Executor32 wrote:Speaking as a PC gamer, I don't get the obsession the vocal minority have with it. I mainly just use KB/M for FPS and RTS games, and my wireless 360 controller for almost everything else, especially racing and third-person action games. Hell, if I get tired of sitting in the chair and just feel like lying in bed and playing, I'll play any game with the 360 controller. I like to think that most PC gamers are like me, and the KB/M Nazis are actually just the same five people bitching to each other and their sockpuppets.
Early console shooters and RTSs were piss-poor ports with gameplay and UIs (respectively) set up to work for a mouse and keyboard. PC gamers don't forget things like that and cover their ears and scream loudly when you tell them about how things have changed since then.
For shooters, Unreal Tournament for the PS2 was an uncontrollable mess using the same difficulty for bots as was on the PC (pinpoint accuracy from across the map), but the controller couldn't keep pace with the fast-paced fighting nor the ridiculous amounts of weapons the game had. If you'll notice, there just aren't many shooters like UT anymore, for better or worse. The one actual cross-platform MP shooter, Shadowrun (ugh) really highlighted the disparity in the control scheme and gave PC elitists more ammo. I can't find the webpage anymore, but even with the slow-movement speed and aim-assists, console users were slaughtered by their PC counterparts.
Goldeneye and, later, Halo would show how a competent shooter could be made for a console and later interations followed the Halo mold (2 weapons, assist aiming, and (generally) less deadly hitscan weapons.For RTSs, the control scheme is almost impossible to make work cross platform. Halo Wars, while not a great game, showed how to do this for console. However, the UI is extremely simple when compared to games like Starcraft. But on the flip side, the PC port of Halo would drag current gen PCs to their knees even though the original game was released on PC like 2-3 years (can't recall) after it was for Xbox.
The other gripe PC gamers have is that developing for console tends to dumb-down aspects of the game and in some instances they aren't far off with concern the things like inventory management or quickly comparing items in RPGs. Making a game for both platforms usually results in one platform getting shafted hard. Mass Effect was known for being buggy on 360, but was really fucked up on PC. I heard of issues with Borderlands (which the UI was fucked dual-screen on 360 anyway), Brink, etc. And as I brought up, the ports usually have major issues with optimization and stability.
Few games pull it off well, most notably valve games like L4dead. I was surprised that a game designed for the 360 worked so well on the PC, even with the bullshit matchmaking system. I even heard good things about the Orange box for console where the main issue was the lack of customization when compared to the PC version of TF2 (no custom maps, etc). That and the lack of admin control with the matchmaking system to deal with griefers.
Diablo fans likely don't want to get stuck with a broken and dumb-downed port of a console game. There's also the bullshit PC elitism. There's always that.
So to wrap up this rant, you basically need two good teams or a concept that works well cross-platform to make a good multiple platform game. But that shit takes time and money with two or more development and testing teams. So, what you're usually stuck with is a buggy and broken piece of shit and Diablo fans are pretty crazy to begin with. So, queue up the death threats and "worst. game. ever." forum posts.
