 and gaming as a sport more main stream in the US?
It would be with a mouse and keyboard not a controller.
Poll: Would you buy SC2 for Consoles? No, I own a console (310) 53% Heresy!!! (147) 25% No, I don't own a console (98) 17% Yes, for PS3 (19) 3% Yes, for Xbox 360 (16) 3% 590 total votes Your vote: Would you buy SC2 for Consoles? (Vote): Yes, for Xbox 360
(Vote): Yes, for PS3
(Vote): No, I don't own a console
(Vote): No, I own a console
(Vote): Heresy!!!
Sorry new didn't know how to make polls yet 
|
99.9% of users on xbox/ps3 dont own a compatible mouse/keyboard
Id fear it would not sell very well at all.
Move support outside of custom made ums would be somewhat pointless considering the amount of multitasking you would need to do.
The systems could handle the game and if they used a keyboard/mouse and so did the pc user there would be no real difference in the game between console/pc.
|
United States4126 Posts
I can't imagine playing any rts on anything besides the standard keyboard/mouse interface. Have you ever seen Starcraft on the N64? That was so difficult to play imo, and by play I mean replicate the PC interface.
|
if they released the game with a compatible mouse and keyboard it would sell
|
So you played sc1 with a keyboard and mouse on your ps3 when you could have played it on your computer? And you're asking if being able to do that for sc2 would make it more main stream? We've had the technology for a long time now to use keyboard/mouse with consoles and no rts game has ever been popular on console just because of that.
I don't understand how you can't see the glaring answer...
|
On December 21 2010 17:49 arterian wrote:
if they released the game with a compatible mouse and keyboard it would sell
But not well
|
If we're talking about playing on a controller, nope. My mind would be moving way faster than my hands could perform (and I have pretty friggin amazing hands).
|
On December 21 2010 17:49 Ack1027 wrote:
So you played sc1 with a keyboard and mouse on your ps3 when you could have played it on your computer? And you're asking if being able to do that for sc2 would make it more main stream? We've had the technology for a long time now to use keyboard/mouse with consoles and no rts game has ever been popular on console just because of that.
I don't understand how you can't see the glaring answer...
Or rather isnt the more glaring point that if you play it with a mouse and a keyboard, whats the difference when playing on a console and pc? Well it would help for people with horrid comps tho.
|
I find the internet is a large part of sc1 and 2 (not just for online gaming, as console would have that too, but sites like TL)
so a few questions, could you run a program like sc2gears on console?
could you get a web browser on console?
Would console alow programs like xfire? MSN?
Whats music playing like with a console?
as you can prob tell ive never owned a console
|
There would be some casual gamers that played, but unless there were major tournaments for it I doubt it would draw any major following.
|
i'd consider it for the N64
|
I would try it, but I wouldn't take it seriously. Campaign would probably be funner.
|
I browse a lot as I play. I play a game, read TL, watch a stream. Get back to playing..and it's then time for the gsl so, yeah the internet is a huge part of the experience. And even though the ps3 has a browser, it's pretty clunky (from the little I've used) and dont know if it allows streaming etc.
And besides, someone else would want to watch something on tv,like movies etc. So I'd be constantly interrupted. So nope, I prefer playing it on the computer.
|
On December 21 2010 17:38 Oslo wrote:
99.9% of users on xbox/ps3 dont own a compatible mouse/keyboard
Id fear it would not sell very well at all.
Move support outside of custom made ums would be somewhat pointless considering the amount of multitasking you would need to do.
The systems could handle the game and if they used a keyboard/mouse and so did the pc user there would be no real difference in the game between console/pc.
Uhh... what? You can use any USB keyboard at least with the Xbox 360. I have plugged in several different models, most of which were common keyboards (dell, emachines, logitech etc etc) and all worked with the Xbox 360.
|
we don't need SC getting dumbed down more than it already is.
|
On December 21 2010 17:49 arterian wrote:
if they released the game with a compatible mouse and keyboard it would sell
Like Rockband peripheries. I fear, though, that the console and PC users would not be able to intermingle with things like Xbox Live and PSN standing in the way.
|
On December 21 2010 17:53 Digamma wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2010 17:49 Ack1027 wrote:
So you played sc1 with a keyboard and mouse on your ps3 when you could have played it on your computer? And you're asking if being able to do that for sc2 would make it more main stream? We've had the technology for a long time now to use keyboard/mouse with consoles and no rts game has ever been popular on console just because of that.
