The next console I buy will be the one that comes with a large hard drive and lets me upload (if I have disc) or download (if I don't) all of my movies and games to the hard drive, acts as a TV tuner, has all the video streaming apps, and actually has an accessible web browser. All backed up by the latest in A/V technology. Basically become a true media center console where I don't have worry about having any other device except a TV and a receiver. I don't have to worry about getting my lazy ass up off the couch to pop in the next game or movie. Call me lazy, but I want convenience more than innovation or graphics. I don't care if its Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo, but this is what I want.
This week, Hilary Goldstein takes a look at what Sony has to do to make its next system a smash.
With Nintendo's Wii follow-up, the Wii U, due at the end of this year, the talk of next-generation consoles is already crackling. Soon we'll be overcome with rumors, leaks, and speculation about the eighth generation of game systems, which includes the next hardware from Microsoft and Sony.
But what are at least 10 things each console manufacturer needs to do to find success in the next iteration of the system wars? Last week Microsoft was in the spotlight. This week, it's time to see what Sony must do if it wants the PlayStation 4 to come out on top.
What Sony Needs to Do
Don't Be Late
This might be obvious, but it's critical that Sony's next console come out before or at the same time as Microsoft's next Xbox. In the most recent gaming generation, Microsoft got a huge jump by releasing the Xbox 360 a year earlier than Sony's PlayStation 3. That extra time gave Microsoft the chance not only to build an audience, but also to get more developers on board to think Xbox 360 first when making games. And it put Microsoft ahead of the curve in terms of pricing.
"It only does everything." For a brief time, that was the PS3's calling card. Doing everything--including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and a hard drive--out of the box created a higher level of consistency between different PS3 options. But it also limited some of Sony's pricing flexibility. Consider this: Microsoft sold a less expensive console without Wi-Fi capabilities, but convinced consumers to buy a pricey add-on to enable wireless access. It even sold bigger hard drives, stupid faceplates, and even a (failed) HD-DVD drive. Sony provided a more robust package, but it didn't necessarily help in the early years of the PS3.
The temptation, then, might be to mimic Microsoft's Xbox 360 launch plans: fire out skimpier versions to lure in gamers with a lower price point and then force them to buy numerous add-ons to flesh out the console. It might seem like a winning formula, but it's a bad idea. Even if the next Xbox and PS4 are released at the same time, Microsoft still has the edge in recognition and popularity. In a head-to-head competition of releasing products, the PS4 has to appear superior in its hardware offerings. Having more for the same price--to have the console be "the only thing you have to buy"--could immediately put Sony on equal ground against the next Xbox.
Solve the First-Person Shooter Dilemma
You'd be hard pressed to find a single nonexclusive first-person shooter that sells better on the PS3 than on the Xbox 360. Battlefield, Call of Duty, and just about every other FPS leads on the Xbox 360. Sony has to even the playing field with the PS4. Shooters are the most accessible games, and they garner the most sales year in and year out. Taking a chunk of the Call of Duty pie would go a long way toward boosting Sony's profile in the next generation.
Of course, that's easier said than done. Microsoft has a controller perfectly suited for shooters, so to combat this, Sony must do something many PS3 gamers will not initially like: change the controller. It doesn't have to be drastic, but the PS3 DualShock controller is merely adequate for first-person shooters. The thumbsticks are too loose, and the triggers don't have enough analog give. Of course, a more reliable online service, exclusive DLC, and more FPS multiplayer betas would help as well.
Move On Up
The Move has some advantages over Microsoft's Kinect. Tactile control is a comfort, not a detriment, to people--having controllers in hand when simulating swinging a golf club or drawing a bowstring feels more natural than having nothing in your hands. Still, the Move in its current incarnation is a bit of a jumble. You can buy the Move controller and then hold a PS3 controller awkwardly in the other hand or buy a navigation controller separately. Instead, Sony should create a single experience for folks in a simple package. Or--crazy as it may sound--create a PS4 controller that can separate to become two motion controllers and ship it with the system. Compete directly with Microsoft with voice commands, menu control, and greater Move integration into all things PS4.
