This Week in Battlefield V

ban mouse and keyboard

Comments

  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Shrouds first time playing cod blackout multiplayer, he went .70 KD on PS4.

    You don't think if he had a xim, he'd do much better than .70 KD? Not saying he'd be a god but you don't think he'd do significantly better than a .70kd hisnfirstngo around with a xim?

    This is not a dumb player. This is just a player uncomfortable with controller to so much effect that he doesn't perform well as others might.

    He can pick up any mnk game on keyboard and pretty much do alright if not outright own. On a controller he's human.

    Mechanically, a keyboard and mouse is better. There's less tension on your hands which allow you to aim more freely.
  • full951
    2465 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Theres no reason not to use it where applicable. It's a controller. Its never been anything more.

  • e-Sparta_Rambo
    461 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    e-Sparta_Rambo said:


    Pelliy wrote: »
    BaronVonGoon said:





    Pelliy wrote: »





    OskooI_007 wrote: »

    XIM is 1:1 unless you move the mouse too fast. PC is always 1:1 no matter how fast you move the mouse.







    And yes, it's very easy to exceed max turn speed using a mouse on XIM.







    Than it's not really 1:1 then.







    It's not 1:1 for sure. But having used both Xim and real mouse PC, I can safely say if you adjust and fine tune the Xim you'll aim very effectively and dominate controller users. A seasoned PC mouse user can tell right away that there's some input lag, stuttering and pixel skipping. But it's very minor and can be easily 'forgotten' if you give it time to get used. On console you don't need real mouse to dominate controller users, Xim does a good job. Not to mention that if you combine it with 'Slowdown' aim assist you effectively become more accurate than on PC with real mouse but no slowdown aim assist.



    Indeed. I have no doubt that its advantageous to use it.



    Just looking at competitive players from GUS, 2ezy, Venom etc, as far as I know all of those guys are using DS4, and has no issue to take a dump on MnK users on console. It takes time, skill, practice to get good. Most arabs are using mnk but I ve never had issue to dominate them with DS4 or the pathetic Tac Hori. Not once I blamed someones input device for my death because I know I ve been outplayed because my foe had tactical edge in said situation.

    Yes, lets make it fair to compare the 0.1% to the rest of the average userbase. Come on man. 

    In any case, I actually agree with what that guy said, that it's probably more exaggerated than believed. I think you'll find more xim users in COD because there are online tournaments that have money involved. Incentive.

    I don't expect an avg mnk user to beat an elite player that uses a controller. I never said that. I said it offers a significant advantage. Significance is relative to the skillset. Someone brought up an example of a guy going 25-12 or whatever number  it was on COD to going 48-10. That's a significant improvement. He increased his actions per min, kill per min by using the adapter. a 23 kill improvement. 

    He's not a god. going 48-10 doesn't make you a pro. Doesn't make you Elite. but getting 23 more kills is a significant improvement, don't you think?

    If I can go from 1.3 kpm to going to 1.7, that's not significant?

    I wouldnt call this a fair comparison. I had games where I was pub stacked by pro wannabe randies and barely broke even, and next round with 2 decent players on my team i went 45-2 against same team. What I am saying is new round different story. When i bought tac hori pro the first round I went 105-21 (Domination BF4), and since then I struggled to get up to 80 kills per round, same with Xim4 when i had it for a month, you would say thats a lot of kills for a small game mode, but I broke 100s with DS4 so many times that I have lost count, and I am not a good player, just above average.

    And you also contradicting yourself by saying average mnk user will not beat mlg pro elite controller user. If MnK offered and I quote "significant advantage" then every average Joe would take a dump on pro controller users.

    It is a fair comparison. I'm sorry you don't see it that way, but it is.

    You on the other hand are comparing elite players to avg players while I'm comparing individual progress of players.

    And no an avg mnk user on console shouldn't beat a pro console player using a controller. What contradicting am I saying here? Significance does not indicate GOD STATUS. No one here has advocate that using a xim makes you A a GOD. You and others are strawmanning the argument.

    Again, significance is relative to the skill. If I'm able to increase my individual stats my kpm, my actions per min using a xim, thats significant! It doesn't mean I'll be able to beat elite players.

    Going from a 1.3kpm to a 1.7 does not make someone elite. I said that. But it shows that personal ability with a controller was limited. The skill ceiling was limited. .40kpm increase is HUGE. It may not look like that. A 1.7 isn't elite. I have a 1.7 and the difference between playing even a 1.9 player vs me is a significant difference.

    Imagine being .40kpm Lower.

