Quake Wars Enemy Territory coming to xbox360, PS3

[CptStern]

oh this should be interesting:

Activision and id Software announce plans to release Enemy Territory: Quake Wars for the Xbox 360 and PS3. The announcement makes two mentions of Splash Damage's upcoming multiplayer shooter being one of the most anticipated titles of 2007, which seems to clarify that the recent mention of the game's fiscal 2008 release window (story) does not actually represent a delay. Word is the Xbox 360 edition is being created by Nerve Software while the PS3 edition is in the works at Z-Axis

I wonder if it'll be cross platform? at least for the pc 360 versions ... at least it'll give the fanboys of each respective system something to argue about "no! true fps should be pc only!" or "console gamers cheat cuz they have auto-aim while pc users be pure skillz!!"

 

[<RJMC>]

yeah pc fanboys re going to protest about it

 

[Icarusintel]

Cross-platform gaming makes me sad.



At least they different versions are being developed by different studios. Still, I don't see why Quake Wars is taking so long...

 

[Link]

Woohoo. This will provide final and conclusive proof that FPS on the PC is superior. The global score list will be dominated by PC's, ending the debate finally.

 

[VictimOfScience]

Yeah, this ought to be good for a laugh. Console controllers will never compare to the KBM. Oh well. Should still be wicked fun!!

 

[knut]

yeah pc fanboys re going to protest about it

Yeah, it's great isn't it? We get a new, awesome looking game AND an endless supply of un-original, dim-witted humour. Bring 'em both on, I can't wait!

But seriously, awesome news.

 

[Mutley]

Do you think this will be the first game where Xbox 360 gamers can play against Vista gamers over the internet? If so, that would be awesome... otherwise, I have to say cross platform:

SUCKS.

 

[CptStern]

Do you think this will be the first game where Xbox 360 gamers can play against Vista gamers over the internet? If so, that would be awesome... otherwise, I have to say cross platform:

SUCKS.

no shadowrun will be the first cross platform game

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Live-Anywhere-Will-Combine-Xbox-360-with-Windows-23185.shtml

 

[Iced_Eagle]

Interesting...

I hope they implement cross-platform for 360/Vista

 

[mortiz]

Yeah, so we can own those XBox 360 nubs with their clunky controller. They wouldn't stand a chance!

 

[Deleted member 56031]

I waas wondering why it wasn't out yet. well at least I have an alternative if my comp can't handle QW.

 

[CyberPitz]

Ahhh, the one thing every pc/console fanboy has wanted. To show they can pwn the other.

This should be fun.

 

[smwScott]

I don't really see how this would prove which one is better, just which one is easier. Whichever one is better is determined by fun factor and personal taste.

For instance, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Timesplitters, etc. are all FPS games that are much better with a gamepad than a keyboard/mouse. Doom or Quake is better on a PC. This game will probably be better on PC too.

Not to mention the odds of it using cross platform are pretty slim.

 

[Lucid]

I don't really see how this would prove which one is better, just which one is easier. Whichever one is better is determined by fun factor and personal taste.

For instance, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Timesplitters, etc. are all FPS games that are much better with a gamepad than a keyboard/mouse.

How do you know?

Have you played a port of each on the PC? (Emulators don't count.)

I think they'd be just as fun on the PC, albeit easier to play.

 

[Combine Hybrid]

suck it, pc fans.

 

[smwScott]

How do you know?

Have you played a port of each on the PC? (Emulators don't count.)

I think they'd be just as fun on the PC, albeit easier to play.

It's down to the style of the game. They're designed to be played in bursts, and in the case of PD and TS feature arcade-like modes that are suited to consoles. They're all very focused on single player/challenges and they're at their best when you have 3 friends gathered around the TV playing them. I'm sorry, but playing 40 other people I don't know and can't see isn't as fun as playing with 2-3 friends. Co-op is also a big part of these games and just sucks on PC unless you happen to be in a setup with two capable computers in the same room, which is fairly rare.

Not to mention some FPS games feel perfect on a gamepad and would probably lose a lot if you transferred it to PC. Games like Quake Wars are well suited to PC, but more single player/co-op focused games are much better on consoles.

 

[DiSTuRbEd]

suck it, pc fans.

What are we going to suck? We're still getting our PC version...

