I always play BF games on console, even though I have a suitable PC for those games. It's the only way I ever have enough dexterity to compete in a one-on-one fight.

I know what you mean though I do still enjoy PC FPS more. I do want a multiplayer FPS to come out that encourages that kind of firefight to occur but it does it through the mechanics of the game rather than an ineffective control scheme. Part of the reason I enjoy Red Orchestra 2 so much is that it does go some way in creating that kind of game because of the slow firing weapons, the heavy suppression mechanic and the inaccuracy of the weapons (rifles are very accurate when you are crouching/lying and have no incoming fire, you are not often in this situation and spend most of your time taking pot shots and exchanging fire). One of my hopes for the rift is that it will encourage this type of gameplay as you will be forced to slow down (no more crazy 180 swivels and that kind of thing) and just core shooting should become more difficult. No more right click-instant ADS view but rather it would raise the gun to eye level and you would have to line up the shot. Stuff like that could be really cool I think

You know what? That exact thing is why i've grown to prefer console shooters over PC. It feels more real, more chaotic. With a mouse it feels like I'm clicking on dudes instead of shooting them.

I'm really looking forward to 64 player console battlefield. Should be crazy.

This sounds like why i prefer Arma for my combined arms shooter needs.

I definitely get where you're coming from. I love me some fast-paced shooters, but Battlefield 4(and 3 for that matter) feels like it was designed to be slower than the PC controls allow for. If I end up buying the game, I'll probably go PS4 in the hopes that 64-players on consoles feels how I want it to be.

I feel ya too. I built a new PC to get into games like this then remember, oh, thats why I don't play shooters on the PC. it is just too precise to feel like a real battle. Just who sees you first. I just go in to fuck shit up, get everyone into a chopper and crash it.

@pie:

I don't really find the handling of gamepads a flaw. It's precisely what makes it better for me - that it's a thing that requires more mastery to handle well, and that the intermediate levels of skill are much much broader. From the guy who can't hit a barndoor from a 5-feet distance and turns like a snail, to the guy who pulls off crazy headshot streaks with lightning reflexes - the range is what makes it much more enjoyable. I enjoy getting shot at and live through it. The emergent gameplay is much more reactive and rich, rather than binary - kill or be killed. Trading blows, that's where the fun is at for me.

Gamepads are only statistically worse than KB&M at FPS games. They're slower and less precise, but for my enjoyment of it, they're just fast and precise enough - any more and it's to the detriment of my enjoyment. I think it's only the contrast to the ease and speed and precision of KB/M that makes FPS gameplay with gamepads feel worse/wrong for you. I believe if you dedicate yourself to the multiplayer part of a console FPS games, eventually the contrast will fade away and the nature of the experience will become more important to you. For me at least, FPS games played with gamepads are infinitely more enjoyable.

I felt the same way when I first started playing FPS games on consoles. It felt wrong and clumsy. In time, it changed though. For me it was Battlefield Bad Company 1, which made gamepads really click for FPS games. I played that game for roughly 1000 hours. I guess that's what it takes. Playing an online multiplayer FPS game on consoles obsessively, until it's engrained in your gaming self.

Hah, that's precisely why I enjoy Battlefield more so than Call of Duty lately. Don't get me wrong, nothing beats the high intensity, trigger finger, adrenaline fueled action of Call of Duty but man, when my friend and I play Battlefield, we're checking corners, calling out EVERYTHING, reviving people like maniacs. We take it far too seriously :P

@seppli: I think I might have mentioned a few times before that multiplayer PC shooters should have an option for "controller-only" lobbies, due to the seemingly massive influx of new PC gamers who would rather stick to their, um, sticks.

I do understand what you mean, but there's something supremely satisfying about being able to get a headshot a split-second faster than the other guy. I was just playing Counter-Strike GO and had a lot of fun doing just that, though I'm still more often on the losing end. When I played Halo 3 for ages, I got tons of the variety of firefights you're talking about.

Console shooters, to me, have always felt like they're more about good positioning and smart movement to make up for the lack of incredibly precise aim. A good console player can often move about a little better than a PC player, though ultimately it's that aiming that crushes anyone trying to use a controller.

I don't think what you say about PC is entirely true. I've had some really intense moments capturing points due to prior knowledge of choke points in the specific area. All of us would spot and suppress while another guy would move up and flank. Over all the the gun fights are considerably much longer than conventional fps. You have a lot more options on how you want to approach an objective. Check corners and approach wide open spaces carefully. Always take the unconventional route and try different things.

I too like that aspect of competitive console gaming but the thing in console BF that draws me the most is the limited player count, 64 player defines Battlefield as much as it breaks it.

I'm curious how 64 player BF4 will feel on PS4/Xbox One. It might just be what the doctor ordered to make it more palatable by making random feeling deaths less prevalent.

Been playing BF3 again and been going to 24/7 Norshal Canal servers with a DAO12. I seem to have more fun with the ADHD mentality of "kill, kill, kill, die. repeat."

deep thoughts going on here.

@seppli: it'll be interesting to see the contrast of it with the PC version in terms of gameplay flow, that's for sure. I wonder if, for example, vehicles will be more dominant on console, or if LMGs and other high rate of fire / large clip weapons will stand out more, whereas on PC (at least in BF3) accuracy and stopping power per bullet usually wins out.

I tend to come down on the side of preferring the way PC shooters play, partly because i grew up with the Quakes and UTs of the world, and spent many, many years playing competitive CS (too many haha). I like knowing that my aim and reflexes will make me dangerous enough to be a threat regardless of the situation.

But I totally get what you are saying, as console shooters really do have a different feel and flow, and the large, combined arms nature of BF4 should make that even more prevalent. It will definitely be fascinating now that these kinds of games will be on an even footing across systems, with only the controls to differentiate them.

@seppli: I only got a PC a few months after BF3 came out and up till then had spent all my shooting time on 360/ PS3. I know how to shoot well on them and spent a lot of time playing your halos and cod and bad companies. I would still much rather play on PC so that I don't feel hindered by the controls but still get the experience you talk about through various mechanics. At the same time I would really want to play something like bc2 or red orchestra 2 on the rift and maybe with something like the steam controller which looks to heighten general precision and "fix" some problems I have with traditional controllers whilst probably never becoming the headshot city on PC (as well as giving you triggers which I do miss some). So it's tricky and I think a balance needs to be struck but at the moment I still prefer playing on the PC