    Your reasoning for this makes no sense. If you can elaborate on it, I'd love to hear it but trawmanning my argument and implying that mnk makes people gods wont be a good argument. Because I never said that.

    I never compared elite players vs noobs, just gave you an example that if your average Joe practices more on his reflexes, aiming, awareness, positioning etc he ll have no trouble to pick off mnk users with ease. However if we re talking about those who play once or twice a month then what difference does it make for them if you are using mnk or controller ?

    If and when we get native mnk support i would vouch for separate lobbies as controller has no chance to beat raw mouse input, but these adapters makes 0 difference to me.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    e-Sparta_Rambo said:


    Pelliy wrote: »
    BaronVonGoon said:





    Pelliy wrote: »





    OskooI_007 wrote: »

    XIM is 1:1 unless you move the mouse too fast. PC is always 1:1 no matter how fast you move the mouse.







    And yes, it's very easy to exceed max turn speed using a mouse on XIM.







    Than it's not really 1:1 then.







    It's not 1:1 for sure. But having used both Xim and real mouse PC, I can safely say if you adjust and fine tune the Xim you'll aim very effectively and dominate controller users. A seasoned PC mouse user can tell right away that there's some input lag, stuttering and pixel skipping. But it's very minor and can be easily 'forgotten' if you give it time to get used. On console you don't need real mouse to dominate controller users, Xim does a good job. Not to mention that if you combine it with 'Slowdown' aim assist you effectively become more accurate than on PC with real mouse but no slowdown aim assist.



    Indeed. I have no doubt that its advantageous to use it.



    Just looking at competitive players from GUS, 2ezy, Venom etc, as far as I know all of those guys are using DS4, and has no issue to take a dump on MnK users on console. It takes time, skill, practice to get good. Most arabs are using mnk but I ve never had issue to dominate them with DS4 or the pathetic Tac Hori. Not once I blamed someones input device for my death because I know I ve been outplayed because my foe had tactical edge in said situation.

    Yes, lets make it fair to compare the 0.1% to the rest of the average userbase. Come on man. 

    In any case, I actually agree with what that guy said, that it's probably more exaggerated than believed. I think you'll find more xim users in COD because there are online tournaments that have money involved. Incentive.

    I don't expect an avg mnk user to beat an elite player that uses a controller. I never said that. I said it offers a significant advantage. Significance is relative to the skillset. Someone brought up an example of a guy going 25-12 or whatever number  it was on COD to going 48-10. That's a significant improvement. He increased his actions per min, kill per min by using the adapter. a 23 kill improvement. 

    He's not a god. going 48-10 doesn't make you a pro. Doesn't make you Elite. but getting 23 more kills is a significant improvement, don't you think?

    If I can go from 1.3 kpm to going to 1.7, that's not significant?

    I wouldnt call this a fair comparison. I had games where I was pub stacked by pro wannabe randies and barely broke even, and next round with 2 decent players on my team i went 45-2 against same team. What I am saying is new round different story. When i bought tac hori pro the first round I went 105-21 (Domination BF4), and since then I struggled to get up to 80 kills per round, same with Xim4 when i had it for a month, you would say thats a lot of kills for a small game mode, but I broke 100s with DS4 so many times that I have lost count, and I am not a good player, just above average.

    And you also contradicting yourself by saying average mnk user will not beat mlg pro elite controller user. If MnK offered and I quote "significant advantage" then every average Joe would take a dump on pro controller users.

    It is a fair comparison. I'm sorry you don't see it that way, but it is.

    You on the other hand are comparing elite players to avg players while I'm comparing individual progress of players.

    And no an avg mnk user on console shouldn't beat a pro console player using a controller. What contradicting am I saying here? Significance does not indicate GOD STATUS. No one here has advocate that using a xim makes you A a GOD. You and others are strawmanning the argument.

    Again, significance is relative to the skill. If I'm able to increase my individual stats my kpm, my actions per min using a xim, thats significant! It doesn't mean I'll be able to beat elite players.

    Going from a 1.3kpm to a 1.7 does not make someone elite. I said that. But it shows that personal ability with a controller was limited. The skill ceiling was limited. .40kpm increase is HUGE. It may not look like that. A 1.7 isn't elite. I have a 1.7 and the difference between playing even a 1.9 player vs me is a significant difference.

    Imagine being .40kpm Lower.

    Your reasoning for this makes no sense. If you can elaborate on it, I'd love to hear it but trawmanning my argument and implying that mnk makes people gods wont be a good argument. Because I never said that.