 

[Link]

Got to disagree with you smcScott on the "style" thing there. I have never played an FPS that I can honestly say wouldn't be improved simply by playing with a keyboard and mouse, and I loved goldeneye.

I agree, there is a lot of fun to be had with a couple of mates in front of the TV. If you haven't played "goldeneye", or even "The world is not enough" with some mates and some pot, for 12 hours straight, untill you have broken at least one controller throwing it at peoples heads, then you haven't lived (Stick it on your "things to do before I die list, seriously"), but given the choise between doing that, or sitting down to a serious multiplayer with some decent clan mates, I would pick the clan mates thing every time. Thats a personal preference thing, so the debate will last forever, but thats my opinion.

As for KBM being "easier", well, thats kinda the point. If it was a choise between a control pad and dragging your sofa in the direction you wanted to move, you would say that the controller was easier. But also, it would be more natural and far faster and more accurate. And its the same with KBM, its faster, more accurate, and I think, more natural.

The simple fact is, that a player with a KBM can turn and aim as fast and accuratley as their reflexes and skill will allow. A controller player can only turn and aim as fast as his controller will allow.

 

[knut]

The simple fact is, that a player with a KBM can turn and aim as fast and accuratley as their reflexes and skill will allow. A controller player can only turn and aim as fast as his controller will allow.

I disagree; it really is not difficult to move my thumbs that are touching an analog stick. Just this second I picked up my 360 controller and did several 360 turns within a few seconds. If anyone in the world finds that complicated (which going by alot of forums, alot of narrowminded PC gamers seem to have trouble adjusting to basic movements) then I really do worry how they will cope when they get jobs. Of course, unless they get dead-end desk jobs, but that aside...

I really do see why there is such a line between people that use keyboards/mouse and people that play consoles, but then it's just downright funny when a game gets announced to come to consoles and P fanboys through an angst hissy fit about it.

 

[Cole]

I disagree; it really is not difficult to move my thumbs that are touching an analog stick. Just this second I picked up my 360 controller and did several 360 turns within a few seconds. If anyone in the world finds that complicated (which going by alot of forums, alot of narrowminded PC gamers seem to have trouble adjusting to basic movements) then I really do worry how they will cope when they get jobs. Of course, unless they get dead-end desk jobs, but that aside...

However you can do a 360 turn a lot lot lot quicker on a PC than a controller. Especially if you can change sensitivey on the fly(on the mouse) and are custom to gaming on high sensitivities.

 

[knut]

Is doing a full 360 in less than a second slow for some people or what? :|

I think some people do actually underestimate how easy it is to use the physical action of moving your thumb in a nice, clean circle on a controller, because when people say it's difficult then I'm just going to straight away label them retarded and just put them down as lying that they've tryed it. Sorry, but it really is as basic as holding a pencil.

 

[DreamThrall]

Got to disagree with you smcScott on the "style" thing there. I have never played an FPS that I can honestly say wouldn't be improved simply by playing with a keyboard and mouse, and I loved goldeneye.

Yeah, but the thing is... I used to play Goldeneye and thought the same thing. But then, they made the Goldeneye mod for HL2, and I felt weird playing it with a KVM, and almost wished I had a damn N64 controller D:

 

[Link]

^True, but I think thats a case of what your used to feeling right. I know I was much more accurate on GES

TheAntipop - Its all about that half a second. For example, natural selection, the mod for half life. If you are attacked by a skulk from behind, and you are holding a shotgun, you can whip round and kill that skulk before he gets his second bite in. If he circle strafes round you, you can track him. With a controller, you would be dead from the second bite before you could turn, and a skulk would circle strafe round you faster than you could turn anyway. My point? Ok, yeah, its not a big difference, but in a fast paced game like an fps? Its the difference between living or dying.

 

[mortiz]

Is doing a full 360 in less than a second slow for some people or what? :|

I think some people do actually underestimate how easy it is to use the physical action of moving your thumb in a nice, clean circle on a controller, because when people say it's difficult then I'm just going to straight away label them retarded and just put them down as lying that they've tryed it. Sorry, but it really is as basic as holding a pencil.