I don't understand how you can't see the glaring answer... Or rather isnt the more glaring point that if you play it with a mouse and a keyboard, whats the difference when playing on a console and pc? Well it would help for people with horrid comps tho.
Making games for a console is easier because you don't have to worry about people not being able to play this or that game, because of this or that missing requirement. In my opinion, Blizzard should be developing for either the 360 or the PS3. They could harness the powers of both of those consoles, while still being able to have games that use keyboard and mouse control. This would make their games more widespread, because I'm beginning to see a shift in gaming towards the console market. It's just so much easier to have a console that you know will play every game that is made for it.
|
On December 21 2010 18:21 hoby2000 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2010 17:53 Digamma wrote:On December 21 2010 17:49 Ack1027 wrote:
So you played sc1 with a keyboard and mouse on your ps3 when you could have played it on your computer? And you're asking if being able to do that for sc2 would make it more main stream? We've had the technology for a long time now to use keyboard/mouse with consoles and no rts game has ever been popular on console just because of that.
I don't understand how you can't see the glaring answer... Or rather isnt the more glaring point that if you play it with a mouse and a keyboard, whats the difference when playing on a console and pc? Well it would help for people with horrid comps tho. Making games for a console is easier because you don't have to worry about people not being able to play this or that game, because of this or that missing requirement. In my opinion, Blizzard should be developing for either the 360 or the PS3. They could harness the powers of both of those consoles, while still being able to have games that use keyboard and mouse control. This would make their games more widespread, because I'm beginning to see a shift in gaming towards the console market. It's just so much easier to have a console that you know will play every game that is made for it.
It may be easier, but it also limits the game in many different ways. Graphics, mechanics, control, input - there's only so much you can do with a basic console controller and static hardware.
Both platforms can coexist because, to a certain degree, they have different target audiences and support different genres. What developers should do is avoiding bad ports from console to PC or vice versa.
Regarding Blizzard, they shouldn't expand into the console market. Their games shine through the unique polish (pun not intended) Blizzard gives them, and through their relative complexity that makes them so hard to master and gives them such a high replay value. Splitting attention between multiple platforms or reducing game complexity for compatibility with lower hardware / input standards could reduce game quality.
|
"It may be easier, but it also limits the game in many different ways. Graphics, mechanics, control, input - there's only so much you can do with a basic console controller and static hardware."
No, not even close. Consoles are computers. The only difference is that their software is tailored to prevent you from installing stuff they don't want you installing on there. Otherwise, their differences are minimal. That's why Sony allowed people for a while to install other operating systems onto the PS3. It's a computer.
"Both platforms can coexist because, to a certain degree, they have different target audiences and support different genres. What developers should do is avoiding bad ports from console to PC or vice versa."
The only reason that's true is because people think it's that way. In reality, all gamers could use consoles if they would allow mouse and keyboard control. Instead of having to make ports, they could all make games for the same console system, and accomplish the same task without making it a huge pain in the ass for the consumer.
"Regarding Blizzard, they shouldn't expand into the console market. Their games shine through the unique polish (pun not intended) Blizzard gives them, and through their relative complexity that makes them so hard to master and gives them such a high replay value. Splitting attention between multiple platforms or reducing game complexity for compatibility with lower hardware / input standards could reduce game quality."
Again, they just need to make games for maybe just one console, and it would improve not only their sales, but their market size. Consoles ABSOLUTELY do not have lower input standards, and even compared to the average computer, Consoles out do PCs in graphics. I'm not talking about those people who have spent thousands of dollars building their 12gb DDR3 with 450gt video card, and 6 processors computer. I'm talking about the people who bought a computer, and run games like SC2 on medium graphic detail, because they're not going to continue spending more money on their computer.
|
being a pcgamer, i always thought that console games were a joke compared to things on the pc (well cept for the classics). but yes, i tihnk people would buy it, but never become really passionate about it, in relativity to the ones who have it on pc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