    I never compared elite players vs noobs, just gave you an example that if your average Joe practices more on his reflexes, aiming, awareness, positioning etc he ll have no trouble to pick off mnk users with ease. However if we re talking about those who play once or twice a month then what difference does it make for them if you are using mnk or controller ?

    If and when we get native mnk support i would vouch for separate lobbies as controller has no chance to beat raw mouse input, but these adapters makes 0 difference to me.

    Are you going to address anything that I said? I don't say that to be disrespectful but to stay on topic.

    You literally named off a bunch of competitive players and compared them with avg mnk users.

    Then go on to strawman my point saying if it's such significant advantage, they should be able to beat elite players using controllers

    Now you're saying you didn't say that. :)

    Okay, can you at least address the points that I made? Don't you think improving individually is significant? Hypothetically speaking if someone were to go from 1.3 kpm to 1.7kpm you don't think that's significant?
  • BaronVonGoon
    6777 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    BaronVonGoon said:


    Ferdinand_J_Foch wrote: »
    BaronVonGoon said:

    Mouse is clearly superior to controller. All you have to do is play on both console and PC. PC players are so much more deadly than console players. Really all you have to do is play on both and it becomes very clear. Nothing against console users and I was one for years, it's not the player it's the input device. PC really challenges you and makes you a better player because the level of play in general is higher, much faster and everyone aims better.



    I'd say the same. I too was a console user for years, but it's so much easier to aim with a mouse.



    I've seen so many console clips where one guy kills a group of enemies who seemingly cannot react ... it's much harder to find people that dim on PC. Then again, the PC platform has it's own issues ... software glitches, OS problems, cheaters, silliness in game chats ... there's a lot of nonsense to deal with, whereas on console, you just put a disc in and start playing.



    Just a few days ago, my GeForce Experience stopped working ... I had to try all sorts of workarounds before one of them worked. I have to go into NVIDIA's Control Panel to do small tricks just to get a decent framerate for BFV, alongside the user.cfg that I've made. Steam randomly decides to freeze from time to time. A Windows update could cause a massive meltdown ... one of my friends got an Insider Version of W10 that started deleting his personal data out of nowhere. A game fails to install for some seemingly obscure reason. There's so many things that can, and will, go horribly wrong without any forewarning.



    Console life seemed so much easier.



    Absolutely. For me console was more fun too. If not for getting used to framerates I would've sold my PC and got back to console. Alot less issues to deal with and less frustrating moments.



    ackers75 wrote: »
    If you can’t go on a wrecking spree with kB/m with aim assist I suggest you give up gaming and try knitting



    Maybe in BF1. But from my experience the ttk in BFV makes it so the wrecking sprees for mnk users on console occur much less frequently in BFV. I have many screenshots of cql rounds in BF1 where I would go 75+ kills and 10 deaths. I never went over 60 kills in BFV on console and rarely went over 40.

    what has the ttk to do with wrecking sprees for mnk users on console specifically? why does the same not apply to controller users?

    also you went from playing emulated mnk vs mostly controller users (i btw think the number of mnk users is a lot smaller than some people think) to play native mnk vs native mnk and sometimes cheaters (i would assume). if anything your experience indicates that your use of mnk on console really did have more than a marginal impact. 


    I don't how to answer this. I mean define 'Marginal'.

    I went from console mnk+aim assist slowdown vs controller users to pc native vs native mnk. My k/d is down and kpm is down.

    I was doing an average of 35 kills/12 deaths cql rounds on console and on pc I'm doing the same thing (Atleast lately). I've only been on pc for just over 6 weeks and had to really (REALLY) struggle to get used to:

    -Keyboard for movement (ALOT harder than you might expect).
    -Aiming without aim assist slowdown. (I've never NOT used slowdown before)
    -Enemies being much faster and much more accurate.

    Yet recently I'm doing the same conquest round kill/death averages as I did on console. Scoreboard screenshots available (I know who saves their own screenshots lol).

    Yeah, there's an impact. But that's to be expected, right?

    I think the impact on my gameplay performance of me using mnk on console vs using a controller is much less than the impact of playing against much stronger enemies. I mean the difference is really night and day.


    As to your question what does the ttk have to do with mnk users wrecking others on console, all I can offer is my experience. I know my stats in BF1 aren't as impressive as someone of your caliber, but relative to the average player I wrecked people on a daily basis in BF1. I rarely wrecked people in BFV. My only conclusion is in BF1 you could afford to make mistakes and jump back into cover. You can't makes mistakes in BFV and not expect to get melted like butter.