What game are you talking about exactly? Most console FPS's I know of use a scheme of the thumb stick left and right for turning and up and down for pitching. This control scheme is particularly none intuitive to high sensitivities as the distance between a minute turn and a full yaw is the matter of about 3/4 of an inch (not inclusive of the dead spot). A high sensitivity using this scheme would require accuracy of the thumb in the matter of tenths, if not hundredths of an inch, and that's even if the granularity of the thumb stick allows that sort of accuracy. With a mouse on the other hand you technically have as much room as you want, but realistically it'd be in the region of 9 to 10 inches depending on the size of your mouse mat. A mouse allows you to move your hand more to get the same minute accuracies, which negates some of the natural inaccuracies of our muscles and evens out granularity in the mouse, with a controller however you're always going to be playing with 3/4 of an inch in every direction.

 

[knut]

mortiz - In all honesty, I just know these things on a more simple basis. Sorry to sound ignorant, but what you've just said really doesn't click for me. What can I say; it's 3 in the morning and I'm absoloutly dire at at maths. In games like Halo 2, Battlefield 2, Rainbow Six: Vegas, I can turn using the thumbsticks to face what's behind me in ease. And I mean real ease. I will say this, however, that looking up or down (invert, whatever) is something I find much slower then when using a mouse. I'll say that.

Link - I guess it depends on the FPS really. I've never played Natural Selection, so I can't comment on killing a Skulk or whatever. But it seems to be an enemy that uses a physical attack, so yeah, I guess that split second turning matters. But I wouldn't nessicarily narrow a game that involes some monster hitting you to something that happens alot in FPS's, save perhaps knife or melee kills. In a FPS, where the enemy has a weapon that is equal to what you are using (a assault rifle, lets say), it's not going to matter how fast you turn around, as for the most part they've got the shots in and your dead. You may not be, of course, it depends how good the other player is. Many a time I've had someone shoot at me from behind in some corridor, meaning he has the first shot in on me, plus the surprise, only for me to turn around with enough time to kill him. Horses for courses, innit?

 

[MultiVaC]

Is doing a full 360 in less than a second slow for some people or what? :|

Yes, that is pretty slow. I was playing Doom 3 again out of boredom and realized that I could jump and do a 540 before I landed, and even then I only stopped turning because I ran out of room on the mousepad.

 

[Link]

Well, ok, the skulks a melee attack character, but as you point out, its possible to turn and kill an opponent thats got the drop on you with automatic weaponry. The question then becomes, how fast can you do it, as he is firing X bullets a second, the percentage of a second taken to turn and return fire becomes important. No doubt you can turn and kill said enemy, but the law of averages dictates that your going to get killed a bit more than I am. Not much, but an amount.

I do want to point out, because I think I may be starting to sound like one, that I'm not a console hater. I own an xbox, I like halo, I loved GE on the N64. I am not saying that controllers are bad. I'm not even saying that they arn't good, all I'm saying is that MKB is better.
As I said before, they are faster and more accurate. Its a fact. I'm not saying console gamers should bow down before the mighty MKB, I'm saying that they shouldn't argue that KBM isn't faster and more accurate, even if only slightly. And as I said in my first post, if ET:QW is indeed cross platform, the leaderboards will bear this out.

 

[Cole]

Is doing a full 360 in less than a second slow for some people or what?

Yes.

What you fail to understand is that a mouse simply works better. It works much better at higher sensitives, and you can even change the sensitivity on the fly. Simply, an analog while is easy is also slow compared to a mouse.

I think some people do actually underestimate how easy it is to use the physical action of moving your thumb in a nice, clean circle on a controller, because when people say it's difficult then I'm just going to straight away label them retarded and just put them down as lying that they've tryed it. Sorry, but it really is as basic as holding a pencil.

No one is saying it's hard. We're saying it's slow compared to a mouse.

 

[Adabiviak]

suck it, pc fans.

LOL

It really seems like a huge untapped market to make a keyboard/mouse (or better?) input for consoles. I don't think there's a dispute that it's a better control scheme for FPSs. By admission, consoles need an 'autoaim' crutch for the gamepads. Why doesn't somebody make this (or why don't more consoles at least allow for this kind of input?) You don't need the entire keyboard for the console, just enough for all the fingers of one hand to reach. If they're worried about controller sales, just make keyboard/mouse style controllers. They can always make proprietary cabling schemes if they are bent on cornering those sales. Didn't the Xbox have something like this?

