If the PC wasn' t made for so many other things other than gaming, then they would most likely have had controller also. But that is not the case.
Games (genres) orinally designed around a specific control setup usually fit better with that control type.
I think the main reason console gamers, who perfer controllers, do so is because they play more than just First Person and RTS (I see the problem with the traditional ones but that can be easily remedied through good design) and the control loss is not enough for them to cry about.
But in the reverse (controller designed games on KB&M setup) some games are pretty much unplayable (
ex. Capcom games), or at least not worth it.
Some people even complain about Arcade to controller.
The Revolution controller setup is defintely good thing for the KB&M replacement for games.
Oh, the only RTS type game I really played was Dragon Force for the Sega Saturn both of which I adored. That was not problem to play and pause easily dealt with the problem of cursor speed.
The controller is more easily useable in gameplay to a wider audience. Which also allowed (the controller) developers to create games that are not like the bulk of other games and easy to play for beginners (understandable). This is what Nintendo has been going for and still is for with the Revolution.
and yes I do agree with .Hack
PS,
Give me any FPS with a controller (setup properly) and I' ll do better than I would with a KB&M (significantly). Not saying either is better for it.
That is just how I play.
< Message edited by Kannon -- 5 Jan 06 6:38:16 >