    If you're question was, does mnk offer an advantage over controller users. The simple answer is ofcourse yes. Does it artificially make you a better player? Possibly. But to a small extent. BUT it's not going take a bad player and make him a good player. It offers a marginal impact and you'd have try both to see for yourself.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    BaronVonGoon said:


    Ferdinand_J_Foch wrote: »
    BaronVonGoon said:

    Mouse is clearly superior to controller. All you have to do is play on both console and PC. PC players are so much more deadly than console players. Really all you have to do is play on both and it becomes very clear. Nothing against console users and I was one for years, it's not the player it's the input device. PC really challenges you and makes you a better player because the level of play in general is higher, much faster and everyone aims better.



    I'd say the same. I too was a console user for years, but it's so much easier to aim with a mouse.



    I've seen so many console clips where one guy kills a group of enemies who seemingly cannot react ... it's much harder to find people that dim on PC. Then again, the PC platform has it's own issues ... software glitches, OS problems, cheaters, silliness in game chats ... there's a lot of nonsense to deal with, whereas on console, you just put a disc in and start playing.



    Just a few days ago, my GeForce Experience stopped working ... I had to try all sorts of workarounds before one of them worked. I have to go into NVIDIA's Control Panel to do small tricks just to get a decent framerate for BFV, alongside the user.cfg that I've made. Steam randomly decides to freeze from time to time. A Windows update could cause a massive meltdown ... one of my friends got an Insider Version of W10 that started deleting his personal data out of nowhere. A game fails to install for some seemingly obscure reason. There's so many things that can, and will, go horribly wrong without any forewarning.



    Console life seemed so much easier.



    Absolutely. For me console was more fun too. If not for getting used to framerates I would've sold my PC and got back to console. Alot less issues to deal with and less frustrating moments.



    ackers75 wrote: »
    If you can’t go on a wrecking spree with kB/m with aim assist I suggest you give up gaming and try knitting



    Maybe in BF1. But from my experience the ttk in BFV makes it so the wrecking sprees for mnk users on console occur much less frequently in BFV. I have many screenshots of cql rounds in BF1 where I would go 75+ kills and 10 deaths. I never went over 60 kills in BFV on console and rarely went over 40.

    what has the ttk to do with wrecking sprees for mnk users on console specifically? why does the same not apply to controller users?

    also you went from playing emulated mnk vs mostly controller users (i btw think the number of mnk users is a lot smaller than some people think) to play native mnk vs native mnk and sometimes cheaters (i would assume). if anything your experience indicates that your use of mnk on console really did have more than a marginal impact. 


    I don't how to answer this. I mean define 'Marginal'.

    I went from console mnk+aim assist slowdown vs controller users to pc native vs native mnk. My k/d is down and kpm is down.

    I was doing an average of 35 kills/12 deaths cql rounds on console and on pc I'm doing the same thing (Atleast lately). I've only been on pc for just over 6 weeks and had to really (REALLY) struggle to get used to:

    -Keyboard for movement (ALOT harder than you might expect).
    -Aiming without aim assist slowdown. (I've never NOT used slowdown before)
    -Enemies being much faster and much more accurate.

    Yet recently I'm doing the same conquest round kill/death averages as I did on console. Scoreboard screenshots available (I know who saves their own screenshots lol).

    Yeah, there's an impact. But that's to be expected, right?

    I think the impact on my gameplay performance of me using mnk on console vs using a controller is much less than the impact of playing against much stronger enemies. I mean the difference is really night and day.


    As to your question what does the ttk have to do with mnk users wrecking others on console, all I can offer is my experience. I know my stats in BF1 aren't as impressive as someone of your caliber, but relative to the average player I wrecked people on a daily basis in BF1. I rarely wrecked people in BFV. My only conclusion is in BF1 you could afford to make mistakes and jump back into cover. You can't makes mistakes in BFV and not expect to get melted like butter.

    If you're question was, does mnk offer an advantage over controller users. The simple answer is ofcourse yes. Does it artificially make you a better player? Possibly. But to a small extent. BUT it's not going take a bad player and make him a good player. It offers a marginal impact and you'd have try both to see for yourself.
    I guess we're debating on what significance means or what it is. Would you say you're a better player on console using a xim vs using a controller?
  • DrunkwoIf
    299 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    you are going to start seeing alot more people on console with mouse and keyboard since EA/Dice refuses to do anything about the cheaters on PC. you should just get one and start practicing now, it is a advantage.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 25
    If mouse doesn't offer a significant advantage, then why do developers matchmake controller and mouse players into separate servers?
    I think some people want to convince us that They're spending $100(sometimes more on the aftermarket) to buy a peripheral because its a matter of preference and has no significant impact or advantageous whatsoever :)

    On a separate note:

    Fornite Cup is happening soon. It's an Open Qualifier. Cross-Play. Lets see if any console player qualifies or if they will allow xim users to compete later on in their console-only sponsored tournaments. :)


  • BaronVonGoon
    6777 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 25
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Would you say you're a better player on console using a xim vs using a controller?

