Options in console games. Why not?

Discussion in 'General Gaming Discussion' started by TecXero, Oct 1, 2014.

  1. TecXero
    OP

    TecXero Technovert

    Member
    2,814
    906
    Apr 13, 2014
    United States
    Mainframe
    I was discussing, with a friend, what options we would like to see in games, more specifically console games. Eventually, we came to a question that we couldn't answer. We speculated but nothing that seemed like a solid reason. So my question is: why do console games tend to have very limited options?
    The options we would like to see in gaming are:

    An option to reduce graphical quality for better performance and vice versa.

    The option to remap the controls.

    FOV controls.

    A colorblind option.

    An option for other kinds of input devices. For example: mouse and joystick for a shooter.

    I have to wonder why these are so rare, especially in console gaming. I'd be willing to turn down the graphics to reach a better FPS. I know that and the other options aren't concerns to many people, but they're just options for those that do have concerns.
     


  2. Foxi4

    Foxi4 On the hunt...

    pip Reporter
    23,529
    21,457
    Sep 13, 2009
    Poland
    Gaming Grotto
    One of the advantages of consoles is that the experience is exactly the same for all players so that nobody has an unfair advantage. That being said, I do wish games gave you the option to adjust resolution so that high res lovers could go 1080p @ 30 FPS while framerate lovers could choose 720p @ 60 FPS instead.
     
    Ericthegreat likes this.
  3. TecXero
    OP

    TecXero Technovert

    Member
    2,814
    906
    Apr 13, 2014
    United States
    Mainframe
    I could understand that for multiplayer games, at least for the input options. Colorblind, FOV, remapping, and graphical options I don't think really fit under that. Even then, what about single player games? I never play games online, outside of Pokemon, console wise, anyway. So I tend to notice the severe lack of options in single player games.

    Colorblind options would ensure that people that are colorblind have similar experiences to people that aren't colorblind. FOV is a legitimate concern for some people as low FOV can cause headaches, though generally not a problem if you're sitting far enough back, but not everyone does. Remapping can make controls more comfortable, especially for a friend of mine as he's missing his middle finger so he has troubles with ZL/L2/LT. Graphical options come down more to personal taste, though it would probably give a slight advantage to people that turn down the graphics in multiplayer, due to higher FPS or less particle effects.

    On the control input, though, I agree for multiplayer. We saw that with the Dreamcast and Quake 3. It was suicide to use a controller against anyone using a mouse. Still, could be in single player games.
     
  4. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    5,529
    1,584
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    The more options, the more things have to be tested. On a PC, this is sort of a given (there is no way to predict which kind of PC or input device the consumer has). The 'advantage', seen from a manufacterer's point of view, is that everyone has the same device with the same input. They can directly make it "the way it is meant to be played" without it sounding like a stupid slogan. ;)

    It's also a matter of supply and demand. Like you said: these aren't concerns to many people. The ones who are concerned with play these games on PC. Like Foxi said: the ones who play on console are AFAIK more concerned with an equal battlefield than with extra options (and admitted, that is sort of an issue with many competitive PC games: a sort of metagame consisting of finding the optimal settings to which players will need to adapt if they want to keep up with the upper tier of players).
     
    WiiCube_2013 likes this.
  5. TecXero
    OP

    TecXero Technovert

    Member
    2,814
    906
    Apr 13, 2014
    United States
    Mainframe
    Very true. Bit of a shame, though. That still leaves single player games. You'd think they could put a bit more testing in for extra options, they wouldn't even have to be in depth. For graphics have a "High" and "Low" option and the ability to set it to the resolution you want. The others would be just on/off or the standard remapping. That way, they could still have a fairly standardized experience across the board. This came about as my friend and I were talking about Bayonetta 2 and there were rumors about the game having frame drops here and there. We concluded we wouldn't mind having an option to set the graphics to a hypothetical "low" for a decent stable framerate.

    I mostly do play on PC anymore due to customizability, but handheld gaming is still unmatched by anything else out there. Also, the Wii U has caught my attention with interesting exclusives. I also forgo the PC version for a console version if I can't find it for PC DRM free.
     
