jefequeso: The advantage to a keyboard is that you have a lot of possibilities when it comes to mapping controls
Yes, but most of those mappings will inevitably be tortured, difficult, and slow. Far more so than a gamepad which is often accused of these very sins.
Keyboards are made to be used with two hands, when one has to rest primarily on a mouse it's going to become inherently a ton less useful. I have a specialized gaming keyboard, and while it helps, it's still a horrid pain in the ass. Some PC games also do an inherently bad job at mapping keys and mouse buttons internally (I'm looking at you, Torchlight 2) and you're stuck using outside software to emulate key presses that the game deigns to actually understand.
Keyboards really do fucking suck, I mean, the layout comes from days of type writers for Freya's sake! That's god damned old. Yeah they beat punch cards for computer input, but that's like saying piss tastes better than shit.
scampywiak: PC is the better platform, those are the facts. Elitism has nothing to do with it.
It's better at generating this argument. Notice how it's usually PC gamers that bring it up. It's like they're oversensitive about something...:)
SimonG: Yeah, sorry. I'm not making a decision on that. If I can switch a game into 60 FPS fine. But I sure as hell won't ignore a game because it doesn't run with 60. On the list of things I care about in a game, this isn't even on the first page.
All my board games run at multiple seconds, or even minutes, per frame. The game either "works" or it doesn't, I'm actually confused about why a measurement gets extracted from any context and then used as a value judgement.
If a game constantly is dropping frames and making it hard to play and enjoy, yep, that's bad.
If a game is dropping frames and it in no way impacts the game play or fun, then why would it matter.
I'm with you, as an independent measurement it's not important. In fact, it doesn't make my list at all...