    Really hard to answer lol. Right now mouse ofcourse. I haven't touched a controller since 2014.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Would you say you're a better player on console using a xim vs using a controller?

    Really hard to answer lol. Right now mouse ofcourse. I haven't touched a controller since 2014.

    Give it a try 🙂
  • full951
    2465 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    OskooI_007 wrote: »
    If mouse doesn't offer a significant advantage, then why do developers matchmake controller and mouse players into separate servers?

    The answer has been given many times: those are two different things. The raw speed and precision of native mouse and keyboard is on a different level than controller. 3rd party adapters on consoles are not that. They can only do what a controller can do. It's entirely within the scope of controller movement that is set by the game.
  • idk1233211
    632 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 25
    full951 said:
    OskooI_007 wrote: »
    If mouse doesn't offer a significant advantage, then why do developers matchmake controller and mouse players into separate servers?

    The answer has been given many times: those are two different things. The raw speed and precision of native mouse and keyboard is on a different level than controller. 3rd party adapters on consoles are not that. They can only do what a controller can do. It's entirely within the scope of controller movement that is set by the game.




    Some people here including my self have provided evidence you clearly havn't read through yet.

    i would also say xim apex is on a different level to a controller.  Raw mouse > xim apex > scuf.
    xim apex is in the middle.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    full951 wrote: »
    OskooI_007 wrote: »
    If mouse doesn't offer a significant advantage, then why do developers matchmake controller and mouse players into separate servers?

    The answer has been given many times: those are two different things. The raw speed and precision of native mouse and keyboard is on a different level than controller. 3rd party adapters on consoles are not that. They can only do what a controller can do. It's entirely within the scope of controller movement that is set by the game.

    It'll be interesting enough to see if there is a study out there that talks about xim vs controller use. All we have is to go on the devs word and anecdotal evidence

    But I'm inclined to believe it offers a significant improvement even with a controllers limitation intact on the emulation because it's still more consistent than using your thumbs. The really good to elite players won't have an issue with dealing or playing against xim but everyone else I believe will far much more better xim, giving it the advantage.

    If it can make you more of a consistent player, it has a significant advantage.

    For example, to cancel weapons, I actually have to take my hand off a button to do so when I use a controller. In PC, you don't have to do this. You can use the scrollwheel to cancel. That gives a slight advantage in timing to the avg playerbase.

    The ergonomics are much more better to play. Imagine tense moments on a controller vs a keyboard.

    All of these things add up. As I mentioned to someone earlier, going up even .10 in kpm is a significant improvement. Going .20 or higher you're changing skill brackets . It doesn't make you a god though and it doesn't mean if you play against a pro, you'll own that pro. It just means you'll fair off better using a xim than you would a controller.

    Instead of losing 8-30 to a pro player, maybe you lose more respectfully even though is still a wallop against a pro
  • full951
    2465 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    55567900 wrote: »
    full951 said:


    OskooI_007 wrote: »
    If mouse doesn't offer a significant advantage, then why do developers matchmake controller and mouse players into separate servers?



    The answer has been given many times: those are two different things. The raw speed and precision of native mouse and keyboard is on a different level than controller. 3rd party adapters on consoles are not that. They can only do what a controller can do. It's entirely within the scope of controller movement that is set by the game.





    Some people here including my self have provided evidence you clearly havn't read through yet.


    i would also say xim apex is on a different level to a controller.  Raw mouse > xim apex > scuf.xim apex is in the middle.

    I've read everything. Most of it is blown out of proportion. I do agree with your tier assessment, native mouse>xim>scuff/elite>base controller

    I think the disagreement lies with how big a gap between xim and controller. The gap isn't very large and is varied depending on the game. The gap between native mouse support and Xim is just as large as the gap between native mouse support and a controller.
  • Turban_Legend80
    4593 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    edited July 25
    broom111 wrote: »
    [post has been removed]

    This thread is about MnK on console. It’s not about cheaters on PC.
    Post edited by LOLGotYerTags on
  • full951
    2465 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    full951 wrote: »
    OskooI_007 wrote: »
    If mouse doesn't offer a significant advantage, then why do developers matchmake controller and mouse players into separate servers?