Epic says Unreal 4 will be ready to roll by 2014. Wisely, Epic usually ties its engine to a major game release--one that pushes the graphical boundaries of the generation. While the days of third-party exclusive games may be waning, this is a prime opportunity for Sony. Do whatever it takes to get Epic's next, uh, epic locked in exclusively for the PS4. You can be pretty much assured it will be one of the best-looking games throughout the system's lifetime, and it sends a signal that the most popular middleware in the industry has a secure home with the PS4.
The turning point in the current console generation wasn't the early release of the Xbox 360, price, or system power. It was, by numerous accounts, the ease of programming for the 360 over the PS3 and Microsoft's dedication to providing support to developers. Sony has since softened some to this philosophy, offering tools to make development easier, but more must be done for the PS4. It can't use the same architecture, and Sony can't come in with the same "you'll figure it out" attitude. Be overly helpful and overly attentive the first two years to woo developers and publishers back toward Sony's side--ensure the PS4 is the lead SKU for cross-platform development and not the Xbox 720.
A Better PlayStation Store
Microsoft has convinced the public that XBLA is something special--a downloadable store unlike any other. In truth, Sony has had a stronger exclusive lineup on PSN over the past two years than the offerings on XBLA. Most gamers don't even realize this. That's because the PlayStation Store is poorly organized and poorly promoted within the PS3 dashboard. Change the story by creating a storefront fused into the dashboard, where new releases have prominence, and the value of PlayStation Plus is more clearly illuminated.
Embrace Genres That Scare Microsoft
The Xbox 360 is often considered the PC-friendly console. That is, the console that feels most in tune with PC gamers' sensibilities (if they wanted to abandon their rigs and play only on consoles). But the Xbox 360 actually shies away from two big PC staples: real-time strategy games and massively multiplayer online games. Sony has dipped its toe a few times into MMO games. Now is the time to invest in a structured system that supports free-to-play MMO games on the PS4 or develop a first-party RTS to try to fuel console growth. Find the weaknesses in the Xbox's game library and make them strengths.
Avoid a Crisis
Sony fumbled its handling of two major public PS3 snafus: the nefarious error code 8001050F, which resulted when the PS3's internal clock mistook 2010 for a leap year, and the 2011 hacker attack that took down the PlayStation Network for nearly a month. Sony deserved the harsh criticism leveled at it. But here's the catch: bad things are certain to happen again. How a company prepares for and reacts to a crisis can be crucial to consumer confidence (and diffusing gamer antagonism).
Sony can't afford another hacking incident. The PS4 online infrastructure must be rock solid and tested regularly. Just as importantly, Sony needs contingency plans for several possible crisis scenarios, including appropriate messaging and compensation to gamers. It would be great if the PS4 had an error-free life, but what are the chances of that?
Be a Leader, Not a Follower
Sony takes risks. It bet on Blu-ray being the next generation in media, in the value of a free online service, and in motion control (remember, the PS3 launched with Sixaxis, and in 3D). Not every bet has paid off (you really can't fly dragons using Sixaxis controls), but at least Sony is making those bets and making them often. The PS4 has to be a console of those types of bets. Even if half of them don't fully succeed, big punches are required to knock out the Xbox 720 and Wii U.
@ADO300 yeaaaa I almost forgot about this epic game, but it is a shame it didnt came on ps3 and of course Time Splitters 4 would be nice
Ps3 already supports keyborad and mouse People.. The only reason why not much people know of this is because the Xbox 360 is holding Back the multiplatform games from using it
PS4 is screwed. The next big step is cross-platform gaming and with the Windows 8 pad and phone coming out you will be able to pick up and drop off games on PC, phone or pad and take them with you. What's Sony going to do to counter that? Even Apple have initiated Apple Game Center to allow the same thing on iPad, iPhone, Apple TV and Nintendo will as usual have cross-play between Wii U and DS and the new controller will allow you to take a pad-like experience mobile with you. Sony are already way behind the curve and could be too far to catch up this time. The next console could be the death knell for the Playstation, even if they do all the things suggested in this article.
@GrumpyMcNasty "Nintendo will have cross platform play, ass usual"....
Aside from poorly implemented underhanded attempts force people into buying more handlhelds to act as controllers is games like Crystal Chronicles, when has nintendo ever "usually" been involved with cross platform gaming? There is virtually no nintendo software outside of their own console, one console at a time. I'm not convinced that cross platform play is going to be as big a factor as people think, although it's certainly novel. That said, if it does, Nintendo's "internal hardware only" business strategy will quickly turn into a GIGANTIC liability.