  6. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer

    pip Reporter
    23,190
    8,942
    Nov 21, 2005
    There has been quite a bit of discussion among game devs when it comes to colour blindness and designing for it right out of the gate/not needing an option.

    I am not sure why controller remapping is not an option, especially on modern consoles that actually run a backend/background process -- proof of concept for this exists on the 360 in various forms.
    Proof of concept also exists for mouse and keyboard but it does seem to break multiplayer by being demonstrably superior.

    Never seen fov induced headaches. Head motion, poor screen calibration, general ability to decouple events and much more besides, can't say FOV has ever come up.

    On middle fingers missing and the problems of lower shoulder buttons... are we supposed to be pressing them with middle fingers? It always feels horrible so I do not, granted that might also explain some of the hand cramp issues I have with the playstation line.

    I am not usually one for control sensitivity but I suppose I have to mention it.

    I would like to see more games have the option to split controls between two controllers so as to have two people play. It makes it nice to teach kids to play and makes for an amusing drunken party activity.

    On FPS I still hold motion blur, proper motion blur, is the way forward and 60 should mainly be there to mask frame rate dips. Until someone pulls their finger out though I guess it could work.

    I always like to see volume controls between BGM, sfx and voices.

    Text speed, fast and faster is usually where I fall here, however I can appreciate some might like more karaoke style subs/text.

    Brightness/contrast is useful, what the devs do seems to depend upon the dev. Sadly, though not entirely unwelcome, many seem to have taken the old audio engineering approach of make it sound good on crappy speakers. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-hdmi?page=3 mentions something on that.

    Screen calibration is useful.

    I love me so splitscreen but do wish those few devs that still do it would add the options to rearrange the tiles. At points I have actually considered building some kind of scanline fiddler to do it myself.
     
  7. Vipera

    Vipera Banned

    Banned
    1,586
    1,460
    Aug 22, 2013
    United States
    Away from this shithole
    Nobody gives a shit about colorblind people. And by nobody I mean developers.
    People with disabilities aren't the top target of this kind of marketing. They are a small minority. Small minorities never win in business.
     
    Tom Bombadildo likes this.
  8. Tom Bombadildo

    Tom Bombadildo Honk!

    pip Contributor
    GBAtemp Patron
    Tom Bombadildo is a Patron of GBAtemp and is helping us stay independent!

    Our Patreon
    10,385
    10,211
    Jul 11, 2009
    United States
    I forgot
    This for pretty much all of the things the OP is asking about. Consoles are meant to bring games to an audience that simply wants to put the disc in and play, not for those who want to tweak 90% of the settings just because it makes the experience kinda a little more enjoyable.
     
  9. Foxi4

    Foxi4 On the hunt...

    pip Reporter
    23,529
    21,457
    Sep 13, 2009
    Poland
    Gaming Grotto
    To be fair, some games do include colourblind assist, for instance Battlefield and Call of Duty.

    Wait, what? CoD and BF aren't Satan incarnate? WHAT IS THIS!?! ;O;
     
  10. grossaffe

    grossaffe GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    2,705
    2,086
    May 5, 2013
    United States
    or are they satan incarnate trying to rope those poor colorblind people into another brown grey shooter?
     
  11. TecXero
    OP

    TecXero Technovert

    Member
    2,814
    906
    Apr 13, 2014
    United States
    Mainframe
    I don't see a problem with options if they don't hurt the majority, but, as pointed out above, a lot of developers (or the publishers will only push them to) only develop just enough to bring in the majority. Change doesn't some like console developers handle well, hopefully they'll adapt and improve when PCs become popular enough for them to worry.
     
  12. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    5,529
    1,584
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    The fact that colorblind people don't complain isn't to be ignored either. Someone in my UT2004 clan couldn't distinguish red and green, which is one of the most common kind of colorblindness. It made no difference. He played like everyone else.