 

[knut]

In all fairness, for me, it all narrows down to how force-fed you are at having easy controls. Games with a mouse, FPS esp., feel way to easy. Precision aiming, barely any recoil that's felt, etc. Fine, they can take the title for having easier games/gameplay, that really is not what I want and I prefer to use analog sticks because at least theres some realism when it comes to firing a weapon.

As for the 360 thing being too slow (less then a second is slow, apprantly, but okay!)... well, again, I guess I'm glad really. I don't want any of my game to look as mind-numbingly brainless and childish as Quake, Doom or Counter Strike. Thank God.

 

[Link]

I'm sorry, being able to aim accuratly makes a game unrealistic now? Console games look less "brainless and childish" than PC games?

Look, I'll give you the damn straws, stop clutching at them.

 

[knut]

In my experience with PC shooters, I've been able to pull of sniper-like pin point accuracy with barely any recoil with weapons like an AK47. I'm no weapons expert, but I believe there is something fairly odd with that.

Theres no straws to clutch at; there is no right or wrong, this is just my own opinion. And yes, Quake MP, Counter Strike and the Doom games come to me as quick, frantic and non-tactical games... things that I am really not a fan of. Sure, you get dolphin diving, bunny hopping and all sorts of shite in other games, but these seem the founding fathers of retarded gameplay to me, and for that I'm happy avoiding soldiers moving at super fast speeds or being able to lower or higher there weapons (hell, a rocket launcher sometimes!) with mere ease.

And I didn't narrow it down to console games being less than PC games - I'm pretty sure Counter Strike and the ilk are on consoles now, no? I'm just using them as examples.

 

[Cole]

I'm sorry but i'll take being able to aim more accurately over being able to aim less accurately.

Also even if you dislike pc's being able to aim to well is auto-aim built into real life? No.

 

[mortiz]

...I prefer to use analog sticks because at least theres some realism when it comes to firing a weapon.

That's the dumbest thing I've heard all day.

Please equate how moving your thumb on a thumbstick is in any way a realistic depiction of aiming a weapon? The mouse may not be realistic but to somehow suggest that a thumbstick is more realistic is ridiculous. The only console controller that probably beats the mouse as far as being intuitive to say aiming a weapon is the Wii-Mote. If you’re talking about any other controller then forget it, unless you can provide a reasoned argument for why it is more intuitive. Saying "I'm uber on the thumb sticks and caim AIM LIEK SO FAST LOL!!!1" doesn't count. You're saying it's your opinion but then you come out with bullshit claims like the thumbstick is more realistic? Justify it with reasons please not just fob it off.

 

[knut]

Cole... who the hell mentioned auto-aim? And that may be fine for you, but when it comes to video games, I'm getting a little bored of walking over things easily. I may play games like it, but that doesn't mean It's not starting to get on my nerves.

Emphasis (sp?) on the word some realism. Not a HUGE AMOUNT OF REALISM, or the Correct and Lifelike Realism... hell, it's not of that. It's a tiny amount, and in this case I think it can be considered more realistic then using a mouse. Obviously it's not realism as in it should be associated to actually firing or holding a weapon. Come on, you'd have to be dumb even to think I was suggesting that. :|

I meant it in the fact that when I'm firing a weapon using thumbsticks the weapon actually moves and responds to, in it's own way, a recoil of it's own. . And that recoil being that using thumbsticks isn't as 'secure', if you will, as holding a steady, iron, robotic grip upon a mouse.

It's hard for me to explain, and when I do explain I am in no way intending it to be the be all and end all of this ridiculous, elitist ''PC vs Consoles in the Genre of FPS'' arguement. I am a fan of both, it really is NO problem to me what, when and why a game comes out for any consoles. I guess I just don't find it hard to move my thumbs or to move my hand. And yes, it is my opinion... I see no problem with that. Perhaps you don't see these things the same way I do? Perhaps alot of you don't? Who cares? Like I said, I'm not saying these things as fact, or to end anything... just my opinion, thanks.

 

[Cole]

Cole... who the hell mentioned auto-aim?

Most console games FPS have auto-aim even if it's subtle. Even on the upcoming Pc vs 360 FPS, the 360 will have auto aim and Pc users wont for complete balance.

