Console Keyboard and Mouse Support

[Kinetics202]

Why can’t consoles have keyboard and mouse support like other FPS games? I don’t like using the word “disabled,” but due to a condition, I’m unable to hold a controller. However, I can compensate by using a keyboard and mouse. It’s extremely frustrating that I can’t play with K&M on my Xbox.

I understand I’m probably in a very small minority, but it feels like a huge slap in the face every time a game I enjoy disables this option. Games like Call of Duty and Fortnite allow K&M support and even match players in input-specific lobbies. Why doesn’t this game have that option? Are there any future plans to add it?

I know some will say, “Just buy a gaming PC,” but that’s not something I can afford right now. It’s frustrating, to say the least.

[Roland's 2nd]

Originally posted by Kinetics202:

Originally posted by Hunu:

get a PC that can play the game.

Telling someone to “just get a PC” isn’t a solution, it’s dismissive and ignores the realities many players face. Not everyone can afford a gaming PC, especially when they already own a console and have invested in that ecosystem.

In the long run PC gaming is cheaper than console gaming. Between Steam sales, Official reseller sales, and the grey market, you save way more on games and can get them cheaper than you would on consoles.

It's also cheaper to upgrade to the next generation when it comes time, since you only have to upgrade GPU and sometimes CPU most of the time.

Console gaming is for suckers, and has been for a long time. The only consoles worth owning are Nintendo ones and that's only if you like their exclusives and don't want to pirate them. This is even more true now that Sony is porting more and more games to PC.

[Kinetics202]

Originally posted by Steve:

Originally posted by Kinetics202:

While it’s true that some people might exploit the system, that’s not a justification to exclude legitimate players who need accessibility options. The solution isn’t to gatekeep features like keyboard and mouse (K&M) support—it’s to implement systems that balance accessibility with fairness.

We're still working on that as a species, but it's slow going because there's more than just some that would exploit the system. It's quite a few. If you leave an alley open, players WILL take the shortcut.

Were it not a competitive shooter with cash prizes, I'd be more inclined to agree with you. But this is a competitive shooter with cash prizes. Security is paramount.

I get where you’re coming from—security is definitely critical, especially in a competitive shooter with cash prizes on the line. But the argument falls apart a bit when you look at games like Fortnite, Call of Duty, and Paladins, which already allow keyboard and mouse (K&M) on consoles without compromising fairness or security. These games are just as competitive, with massive player bases, input-specific matchmaking, and even cash-prize tournaments. Yet, they’ve found ways to successfully implement K&M support while still addressing cheating concerns.

Yes, there will always be people trying to exploit the system, but that’s true regardless of input type. The existence of controller adapters proves that. The difference is, those games prioritize inclusivity and accessibility while using robust anti-cheat measures to deal with bad actors. If they can do it, there’s no reason this game can’t follow suit. Excluding K&M support outright feels less like a security measure and more like a missed opportunity to make the game more accessible for everyone.

[Kinetics202]

Originally posted by Roland's 2nd:

Originally posted by Kinetics202:

Telling someone to “just get a PC” isn’t a solution, it’s dismissive and ignores the realities many players face. Not everyone can afford a gaming PC, especially when they already own a console and have invested in that ecosystem.

In the long run PC gaming is cheaper than console gaming. Between Steam sales, Official reseller sales, and the grey market, you save way more on games and can get them cheaper than you would on consoles.

It's also cheaper to upgrade to the next generation when it comes time, since you only have to upgrade GPU and sometimes CPU most of the time.

Console gaming is for suckers, and has been for a long time. The only consoles worth owning are Nintendo ones and that's only if you like their exclusives and don't want to pirate them. This is even more true now that Sony is porting more and more games to PC.

PC gaming does offer some long-term cost benefits, dismissing console gaming as “for suckers” overlooks a massive and diverse audience that values consoles for their affordability, simplicity, and accessibility. The Xbox and PlayStation ecosystems are huge, with millions of players who prefer the convenience of plug-and-play systems without the need to worry about upgrades, compatibility, or hardware troubleshooting.