    The answer has been given many times: those are two different things. The raw speed and precision of native mouse and keyboard is on a different level than controller. 3rd party adapters on consoles are not that. They can only do what a controller can do. It's entirely within the scope of controller movement that is set by the game.

    It'll be interesting enough to see if there is a study out there that talks about xim vs controller use. All we have is to go on the devs word and anecdotal evidence

    But I'm inclined to believe it offers a significant improvement even with a controllers limitation intact on the emulation because it's still more consistent than using your thumbs. The really good to elite players won't have an issue with dealing or playing against xim but everyone else I believe will far much more better xim, giving it the advantage.

    If it can make you more of a consistent player, it has a significant advantage.

    For example, to cancel weapons, I actually have to take my hand off a button to do so when I use a controller. In PC, you don't have to do this. You can use the scrollwheel to cancel. That gives a slight advantage in timing to the avg playerbase.

    The ergonomics are much more better to play. Imagine tense moments on a controller vs a keyboard.

    All of these things add up. As I mentioned to someone earlier, going up even .10 in kpm is a significant improvement. Going .20 or higher you're changing skill brackets . It doesn't make you a god though and it doesn't mean if you play against a pro, you'll own that pro. It just means you'll fair off better using a xim than you would a controller.

    Instead of losing 8-30 to a pro player, maybe you lose more respectfully even though is still a wallop against a pro

    You can go off what people who use it on a regular basis tell you.

    I think it's an improvement over the base controller.(honestly anything is) I also know it isn't what people try to make it out to be. It's an objectively better way to control a first person shooter and most other similar types of games played on console. however, it did not come with any skill in the box. There was a back order on game sence. They were clean out of consistency too. Jokes aside, these are all things the player provides to the equation. You can't buy them.

    your example about having to take your thumb off the stick/button to perform an action. You can do that on console despite you saying you can't. That's the specific advantage of using a scuff or elite controller. Another elite controller advantage used to be customizable bindings but that's possible on a system level with the base controller now and some games allow for full binding customization like bfv does. bfv even provides bindings for keys a controller doesn't have.

    I do agree the ergonomics are better but I'm inclined to leave that to personal preference. If you've ever heard a console vs pc argument one of the points given for console is the controllers are more comfortable and can be used in more positions and places. So I guess if that's what you like then use it.

    I don't know what pros have to do with any of this. They're pros, when they play for money in tournament it will be controllers only, when they play for a stream, it doesn't matter.

    I see no negatives to giving console players better control options. It does not ruin anyone's game experience. On the contrary it's getting people who never would play console to play more and longer than ever. It isn't killing games. It's not cheating and it's not unfair. People against it are blowing it way out of proportion. The chances of even encountering a mnk player are next to zero. I used to think about 25% of all console gamers at least had one. I was so wrong. It's less than 1% of players in any game for users of xim products. If you wanna add up all the other brands, giving a generous estimate, maybe 3% of players if they were all playing at the same time.

    I am impressed by how small a slice of the gaming community can make such a big impact. I really do think the emulators are the driving force behind mnk coming to the console space. You will see more of it next gen
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    full951 said:
    Pelliy wrote: »
    full951 wrote: »
    OskooI_007 wrote: »
    If mouse doesn't offer a significant advantage, then why do developers matchmake controller and mouse players into separate servers?

    The answer has been given many times: those are two different things. The raw speed and precision of native mouse and keyboard is on a different level than controller. 3rd party adapters on consoles are not that. They can only do what a controller can do. It's entirely within the scope of controller movement that is set by the game.

    It'll be interesting enough to see if there is a study out there that talks about xim vs controller use. All we have is to go on the devs word and anecdotal evidence

    But I'm inclined to believe it offers a significant improvement even with a controllers limitation intact on the emulation because it's still more consistent than using your thumbs. The really good to elite players won't have an issue with dealing or playing against xim but everyone else I believe will far much more better xim, giving it the advantage.

    If it can make you more of a consistent player, it has a significant advantage.

    For example, to cancel weapons, I actually have to take my hand off a button to do so when I use a controller. In PC, you don't have to do this. You can use the scrollwheel to cancel. That gives a slight advantage in timing to the avg playerbase.

    The ergonomics are much more better to play. Imagine tense moments on a controller vs a keyboard.

    All of these things add up. As I mentioned to someone earlier, going up even .10 in kpm is a significant improvement. Going .20 or higher you're changing skill brackets . It doesn't make you a god though and it doesn't mean if you play against a pro, you'll own that pro. It just means you'll fair off better using a xim than you would a controller.

