Unreal Tournament 3 (PS3) Impressions

i don't want to start an argument of which is better, but i think most people will agree that k/m is better, period. i think a skilled k/m player would beat a skilled gamepad user anyday.

 

Well the fact is that you can aim faster and more accurate with a mouse so unless you are playing against someone far below your skill level you probably wont stand much of a chance against a m/k player.

I dont think that would work very well. You need a stable platform for a mouse and keyboard and your legs arnt a stable platform. You'll be forced to keep your upper legs level and dont move so that isnt really comfortable to begin with. The M/K will probably not be that light and your hands will be pressing down on it so there is the chance of blood not running to your legs anymore and getting that thingly feeling. It'll probably work if you bend over on the couch, put your feets on the ground and dont move but that wont be comfy at all.

 

I agree wholeheartedly. I hate these forced segregations based on assumed results. It's like separate male/female Tennis. Why aren't women allowed to take on the men? Even if they would lose all the time as is assumed, that should be their choice to make whether to try or not. Why aren't football teams mixed? Women should be allowed to try-out alongside blokes, and lose the place on actual inferior ability rather than assumed inferiority if they are to lose the place. *

As long as it's clearly explained that a zone mixes up control methods, and you have the choice to go to single method zones, it should be left to the users to decide what experience they want. Heck, a controller Clan versus K+M clan might be a load of fun, as long as your a good sportsman! Or you could arrange 16 controller users versus 4 K+M users, and have to pit teamwork against superior controls.

* Of course Football should never be sullied with the hideousness of mixed teams, but it makes a good hypothetical example here.

 

Well atleast women can play against us in Unreal Tournament 3
in real life sports it would hardly serve any purpose other than short lived amusement. I agree with the rest though it could be fun to play against KB/M or vise versa as long as it is also possible to play against guys using the same control method. It could create some interesting situations.

 

I disagree with that strenuously. In some sports there's a real difference, but in something like Soccer, teamwork and football-brains are more important than strength and stamina. I know a 7 year old girl who's crazy about football and very good. It's clear she'll be able to trounce most guys when she's older, yet she'll be marginalized because of gender wihtout any regard for her abilities. Maybe they wouldn't find their way into the Premiereship, but they could play in the lower leagues effectively, I'm sure, and get paid a lot more than the specialised Women's League.

Which is way off topic.

 

come on, keyboards and mouses are only tenner. what reason would you have for not being able to afford keyboard when you can afford 425GBP console???

 

Yeah this is somewhat off topic that's for sure... but I'm sorry but you are wrong...
It's true that in soccer the "football-brain" is very very important, but it's not enough. The difference in strenght, stamina, speed, endurance is too big. Football is a very physical sport, and imo is a very bad example for your analogy. A top notch women would struggle even in the very low divisions and the salary there is already very low. I don't try to sound harsh, but that is the reality.

 

How do you know if they're not allowed to try, though? On the rare televised woman's matches I see, the play there is better than a lot of low division mens football I see. Point is, tying in with the original point, why are they excluded on assumption they'd be no good, rather than allowed to try and get rejected because a male player is better? Why aren't they given a chance to try? What if only 3 women in the entire world are able to play Championship Division quality soccer. Should they not be allowed because the average for women is lower than the average for men? Should controller players be refused to play against KB+M players just because it's assumed they'd get whipped? What if they enjoy the challenge, and would find one KB+M player kill well worth 5 deaths?

I'm principly against exclusion. Everyone should be judged by their own abilities in an activity, rather than a set of abitary factors. If they are rubbish, that'll be shown in the competition. Don't tell people they're rubbish without giving them the chance to show they not, even if they're mistaken.

 

I don't have a problem with your philosophy I respect that and generally agree with it. However in this particular matter I feel that's it important to point out that there aren't 3 women in the world who could play in the championship division (if that is the one right under premier league?) The fact is that when a male athlete who has trained his whole life reaches about 40 results to a situation where they can't keep up, it's not because of sudden decrease in their "football brain" but a small drop in their physical attributes, but even then they are still at that age superior to 25 year old female.

The competition even in championship or even few divisions lower is too hard. I'm not trying to undermine women here if somebody get's that kind of wibe out of me, but football is very physical sport and the difference in the attributes is too large. a women can have outstanding technic and drippling skils, but it is not enough. But for the sake of possibilities maybe there is a female prodigy child born every 100 years that could actually compete with male athletes and should get the chance to prove herself, though any women who could play well against men, would surely utterly dominate in womens game and thus get fame and fortune as even though womens soccer is not that big globally I have understood that atleast in USA the biggest stars probaly make quite a nice living out of it.

 

Woman wouldnt survive a soccer match against man once they get a bit older. My brother used to play with girls in his team untill last year but now the girls had to go to a girl team. Not because they wernt good enough, because they were better than some of the guys, but they just lack the strenght needed to compete against boys in their teens. That isnt marginalizing people but protecting them.

 

Yes, to some extent. But the actually principles behind this marginalizing go back to sexual discriminiation that wasn't founded in a proper understanding of gender-specific abilities. If Soccer is divided for a matter of protection, which may be fair but again I think it's down to the women to decided for themselves if it's too dangerous - consiedering how sissy modern footballers are in picking up injuries! - what about Table Tennis? Skiing? Basketball? Baseball?