Yes, Steam sales and upgrade flexibility are great for PC gamers, but consoles provide a more accessible entry point for people who don’t want or can’t afford the upfront cost of building or buying a gaming PC. On top of that, the shared experience of console gaming, with cross-platform compatibility, party systems, and exclusives, is a major reason why so many players stick with it. Not everyone wants to dive into PC gaming, and that’s okay.

Also, with the increasing crossplay capabilities between Xbox, PlayStation, and PC, the argument that one platform is superior is becoming less relevant. Games should aim to be accessible across platforms, and that includes features like keyboard and mouse support for consoles. This would only make the already-large console audience even more inclusive, which is a win for everyone.

[Roland's 2nd]

Originally posted by Kinetics202:

Originally posted by Roland's 2nd:

In the long run PC gaming is cheaper than console gaming. Between Steam sales, Official reseller sales, and the grey market, you save way more on games and can get them cheaper than you would on consoles.

It's also cheaper to upgrade to the next generation when it comes time, since you only have to upgrade GPU and sometimes CPU most of the time.

Console gaming is for suckers, and has been for a long time. The only consoles worth owning are Nintendo ones and that's only if you like their exclusives and don't want to pirate them. This is even more true now that Sony is porting more and more games to PC.

PC gaming does offer some long-term cost benefits, dismissing console gaming as “for suckers” overlooks a massive and diverse audience that values consoles for their affordability, simplicity, and accessibility. The Xbox and PlayStation ecosystems are huge, with millions of players who prefer the convenience of plug-and-play systems without the need to worry about upgrades, compatibility, or hardware troubleshooting.

Yes, Steam sales and upgrade flexibility are great for PC gamers, but consoles provide a more accessible entry point for people who don’t want or can’t afford the upfront cost of building or buying a gaming PC. On top of that, the shared experience of console gaming, with cross-platform compatibility, party systems, and exclusives, is a major reason why so many players stick with it. Not everyone wants to dive into the complexities of PC gaming, and that’s okay.

Also, with the increasing crossplay capabilities between Xbox, PlayStation, and PC, the argument that one platform is superior is becoming less relevant. Games should aim to be accessible across platforms, and that includes features like keyboard and mouse support for consoles. This would only make the already-large console audience even more inclusive, which is a win for everyone.

On PC, Playstation is the only playerbase we can't party up with anymore. When I play Sea Of Thieves I regularly party up with Xbox players and join their groups thanks to the Xbox app for Windows.

And people can buy a prebuilt ( I wouldn't recommend it, but if you're really that intimidated by putting your own parts together, so be it ) and hook it up to their TV. Even before HDMI was the standard I was hooking up laptops with broken screens to TVs to use as emulation boxes as far back as 2009. I'm currently responding to this sitting in bed with a wireless keyboard in my lap and a wireless mouse at my side on a 43 inch TV. HDMI being the standard for video, and everything being set to automatically update by default these days killed the accessibility argument a long time ago.

Steam Big Picture mode even took it a step further back in 2015 so that you can treat your PC like a console and rarely ever need a keyboard and mouse, if you're so inclined.

[Steve]

Originally posted by Kinetics202:

Originally posted by Steve:

We're still working on that as a species, but it's slow going because there's more than just some that would exploit the system. It's quite a few. If you leave an alley open, players WILL take the shortcut.

Were it not a competitive shooter with cash prizes, I'd be more inclined to agree with you. But this is a competitive shooter with cash prizes. Security is paramount.

I get where you’re coming from—security is definitely critical, especially in a competitive shooter with cash prizes on the line. But the argument falls apart a bit when you look at games like Fortnite, Call of Duty, and Paladins, which already allow keyboard and mouse (K&M) on consoles without compromising fairness or security. These games are just as competitive, with massive player bases, input-specific matchmaking, and even cash-prize tournaments. Yet, they’ve found ways to successfully implement K&M support while still addressing cheating concerns.

Yes, there will always be people trying to exploit the system, but that’s true regardless of input type. The existence of controller adapters proves that. The difference is, those games prioritize inclusivity and accessibility while using robust anti-cheat measures to deal with bad actors. If they can do it, there’s no reason this game can’t follow suit. Excluding K&M support outright feels less like a security measure and more like a missed opportunity to make the game more accessible for everyone.