This comment has been deleted
Honestly, PS4 needs to bring back frequent and GREAT RPGs. Final Fantasy. Kingdom Hearts. Yeah, Square Enix, solve this. FFX was the last good Final Fantasy. Kingdom Hearts has yet to have a console game on this generation.Racing would also be a good genre to get better at. I'm loving some of the games, but none of them are split screen it seems, so I can't play with my friends. There also seems to be a lot less racing games in general.To me, these are the two key genres that helped PS2. PS3 doesn't seem to have them.
@Kerry12424 Couldn't agree more. I am a big consumer of RPG games and my whole reason for getting involved with the PS3 was because the PS2 was THE rpg console of it's era. I figured even if PS3 didn't take that title home with it, there was no way it wouldn't at least have lots of quality rpgs....but SquareEnix is at the heart of the Japanese gaming problem that has manifested in the last 5-10 years. It's a nation who's industry is completely out of ideas and who's corporate structure does not allow for the kind of creativity necessary to make a good rpg flourish. You don't need creativity in great abundance to toss together a serviceable shooter or platformer. These are more reflexive types of gaming than anything. RPGs REQUIRE creative story telling and battle systems or they quickly become utterly unplayable.
I'm not so sure about PC gamers "abandoning their rigs" to the 360, but I will leave that silly nonsense for another day. One surprising thing that the article doesn't mention is the possibility of the PS4 being the fist and only console (for that generation) that could carry a disc format twice as big as a Blu-Ray disc, and if the discs are cheap for consumers to buy, the possibilities of what games can be on there could potentially blow the other 2 consoles out of the water.
@midnightclubx This sounds like a horrible idea to me. Half the problem with software for these consoles is that there is a pressure to "fill" the disk capacities which has lead to a design ethos that values pretty graphics and gigantic cutscenes over actual gameplay elements. Trading substance for vanity is crushing the love right out of the industry and more and more people are figuring this out as the younger generation of gamers is now growing up.
@Vinomadd2012 The increased disc space isn't a simple thing of "trading substance for vanity"; if that was the case, everyone would've been complaining about the PS2's DVD disc simply because the graphics are better than the PS1, or the Super Nintendo's increased cartridge size being criticized, etc. If anything, the next generation could have the chance of redeeming itself for the mistakes of this generation by offering digital versions of every game alongside the disc they could release on the next generation. I mean, look at (for example) Heavy Rain; it would've never been possible on a DVD-sized disc on the 360. Same goes for Uncharted. All I'm saying is that disc size is one of the last complaints I would have about games not having anough gameplay, because it's either the developers or the publishers themselves.
@midnightclubx The comparison to older consoles is not valid. Those were times when color palettes were measure by fingers, not in the millions like today. And yet, many of the greatest examples of artfully made video games comes from that era. I'm nto saying I have anything against a game looking great. I like eye candy as much as the next person, but when the biggest part of a studio's budget is for the pretty wrapper of the game instead of story writing, systems development, engine creation and game mechanics, you've got a problem...what you have it modern gaming.
Heavy Rain could have been several discs. Final Fantasy 7 was like 4 discs long. We lived. Available disc space does not equate to better games in this market. It equate to more space that needs to be filled and it's far more profitable for a studio to fill it with visual fluff than actual content.
If the industry want to deliver on both points, both vanity and substance, hell sign me up. But until this market changes, and fat chance it will since console gaming is almost entirely under the control of casuals now who have no interest in investing time, emotion, or money into their hobby, if you can even call it a hobby for them, and they have no interest in being properly challenged. All they want is for it to look pretty, be real easy and over in an hour or two. They are the biggest share of the market, the developers will cater to them. Bigger disc sizes just means more trash.
here the real fact about this console gen x box is garbage: it not reliable need money to play online got nothing special( exclusive game) it got noting more then a pc oh yeah it got kinect whit dancing game........,pc is bomb....,ps3 is great ...got god of war uncharted mtgs4( the best offline game of this console gen in my opinion) wii is nice it got mario and zelda(for those who have growth whit mario and link )
@gino_pachino Even those of us who grew up with Mario, Samus, and Link are getting tired of it. It's a no win situation for Nintendo really to continue developing the same software generation after generation. Either they stray too far from the gameplay that made the respective franchise beloved and piss everyone off, or they stick with the tried and true methods, and piss everyone off because, honestly, who needs another Zelda game? Yes yes yes. get the three dinglies, unlock the sword, get some more baubles and kill the pig, everyone has pulled pork sammiches, link doesn't get a kiss. It's been done to death. They need new ideas, but that's not what Japanese corporate structures do well.