    The problem with this sort of thing is that it gets overestimated by those who aren't colorblind. Those people themselves don't know anything else, so they're used to it. Perhaps a smaller part of them plays video games, but going through all sorts of lengths to accommodate them won't make the game sell better. In fact, I'm willing to bet that that colorblind-option in CoD is used more by '1337' people tweaking their settings for clear visibility than by actually colorblind people.
     
  13. Ericthegreat

    Ericthegreat Not New Member

    Member
    1,805
    314
    Nov 8, 2008
    United States
    Vana'diel
    People would complain: "this games shit it cant do 1080p at 60 fps" not "silly this console cant do 60 fps".
     
  14. [MLG]xX420NoScopeBlazeXx

    [MLG]xX420NoScopeBlazeXx Member

    Banned
    41
    16
    Aug 16, 2014
    Canada
    Isn't the point of console gaming plug-n-play? If you want settings, just play on PC. Besides, FOV options would either ruin the game balance or cause everyone to just play at the highest FOV anyways. You'd be retarded to play any FPS not at the maximum FOV. FOV is only useful for PC anyways. At the distances TVs are from the viewer, a lower FOV looks more natural. At monitor distance, a higher FOV looks more natural.
     
  15. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer

    pip Reporter
    23,190
    8,942
    Nov 21, 2005
    Maybe once upon a time. Today we have updates, varying levels of DLC and more to contend with.

    Really? I always thought FOV was a function of aspect ratio, not to mention "distances TVS are from the viewer" is a rather nebulous concept when it comes to consoles. Not to mention with computer monitors having VGA in, TVs doubling as monitors, consoles having VGA out and more besides the computer monitor as console viewer is quite common.

    That said if you decide to do online then it really does make no sense to do anything other than maximum fov, even if it makes it look like you are viewing the world through a fisheye lens.
     
  16. TecXero
    OP

    TecXero Technovert

    Member
    2,814
    906
    Apr 13, 2014
    United States
    Mainframe
    It would still be plug and play for those that don't care for the options. The defaults would be fine for most people. Though it's purely hypothetical and either way, it probably won't be a concern anytime soon.
     
  17. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    5,529
    1,584
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    Agree with the plug n play option, but FOV is a bad example. Increasing your FOV to the maximum won't make you a better player, because while it certainly offers you more view, actually aiming becomes harder. Say an enemy stands directly in front of you and you have a standard FOV of 90. If neither of you move and you increase your FOV to 180 (whoah, fisheye view!)...then that same enemy is suddenly half the size (he looks way thinner than before), as your monitor doesn't magically expands in size.
    I've had some discussions on this with semi-pro's, and there was no general consensus on whether a high or low FOV was the better option. In fact, one of the best players I've ever met claims he used an FOV of 80 or even lower than that.

    While I've never compared an FOV's "natural looks"* between a PC monitor and a television, I gotta say I have my doubts. To be honest, I suspect you're just repeating things others have said without even testing anything.


    *WTF does that even mean when trying to get an edge over someone else?
     
  18. Foxi4

    Foxi4 On the hunt...

    pip Reporter
    23,529
    21,457
    Sep 13, 2009
    Poland
    Gaming Grotto
    Nothing wrong with those - since they don't have the advantage of aesthetics or story, the gameplay carries the games, which is a good thing. :)
     
  19. [MLG]xX420NoScopeBlazeXx

    [MLG]xX420NoScopeBlazeXx Member

    Banned
    41
    16
    Aug 16, 2014
    Canada
    I'll have you know I've been playing FPS competitively for over a decade. I have played games in the CoD, Battlefield, Medal of Honor, Counter-Strike, and Quake series. There's isn't a single FPS where I don't have a k/d ratio of at least 2:1. I think I'm qualified to make a stance on FOV. A game's FOV is compensation for how much a screens takes up of your eye's FOV. That was what I mean by "looks more natural". A higher FOV IS always better for competitive play, as long as you play with a giant monitor. If you're too poor for a giant monitor, you shouldn't be playing competitively anyways.
     
  20. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    5,529
    1,584
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    You know...playing FPS'es for that long and not even knowing that the highest FOV isn't automatically the best setting is actually worse than just parroting what others say.