I'm getting a little bored of walking over things easily. I may play games like it, but that doesn't mean It's not starting to get on my nerves.

So play a harder game or on a harder difficulty? There are many games that challenge a keyboard and a mouse.

It's hard for me to explain, and when I do explain I am in no way intending it to be the be all and end all of this ridiculous, elitist ''PC vs Consoles in the Genre of FPS'' arguement. I am a fan of both, it really is NO problem to me what, when and why a game comes out for any consoles. I guess I just don't find it hard to move my thumbs or to move my hand. And yes, it is my opinion... I see no problem with that. Perhaps you don't see these things the same way I do? Perhaps alot of you don't? Who cares? Like I said, I'm not saying these things as fact, or to end anything... just my opinion, thanks.

This is not a Pc vs Console argument.
It is about if a Keyboard and a Mouse is better than a console controller.

I meant it in the fact that when I'm firing a weapon using thumbsticks the weapon actually moves and responds to, in it's own way, a recoil of it's own. . And that recoil being that using thumbsticks isn't as 'secure', if you will, as holding a steady, iron, robotic grip upon a mouse.

I'm sorry but when it's me very and someone else in an extremely tense match. My desire is to kill the opponent. Not fill myself up with emotions on how beautiful the game is or how thumbsticks make the game feel more alive. When your in an intense match you loose focus and concentrate.

 

[smwScott]

I'm sorry but when it's me very and someone else in an extremely tense match. My desire is to kill the opponent. Not fill myself up with emotions on how beautiful the game is or how thumbsticks make the game feel more alive. When your in an intense match you loose focus and concentrate.

Some people just play to have fun. I don't think I've ever played a videogame that I would call a "match." That term is usually reserved for sports or something that requires a bit more ... well more something than sitting in front of a screen playing a game. Videogames are a hobby, not a skill. I prefer the immersive and intuitive control of a gamepad to a mouse/keyboard for almost every game.

When you're playing something like Quake where it's just pure arcade action, then a mouse/keyboard is better simply because it's faster and more accurate. When you're playing a game like Resistance, Perfect Dark, whatever ... it just feels better with a controller. I prefer to lean back on my couch, relax, and play a game on a 32" screen than I do hunched over a desk with my face about a foot away from a monitor.

I'm probably going to play Ep2 on PS3, so then I should be able to give a very accurate comparison between the two ... seeing as it'll be the first time I've played the same game on both formats.

 

[Agent.M]

I don't think I've ever played a videogame that I would call a "match." That term is usually reserved for sports or something that requires a bit more ... well more something than sitting in front of a screen playing a game. Videogames are a hobby, not a skill.

Im gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you on that mmmkay! Being an x college football and baseball player plus a gamer I believe they both require skill!

 

[Warbie]

Please equate how moving your thumb on a thumbstick is in any way a realistic depiction of aiming a weapon?

Simply because it takes longer - aiming with a mouse is very quick, unrealistically so.

I'm a fan of console and pc fps and enjoy using a m&k and joypad for different reasons. For me, using a pad feels more similar to taking careful aim and firing a real weapon. I find getting a headshot in Golden Eye to be far more satisfying than getting a headhsot in, say, HL2 or CS. Analogue movement, rumble, trigger buttons etc all add up to a far more visceral and, imo, more immersive experience - which is why I prefer using a pad for single player games.

Using mouse can feel rather tame in comparison, but aiming is certainly easier and quicker and more suited to faster paced shooters. Having played RTCW/ET and CS in clans for years I wouldn't dream of using a pad for anything of ths pace (UT and Q3 even more so), but would pick a pad every time for something like Gears of War or Golden Eye.

I'll be getting Quake Wars on the pc mainly for mouse control, but will be getting Bioshock on the 360 for a more engrossing experience.

 

[Direwolf]

Warbie's hitting on most of the points that I'd bring up. The ease of using a mouse means you have a few choices: you can either make the game more more difficult and fast paced that you could otherwise (ala Unreal), or you can make it much more complicated by involving large-scale battles, vehicles, etc (ala Battlefield and Quake Wars). It doesn't mean consoles are incapable of such games, but they face some very serious obstacles in button-mapping and situational awareness.