@holtrocks The gaming community is growing up and they want the sophistication a pc can offer. The problem is and always has been the cost of a proper gaming rig keeps a lot of people out of the market.
@holtrocks Well, PC's already have controller support, why not have consoles that have support for certain things that PC's have. It would open up the console market to a wider audience for sure. And there would be less of a divide between Console and PC gamers and we wouldn't see as much of that elitist attitude we currently get.
There needs to be keyboard and mouse compatibility for ALL games. I HATE playing FPS's with any of the major consoles controllers. It ain't gonna happen, but I can dream I guess.
@scatterbrain007 You are so damn right!
These fools think xbla is better presented than ps store? I have both and I can honestly say that ps store is much easier to use, has good proces especially for ps plus users, and new releases do have prominence, they advertise it in the top right corner of the screen? What are they talking about?
@Stoopid_Fool they are xbox fanboys. I can't stand the thing microsoft have done by selling its part seperately.
Yes thank you, its ridiculous that microsoft gets away with that, I honestly can't believe that the 360 has sold more than the PS3, when the PS3 is clearly the better console, I mean they're pretty much the same price and if you're goin to spend that much on something then you might as well get the best and one that isn't goin to get the red ring of death at some point. The only reason I bought the 360 is because I had to play Alan Wake (I'm a huge fan of Remedy Games).
Most of my playing hours in all my life were in front of all of Playstation devices and i do love my Playstations!
I'm always in a hurry to buy the new one. And i do prefer the home consoles!
I do agree with a lot of these points! I do agree that the controller needs a new design.
They can even start to experiment now when the life sicle is going to an 3 year end (just a guess)
Be bold. Pay more attention to your fans and to your developers.
Sony is a very unique console with personality. But if you don't look and please the ones around them they will fall.
And i do love that console a lot.
@slycatchCouldn't disagree more. The PS3/2/1/snes controller is the standard because it conforms to the shape of the hand and maxes out the limits of our hands effectively. It allows for , currently, the maximum amount of interaction with a game environment. The problem is not and has never really been the controller, it's software designers who refuse to take full advantage of what is presented to them.
Nintendo capitalized on this with the Wii controller very effectively. It's novel in every way. It's also completely incapable of permitting a deep, rich, complex interaction with the environment which is why so many Wii games are on rails instead of free form exploration. They found the ultimate cash cow in selling you a fancy gimmick to disguise the crap software they were making.
The problem with this is that, even casuals either grow up and become sophisticated or move on to the next big fad and forget their gaming "hobby". Then, you are suddenly left with a crappy game console with laggy, imprecise controls that inherently limit what you can do in the environment.
Xbox MIGHT, MAYBE be on to something with their infrared sensor, but it's on shakey ground and it's yet to be seen whether or not waving your arms around like an idiot can match or exceed the immersion a standard ps3/xbox controller offers. Immersion is a word you hear alot from proponents of motion controls. But it's not waving your arms around that makes a game imersive, it's how it captures your imagination, and nothing does this better than giving you MORE diversity in the gaming environment to get lost in. Until a new controller is made that matches or exceeds what we already have, all we will get is novelty crap. And novelty wears off damned quick in the tech market.
Good Point! But I have to disagree with you!
I don't care if the problem is the developing of the gameplay that is badly done or the controller is the problem. I don't think it is as bad as everyone dramatizes it. I just want the best controller i can get and that's it!!
I had played many hours with the ps controller over the years and the fact is that the Xbox feels better. It reacts better and the R2 and L2 Buttons are better placed also.
And that's probably one of the few things I like about the Xbox.
I'm not saying that Sony should go and copy it of course.
Different things were tried with the N64 or the Dreamcast, but the matter of fact is that the best controllers look alike the Dual Shock.
@slycatch@Vinomadd2012 "Different things were tried with the N64 or the Dreamcast, but the matter of fact is that the best controllers look alike the Dual Shock."
Proving my points for me, now? Thank you!
