I would say that touchscreen controls can work for emulated games that don't require fast inputs, like turn-based RPGs.
Generally, missing a single input in such an RPG, or taking a while to make that input, won't be an issue (unless you confirm a bad selection, but that usually requires a second missed input if you're not going too fast).

It's not quite strictly the case that I never play first person games, but when I do it's typically something like an Elder Scrolls game, and TES games never have difficulty that can't be circumvented via non-twitchy means (except *maybe* the start of Arena).

Edit: Why the low rating?

"cost"? What's even the point of playing such a game if you don't do the aiming? I can just as well go out get some dinner while the console plays the whole game for me.
Neither do I. I've played quite a few platformers in my time, and I've yet to encounter one that would make me think "man, keyboard really sucks for this". I mean really, what's supposed to bethe problem with "left, right, up, down, jump, (and maybe) shoot/attack" on a keyboard?

Err, not the point I was making.

On consoles, I am guessing there is such stuff as auto-assist or even auto-aiming sometimes which can make the controls more palpable. (haven't played much beyond the PS2 era). Makes it easier in the case of auto-assist but takes away the ability to manually do the aiming yourself (unless you take it off). I find it more probable.

Now that I think about it, the best way to do a FPS on console is to have a Wii nunchuck like setup, with one hand used for controlling your character and the other (probably gun shaped) to do the shooting. Would be costly though and it's not exactly new.

Some controllers may suck if used in certain genres - that's true.

But I thought about "all the controllers I used in my life"...and most didn't suck...at least not in most genres.

I think it's just so, that games got more and more complicated and faster over the years, and the controls for these games had to get forced in a handheld device that has only so and so much buttons to trigger all the possible actions.

And that sucks.

Back in the days of Atari, Commodore and co. you could get away with a two button controller...partly because the games were much slower than today, and all a button was (most of the time) used for, was "fire" and/or "jump".

That enabled you to play "FPS" (well, what we'd call so, today) with a joystick with only one or two buttons.

Nowadays, I - personally, would place FPSs in the category of games that suck with controllers...that's a genre for which I nowadays prefer M+K.

But for just about everything else...? Controllers are a-ok.

Though, of course - in the end, it's all a matter of "getting used to it".

I remember the first day I ever used a mouse...I thought: "what a crap! How am I supposed to move from this end of the monitor to that end of the monitor? My desk's top isn't big enough to do that!" ;)

Nowadays...using a mouse is second nature to me...habituation did the trick.

Edit: missing letter

Not 4X games or H'n'S games or WRPG's or ARPG's or Space Trading and Combat games or Builders like Rimworld or Factorio too I guess?

Well, I do sometimes play WRPGs and the genre that is commonly called ARPGs.

WRPGs: While the TES games do require a mouse, there are other games that do not. I recently played Ultima 3, which doesn't even support mouse controls. Even Ultima 6 is mouse optional; it could even have realistically been adapted to a controller without the simplifications seen in the SNES version (with the exception of conversation). Ultima 7's requirement of a mouse, I feel, was a step down, and I note that Ultima 6 controlled much better than, say, Baldur's Gate (which *forces* you to rely on pathfinding for even basic movement).

As for the genre called ARPGs (a name I disagree with, as such games are really just action games that borrow some elements from the RPG genre), they only need a mouse if the parent action genre does; games like Crystalis, the Ys series, and the Mana series (just to name a few) play just fine without a gamepad.

Edit: Again, why the low rating?

Funnily enough, though I disagree with you on the mouse topic, this I can understand.
I usually don't use the term ARPG except for games like Vampire The Masquerade.
My personal bugbear is people conflating ARPG with H'n'S and especially H'n'S with Spectacle Fighters.
There is a difference between Vampire The Masquerade and Torchlight. and Titan Quest and Devil May Cry..

But that's a topic for another thread I suppose. ,)

Back in the day, the first playthrough of TIE-Fighter was with mouse and keyboard. Yes, it can be done. It was fun as hell.

Loved the Dpad the 360 had for games like metal slug and such but when I used to play gears It did play better with controller to me than a mouse and keyboard. it's hard to explain but some games do play well with controller and some do not, Uncharted the first one was bad with controller for me.

It depends on what era of RPGs you are taking about. If's RPGs that were made on console Like Final Fantasy for example a controller/gamepad is better than using a Keyboard and mouse. True there are some WRPGs that are ARPGSs like the Diablo Series especially 1 and 2 where the games were made with Keyboard and Mouse controls in mind. About actions in ARPGs it depends on what genre and era of RPG you are talking about if only a mouse is required. If you look at a game like Darksouls the devs say a controller/gamepad is highly recommended and the Keyboard mouse controls suck. With any modern RPG or platformer I prefer using a gamepad/controller because in my mind those genres would be way too clumsy with a keyboard mouse combo.

Also if you take a game like Duke Nukem Forever an fps that game has gamepad support which can be useful for certain parts of the game such as the driving areas while keyboard and mouse is recommended for the rest of the game but that just from my experience.

I broke my main (left) hand at the beginning of this summer.
Mouse driven games were my savior.
Especially 4X and H'n'S games.

How well would a one-handed console player do?

Controllers take a long time to get used to if you've been exclusively playing PC games with a M&K for years if not decades... but eventually they start to feel natural.

Believe me... they'll never be as precise for shooters, but you can eventually get pretty good with them. Like them in games with vehicles or that have QTEs. I hate QTEs... but if I have to do them they're much easier with color-coded button prompts.

Maybe I should've said Metroidvania? but that word gets tossed around a lot like Soulslike these days.
The newest example I can think of is Hollow Knight.
There are a lot more movements and actions than directions, jump, and attack. Although to be fair, one can probably beat the game with only those. I like versatility, and controllers definitely feel easier to play with when there are a ton of options.

You could potentially play Mario Sunshine with K/M, but that seems like hell. And of course, it was made for console.
I will say though, that for FPS, K/M can not be trumped. Maybe VR? But I've never tried it and probably will never do for a good FPS game.

This whole thing is subjective as hell.

Same for me. It's as if I was born with a keyboard and mouse in hand, so it feels second nature to me to play anything 3D armed with these two. But, put a controller in my hands, and I am hopeless! Unless I play 2D games. It's pretty strange when I think about it... how a piece of hardware has had an enormous impact on my body (hand-eye reflexes).