IMO, competitions should be open to everyone, with division only on ability. In the football world, lesser players aren't thrown aginst the best players, but end up in ability-specific leagues. In online gaming, players should be grouped together by ability to mash up the opposition, with no concern given to what control method they're using. After all, who cares if someone's using KB+M or Controller when they're getting head-shots every time? Would you refuse that person entry into your clan because they have the wrong type of controller? "Sorry mate. Don't care if you're the number ranked player in the world by a margin of 25% more points. We only use trackballs in this clan. You can take your Wiimote elsewhere, thank-you-very-much."

Segregating online games to differnt control methods is to me as wrong as segregating them on gender of players, or height of players. Consoles are the most inclusive 'sport' in the world and that should be embraced, letting the players themselves find a place where they feel comfortable. IMO.

 

Just focusing on your last paragraph, I don't agree with that.

In online gaming, your gender or height don't give you an advantage over the competition. A quicker, more precise control does, and quite a distinct one at that.

The problem with not segregating by control method is that, someone who uses (or is only able to use a controller) may not be able to find a place where they feel comfortable, if they cannot be 'protected' against someone playing with a KB/M.

That's why most sports have standards on what equipment can and can't be used.

Hence the need to segregate by control method. I just have to look at the video on the previous page, where it is being controlled by a person using a controller, to see that the KB/M will provide a distinct advantage (sans auto-aim).

 

I don't think this really is a problem as I don't think there are many if any women who would like to compete against men, at best they would be average (and that's stretching) and would go unnoticed, whereas they are treated as stars among women. in Tennis for example there would be absolutely no point in it, since women get really good salaries in it too. In essence I don't think there are adult women athletes honestly thinking they could compete against men at top level.

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly on that last sentence, but are you suggesting that all competion should be open to women and men? I seriously don't think athletes would like that especially women and in this football example, why would you like to play in 11th division with few blokes, when you can play in the premier women league with much better media coverage to boot.

Well it's important that the player is confortable, but not at the expense of the opposite players, there should be 3 different leagues: KB/M only, Controller only and mixed, that's the right way to go. If I wan't to play competitively with controller, I certainly woulnd't like to play against KB/M players, but if somebody else does then that option would be welcome.

 

You give them places where they can choose to go themselves. Offer controller only spaces, KB+M spaces, and open spaces. The players get to decide for themselves where they're happiest, rather than being told where they should be for their own good. Likewise in football, have a Women's league if you want, but allow them to try out in the Men's league, and vice versa. Would you rather be in the top end Women's league than the 11th division in the men's? Perhaps, but it ought to be for the players themselves to decide that. If Sally Fergal wants to play for Lesser Piddlington Eleven's instead of Arsenal's Woman's Team, why deny them that choice. Especially when I don't think the difference will be that great. And annoyingly, we'll never know because women aren't given the chance to compete at the same level. All we have at the moment are arguments based on expectations. Women are weaker than men, ergo they can't compete at anything other than the bottom divisions when against men. Given how crap Woking play these days, I'm sure there's many a female player that'd make a worthwhile presence in the Conference or League 2. Pinning them at 11th Division to make a point doesn't make a realistic one IMO.

 

Well I think we just have to agree to disagree then
Just like to say one more time, that this probably isn't as issue for athletes, atleast I haven't heard anyone complaining and atleast in Finland women have a chance to participate in many sports where gender is not regulated like motorsport and couble years back there actually was a Canadian women playing hockey in our third league and she did ok...Although I must say that the men took it easy on her, and she would not have been there, if ironically She wasn't a woman meaning that her level was good enough to make a nice marketing and thus made some nice money to the team. I think at the time she was considered the best women player in the world, captain of the Canadian olympic team Hailey Wickenhaiser.

The point is that there are atleast some opportunities for women to compete against men.

 

this forum is now changing to footy women thread

 

If people know that they may be playing other under a different control method I see no reason to segregate the lobbies/game.

UT is not a game I would normally purchase for a console, although if I did I would most definetely play with a controller. To me its more of an issue what the player is more comfortable with rather than which control method is "superior" (although I agree that a mouse would be the technically superior method).

As far as inherent advantages the kb/m would be the amongst the least of my worries particularly in pc gaming. Who has the better/faster connection, who is playing at what res., who is playing at what framerate, etc; the kb/m would only be the beginning of advantages-disadvantages one could associate with combining console and pc online competitive gaming.

 

Thank you, Unreal Team!

Thank you Sony!

Thank you vocal FPS fans!

Thanks to all those who made KB/M support a reality!!

I'll be buying the game becaseu of this.

 

KB/M is the most important factor. I could whip the pants off joystick users even if I was running at low-res, on a high ping connection, with choppy frame rate. I'd list the order of important of "equipment" as:

1) KB/M
2) network
3) framerate
4) resolution

Resolution doesn't really affect my ability very much with the exception of very long sniper battles. Ironically tho, I find aliasing/pixel popping a good way of detecting movement far away. I've played tons of clan-matches on sucky video equipment where I had to drop down to 640x480 rez and it didn't impact much at all.

I've also played with low framerates. It's not the low framerate that's the problem I find, but variable framerate. If I can have a guaranteed 15fps, I can deal with it. But if it is fluctuating between 10, 15, 20, 30, and 60, then it screws me up.

Network is the issue I'd say that is almost as important as KB/M. Unless you're playing with area effect weapons. (rockets, etc) I almost exclusively use rifles/sniper rifles, etc, so network performance is very important.

KB/M + good network + skill = very good sniping. No way a console user without KB/M could deal with it.