The SNES controller lives on as the prototype of modern dualshock, and to a lesser extent, XBox controllers. This isn't because they've run out of ideas. It's because it's the right shape and layout to give maximum utility to our hands. More capability means more options for game environment interaction.
Sony should put a little effort in the durability of the Slim versions. My Slim can barely hold when I play BF3 online. It freezes. Maybe it's me not taking proper care of it, but it has only happened with BF3, which I understand is a heavy game.
Also, I think the L3/R3 should be replaced by more comfortable and easier buttons, not joined to the joysticks. Had this issue with BF3, too. Overall, the controller is great.
I never had any affection towards the 360. Never liked it, didn't like the exclusives. I just enjoy Sony and never was dissapointed.
There are ultimately only 4 differences between a PS3 and 360; Exclusives, Blu-ray, Online experience, and controller.
Anyone who thinks the graphics are a big difference between the consoles is pretty much insane. Anyway, I think exclusives wise PS3 did better than the 360 and should do the same next gen. Blu-ray wise, even though numbers have shown not many people surprisingly have taken up watching movies on Blu-ray yet (probably because HD movies look great already) it is still a great bonus to have and I love watching anything that is available on Blu-ray.
Online experience on the 360 is in my opinion so far ahead of the PS3. Everything from the interface to the options, apps, and xbox live arcade. Finally, controller wise I think the 360 is a much better controller. it is just the right size and just feels like one with your hand. I cannot stand the PS3 controller and it's the main reason if a game comes out I buy on the 360 instead of PS3. The analogs are way too loose and I don't know what they were thinking with the L2 and R2 triggers. Overall it's just too small and light and flimsy.
Anyway, that's my take and is the reason my PS3 has been collecting dust aside from a few of the exclusives I played. Everything else is on the 360.
TLDR: Sony please change the controller and do a massive overhaul for the interface and online experience.
@beefkake31 I agree with the L2/R2 buttons. But I disagree with everything else you said about the PS3 controller. If they changed it and made it anything like the 360 controller I simply would never use one and use an alternative (PS3 controller or some third-party company like Logitec).
@Scorpion1813 @beefkake31 Well I just want to tell you guys that third party controllers have came a long way. I am a Xbox gamer when it comes to shooters and agree they have designed the best controller. My hands hurt after using a ps3 controller for a long period of time. I bought a power A fus1on tournament controller and you can't even tell the difference. I actually like It better than an Xbox controller. They have this controller for Xbox and ps3. I bought BO2 and change the shooting settings and you can't even tell your on a ps3. I plan on switching back to PlayStation as my main console and not getting the next gen Xbox.
@Scorpion1813 I'm sure some people prefer it, I don't get it but it is what it is.
First few sound pro fanboy. Fix the triggers R2 and L2 make them like they where on ps2 instead of the pedals on ps3 and give us better graphics with a slim looking console like the wii u and we have a winner.
weaker multiplats is something that dogs the ps3..
they need to stop with the special cpu or gpu nonsense..
@daveg1 It was a miscalculation, for sure, for Sony to go so proprietary with their hardware architecture. But to be fair, it was a decision based on past, highly successful business models. The idea is to create something unique that require a specific set of skill to program for so that your console's exclusives deliver something the competitors really cannot. but Sony got wishy washy and only put one foot in. They wanted the door left over for cross platform ports and shot themselves in the leg. I think the age of console specific games is fast dying and individual consoles themselves may one day a generation or two from now vanish.
Is the 360 really more of a "shooter console" than the PS3?
The 360 only has 2 exclusive shooters: Halo and Gears.
PS3 has Killzone, Resistance, Uncharted, MAG, Warhawk
Most other shooters are multi-platform
@Spartan_418 they said first-person shooter, not just shooter, learn the difference... still, your point stands, 360 has 1 FPS and PS3 3
@fallin75 The problem with Sony's shooters is they're mediocre at best always claiming to be Halo killers, still waiting...
@bagmup I honestly don't see what's so great about Halo. But I'm not that bi of a Sci-Fi fan and FPS games bore me after a while.
@bagmup I dunno about that, Resistance isn't that great but Killzone 2/3 are among the best shooters I've played, despite the problems with the PS3 controller
@Spartan_418 I think it's more that out of all those multi-platform games, more are sold on the 360 than the PS3. So given the choice people are more likely to buy it on the 360.