    Instead of losing 8-30 to a pro player, maybe you lose more respectfully even though is still a wallop against a pro

    You can go off what people who use it on a regular basis tell you.

    I think it's an improvement over the base controller.(honestly anything is) I also know it isn't what people try to make it out to be. It's an objectively better way to control a first person shooter and most other similar types of games played on console. however, it did not come with any skill in the box. There was a back order on game sence. They were clean out of consistency too. Jokes aside, these are all things the player provides to the equation. You can't buy them.

    your example about having to take your thumb off the stick/button to perform an action. You can do that on console despite you saying you can't. That's the specific advantage of using a scuff or elite controller. Another elite controller advantage used to be customizable bindings but that's possible on a system level with the base controller now and some games allow for full binding customization like bfv does. bfv even provides bindings for keys a controller doesn't have.

    I do agree the ergonomics are better but I'm inclined to leave that to personal preference. If you've ever heard a console vs pc argument one of the points given for console is the controllers are more comfortable and can be used in more positions and places. So I guess if that's what you like then use it.

    I don't know what pros have to do with any of this. They're pros, when they play for money in tournament it will be controllers only, when they play for a stream, it doesn't matter.

    I see no negatives to giving console players better control options. It does not ruin anyone's game experience. On the contrary it's getting people who never would play console to play more and longer than ever. It isn't killing games. It's not cheating and it's not unfair. People against it are blowing it way out of proportion. The chances of even encountering a mnk player are next to zero. I used to think about 25% of all console gamers at least had one. I was so wrong. It's less than 1% of players in any game for users of xim products. If you wanna add up all the other brands, giving a generous estimate, maybe 3% of players if they were all playing at the same time.

    I am impressed by how small a slice of the gaming community can make such a big impact. I really do think the emulators are the driving force behind mnk coming to the console space. You will see more of it next gen
    Elite controllers still have issues with thumb precision. 

    I myself am arguing just on performance. I'm not debating if its cheating, or killing games. Like I said to Turban, I agree with him that I don't believe the majority of people have one. I believe that's something people use as an excuse to getting owned. I don't see the common gamer spending $100 on a peripheral that you have to fine tune through your phone to get the results that you want. I just don't see that happening. It's too complex to be plug and play. Most people will elect to stay with a controller or go to pc and play natively.

    The xim is a grey area. I do not consider it cheating in games that have no policy against it. For overwatch, it is cheating. For COD online tournaments, its cheating. As far as sony and MS goes, There seems to be a lot of double speak going on with microsoft and especially sony on such peripherals, they say unauthorized software, but sony licenses an adapter and Microsoft wants to work to get mnk partners on consoles.  

    For battlefield , if it was considered cheating, this thread would have been closed a long time ago.

    Its definitely in the grey area.

    The topic I'm debating is that its efficiency and consistency over controllers. That's all I'm debating. 
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I really hope that native support comes to consoles and that the market is opt-in for crossplay. Its really about time that happens on some level. It really makes no sense to lock in input like that. I also say that by making things native, sales in adapters will go down and keep people more honest in controller only lobbies. It won't fully eliminate it, but it'll be less of people buying xim. Why would you buy a xim if you can just play in a pc mixed lobby? save the $100 bucks. So I agree with you in that regard @full951 that they are driving the race to mnk on console
  • full951
    2465 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    full951 said:


    Pelliy wrote: »


    full951 wrote: »


    OskooI_007 wrote: »
    If mouse doesn't offer a significant advantage, then why do developers matchmake controller and mouse players into separate servers?



    The answer has been given many times: those are two different things. The raw speed and precision of native mouse and keyboard is on a different level than controller. 3rd party adapters on consoles are not that. They can only do what a controller can do. It's entirely within the scope of controller movement that is set by the game.



    It'll be interesting enough to see if there is a study out there that talks about xim vs controller use. All we have is to go on the devs word and anecdotal evidence



    But I'm inclined to believe it offers a significant improvement even with a controllers limitation intact on the emulation because it's still more consistent than using your thumbs. The really good to elite players won't have an issue with dealing or playing against xim but everyone else I believe will far much more better xim, giving it the advantage.



    If it can make you more of a consistent player, it has a significant advantage.



    For example, to cancel weapons, I actually have to take my hand off a button to do so when I use a controller. In PC, you don't have to do this. You can use the scrollwheel to cancel. That gives a slight advantage in timing to the avg playerbase.



    The ergonomics are much more better to play. Imagine tense moments on a controller vs a keyboard.