Yeah, everyone including cheaters. I get your argument, but it's got personal bias.

Let's face it. How many players are out there in your boat? I'm willing to wager it's far, far less than the number of people willing to do anything they can to get a competitive edge, fair or no.

Not every design decision can be perfect; in fact, it's INCREDIBLY rare when the stars align so that a perfect decision can be made. This was a decision very clearly made, in the game's infancy, from a utilitarian standpoint.

Maybe later as the game gets more established and the devs have more time to roll out beefier security, it can be revisited, but for right now, the cons outweigh the pros by a lot.

[Kinetics202]

Originally posted by Steve:

Originally posted by Kinetics202:

I get where you’re coming from—security is definitely critical, especially in a competitive shooter with cash prizes on the line. But the argument falls apart a bit when you look at games like Fortnite, Call of Duty, and Paladins, which already allow keyboard and mouse (K&M) on consoles without compromising fairness or security. These games are just as competitive, with massive player bases, input-specific matchmaking, and even cash-prize tournaments. Yet, they’ve found ways to successfully implement K&M support while still addressing cheating concerns.

Yes, there will always be people trying to exploit the system, but that’s true regardless of input type. The existence of controller adapters proves that. The difference is, those games prioritize inclusivity and accessibility while using robust anti-cheat measures to deal with bad actors. If they can do it, there’s no reason this game can’t follow suit. Excluding K&M support outright feels less like a security measure and more like a missed opportunity to make the game more accessible for everyone.

Yeah, everyone including cheaters. I get your argument, but it's got personal bias.

Let's face it. How many players are out there in your boat? I'm willing to wager it's far, far less than the number of people willing to do anything they can to get a competitive edge, fair or no.

Not every design decision can be perfect; in fact, it's INCREDIBLY rare when the stars align so that a perfect decision can be made. This was a decision very clearly made, in the game's infancy, from a utilitarian standpoint.

Maybe later as the game gets more established and the devs have more time to roll out beefier security, it can be revisited, but for right now, the cons outweigh the pros by a lot.

I’m not sure if I’m getting my point across clearly. This has already been proven to work and not just in one game. There are plenty of console players who already enjoy or would love the option to use keyboard and mouse. If it didn’t work, games like the ones I’ve repeatedly mentioned wouldn’t have implemented it so successfully.

[Steve]

Originally posted by Kinetics202:

Originally posted by Steve:

Yeah, everyone including cheaters. I get your argument, but it's got personal bias.

Let's face it. How many players are out there in your boat? I'm willing to wager it's far, far less than the number of people willing to do anything they can to get a competitive edge, fair or no.

Not every design decision can be perfect; in fact, it's INCREDIBLY rare when the stars align so that a perfect decision can be made. This was a decision very clearly made, in the game's infancy, from a utilitarian standpoint.

Maybe later as the game gets more established and the devs have more time to roll out beefier security, it can be revisited, but for right now, the cons outweigh the pros by a lot.

I’m not sure if I’m getting my point across clearly. This has already been proven to work and not just in one game. There are plenty of console players who already enjoy or would love the option to use keyboard and mouse. If it didn’t work, games like the ones I’ve repeatedly mentioned wouldn’t have implemented it so successfully.

Yes. I get what you're saying. It worked elsewhere at another point in time, so it can be neatly shoehorned in here under the same guidelines.

Except cheating isn't a static field. It's constantly evolving, and most cheatmakers have a consistent lead on the developers of games.

Marvel Rivals is a UE5 game. Unreal Engine isn't and has never been known for its security. It's very easy to cheat on this game engine compared to some others. It would definitely behoove a developer of a UE title to lock it down as much as possible, esp. early on.

(Also, even Fortnite has many controller emulators banned. In fact, the only official controllers for use are PS/Xbox compliant -- they banned many emulators three years ago: https://www.essentiallysports.com/esports-news-fortnite-creator-epic-games-is-banning-cronus-zen-and-other-external-hardware-used-by-many-pros/ )