@Scorpion1813 @Spartan_418 i have both consoles n i bought Battlefield bad company, battlefield bad company 2, Call of duty 3, Call of duty 4, MW2 and MW3 on xbox360 but suddenly i decided to buy BF3 on ps3 but guys trust me i did not enjoyed it as much as i did on xbox360 n the issue is definitely ps3's controller
The PSN store used to be fine, but they keep changing it and it has actually become HARDER to navigate in recent months.
Free-to-play MMO's don't tend to survive very well, or you don't here much about them. I think the best feature of a free-to-play MMO would be to have it browser-based so that it can be played anywhere - that way it's more accessible to more people. Having an MMO of any kind (especially the not-so-good free ones) being console-only is not such a good idea.
The only way RTS game would work is to have mouse/keyboard support. But the fact a lot of people aren't willing to buy these accessories for a console (for mediocre RTS games) when the game is usually available on PC anyway.
Sony would need to get exclusives and offer keyboard/mouse packaged with the game (as well as copies of the game without these accessories for those who already own them).
Having decent K/M support on console could also help sales for FPS games because many FPS players prefer that setup over a controller. There are many games I prefer to play on PC over Console because I prefer K/M (such as FPS and RTS), and there are games I prefer on console because I prefer the controller and ease of access (not installations required and no need to spend money updating my PC every few years).
@Scorpion1813 Well, one potential solution for the mouse/keyboard option is for the industry to get out of it's own ass and stop making every widget, bauble, doodade and plug a proprietary uber secret. Standardized plug and play devices made modern computing and they can do the same for consoles.
"The only way RTS game would work is to have mouse/keyboard support."
I disagree, only because there have been good RTS console ports in the past without keyboard and mouse, but I do think that in this era it's a bit silly for any console with Bluetooth and USB (and no electronic device these days should come without at least one USB port) not to support a keyboard and mouse. They wouldn't have to package these or offer them separately because most people already have USB keyboards/mice or could buy their own if they so desired (I still think the controller is and should be a viable option for an RTS game). Heck, all I'd really need is a USB port and driver support, and I'll just plug my wireless keyboard and mouse combo in. It really shouldn't be that hard.
@rarson I certainly don't mind it if people want to play shooters against me with a controller. Just makes my kill count go up. The few experiments Microsoft tried with cross platform shooters were cancelled when it was discovered controller users are universally unable to compete with mouse 'n keyboard users. It's not even that they were worse players, in fact, I'd bet many of the controller users were better, simply because it takes more of an effort to get motion on the screen with sticks than it does with the computer setup.
@Scorpion1813 Sounds like you're trying to turn a console into a pc. One of the main reasons console gamers buy consoles is because they don't like the keyboard/mouse control scheme. Your opinion sounds like how to make a console better suited for pc gamers, lol. One of the main differences in a console is no keyboard/mouse, and it should stay that way to keep everyone on equal footing. The Xbox 360 had a few RTS games and the controls were fine, Halo Wars being among them. As for the free-to-play MMO... I think if they made a game like that built into the console, from the dashboard, it would do well, especially when the console first launches with few games. It would give gamers something to always play, is always evolving at no cost to the gamer, and Sony/Microsoft could make boat loads of money selling "enhancements."
@Vodoo @Scorpion1813 Let me ask you this... What level of depth did you get playing halo wars vs games like company of heroes and starcraft, The speed and responsiveness to get the other guy before he gets you is probably going to be a little difficult to with a controller. I would say the same about FPS's as well.
The polar opposite would be games like darksiders, god of war, fighting games and other such systems. Keyboard would probably be a little over kill in some fighter games actually with a g15 macro keyboard. Just some thoughts.
@Vodoo I never said the keyboard/mouse should replace the controller - I said it should be better supported with easier access in obtaining these accessories. While at the same time still keeping the standard controllers.
My "opinion" isn't about making consoles better for JUST PC players. My comments were aimed at improving consoles for gamers in general - meaning there would be less of a divide between console and PC, allowing console to compete with PC's in certain markets (such as FPS and RTS games).
It doesn't really matter how many RTS games each console has had, all of them would have been better with K/M support and thus better on PC. Many people are put off console RTS games for this reason alone and I can assure you that those console RTS game you are referring to would have sold a lot better if K/M was supported.