    All of these things add up. As I mentioned to someone earlier, going up even .10 in kpm is a significant improvement. Going .20 or higher you're changing skill brackets . It doesn't make you a god though and it doesn't mean if you play against a pro, you'll own that pro. It just means you'll fair off better using a xim than you would a controller.



    Instead of losing 8-30 to a pro player, maybe you lose more respectfully even though is still a wallop against a pro



    You can go off what people who use it on a regular basis tell you.



    I think it's an improvement over the base controller.(honestly anything is) I also know it isn't what people try to make it out to be. It's an objectively better way to control a first person shooter and most other similar types of games played on console. however, it did not come with any skill in the box. There was a back order on game sence. They were clean out of consistency too. Jokes aside, these are all things the player provides to the equation. You can't buy them.



    your example about having to take your thumb off the stick/button to perform an action. You can do that on console despite you saying you can't. That's the specific advantage of using a scuff or elite controller. Another elite controller advantage used to be customizable bindings but that's possible on a system level with the base controller now and some games allow for full binding customization like bfv does. bfv even provides bindings for keys a controller doesn't have.



    I do agree the ergonomics are better but I'm inclined to leave that to personal preference. If you've ever heard a console vs pc argument one of the points given for console is the controllers are more comfortable and can be used in more positions and places. So I guess if that's what you like then use it.



    I don't know what pros have to do with any of this. They're pros, when they play for money in tournament it will be controllers only, when they play for a stream, it doesn't matter.



    I see no negatives to giving console players better control options. It does not ruin anyone's game experience. On the contrary it's getting people who never would play console to play more and longer than ever. It isn't killing games. It's not cheating and it's not unfair. People against it are blowing it way out of proportion. The chances of even encountering a mnk player are next to zero. I used to think about 25% of all console gamers at least had one. I was so wrong. It's less than 1% of players in any game for users of xim products. If you wanna add up all the other brands, giving a generous estimate, maybe 3% of players if they were all playing at the same time.



    I am impressed by how small a slice of the gaming community can make such a big impact. I really do think the emulators are the driving force behind mnk coming to the console space. You will see more of it next gen

    Elite controllers still have issues with thumb precision. 

    I myself am arguing just on performance. I'm not debating if its cheating, or killing games. Like I said to Turban, I agree with him that I don't believe the majority of people have one. I believe that's something people use as an excuse to getting owned. I don't see the common gamer spending $100 on a peripheral that you have to fine tune through your phone to get the results that you want. I just don't see that happening. It's too complex to be plug and play. Most people will elect to stay with a controller or go to pc and play natively.

    The xim is a grey area. I do not consider it cheating in games that have no policy against it. For overwatch, it is cheating. For COD online tournaments, its cheating. As far as sony and MS goes, There seems to be a lot of double speak going on with microsoft and especially sony on such peripherals, they say unauthorized software, but sony licenses an adapter and Microsoft wants to work to get mnk partners on consoles.  

    For battlefield , if it was considered cheating, this thread would have been closed a long time ago.

    Its definitely in the grey area.

    The topic I'm debating is that its efficiency and consistency over controllers. That's all I'm debating. 

    Thumbs are the problem? There's a solution for that. 👍

    The only time you will see a policy against it is in tournament play. The only tournament that's getting enforced in is when it's in person. There's no Grey area. They only Grey area is when you hear devs statements on what they will do about it.

    Thumbstick movement is generally considered superior to wasd. It also frees up 3 of your four fingers on your left hand and gives the job to your left thumb. Sounds a lot like what a scuff offers. You can be stealthy with a Thumbstick too. The only inconsistent variable to the set up is the mouse movements. You said it yourself, you have to fine tune it. Some games, waaaay more than others. It's consistently hitting the speed limit and decelerating your movements for damn sure. It's on you to make consistent movements for it to work right. Not the other way around.
  • Lancelot_du_Lac
    34 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The future for gaming, according to Sony and Microsoft, is cross platform, co-operative, and cloud-based. To do this, I believe they will become input agnostic. The benefit of a controller is being able to use it from the couch. That will remain. But other inputs will be, in my opinion, added to broaden the gaming audience. The link between Console/Controller will probably weaken further with the next Console versions.

    Eventually, you will be able to play on any device (including mobile phones), with any input device. If players want to stick with a controller, that will be their choice to sacrifice accuracy (if it is true about devices like Xim) for convenience/comfort. I play Gran Tourismo on PS4, and use a steering wheel. It is not very convenient, but I prefer the improved feel and accuracy. That is the trade-off.
This discussion has been closed.