Microsoft Announces New Xbox Controller

[The Duggler]

Originally Posted by TheGame

And Duggler, I hope they don't change it. The controler's design is simplistic and it works well imo. I don't think they should fix what isn't broken.

That's what I hear from PS users all the time and if it's fine with you then OK. And me I couldn't care less, I don't buy playstations.

I know they gave you one hell of a scare with the boomerang, but you should give them another chance

[Typhoid]

I'm not returning my PS3 because of it. But I have a hard time figuring out why it's so hard to admit that these are dumb decisions.

Because those problems that you have such a big deal with don't bother me and The Game, because we charge out controllers when we aren't playing our system, opposed to you - who apparently never charge it unless playing.

I don't find the cord dumb because A) I'd much rather have any length of USB cable than a giant battery pack in the back B) It's never hindered my gameplay in any way. Has my controller died mid-game before? Totally. What did I do when that happened? Used my other, fully charged controller. Catastrophe avoided.

I'm not saying I can't see why people wouldn't like the USB cord. But personally, it doesn't make a single difference to me. I've never once thought "Damn this cord" or "I really wish I had a longer cord". Because I'd assume if I ever wanted a longer cord, I'd simply just purchase one instead of begrudgingly using the small one I hate oh-so much.

Why is it so hard to admit that including a 3 ft wire was a cheap decision?

What you call "cheap", I call "cost effective" and "efficient". You don't need a huge, long cord, anyways. The idea behind a wireless controller is to play it wirelessly. Therefore the length of the cord [in idea with the fact you don't play it with the cord in] doesn't factor into it one bit.

Half empty/Half full. We have different opinions on something entirely pointless that stems from our specific encounters with the system. And like you said, it's not a deal breaker anyways, so it's not even really important to be talking about anymore.

Also, my two cents on the design of the controller being the same - I think it's a good idea, personally. Why should you change up your controller every system? Why drastically change something that's worked for a decade, and everyone that buys your system is used to? Changing controllers needlessly is Nintendo's bag. Even Microsoft has never changed the Xbox controller, technically. You don't fuck with what works for you. Business rule 4.

The design is simple, light, and fits the hand perfectly. I'm curious though, The Duggler, what do you think they should improve and change on the Playstation controller? Make it fatter, wider, more buttons, lights and whirring noises? Maybe shift the location of every single button, and make the controller 100% different, so that when it comes out next gen everyone who's grown used to the controller has to start all over again. What can they possibly change? are 11 buttons [2 being pressure sensitive], 2 sticks, and a d-pad [not to mention an on/off for the system itself] not enough shit on a controller for you? How many more buttons do you want? Maybe it's the positioning of the buttons you find dumb. Would you suggest they make it more like the 360 controller, which essentially just has 1 joystick and d-pad switching locations with eachother? Is that the zenith of controller placement technology? Maybe all controllers should be gaudy things that take plug-ins and have wires and straps flapping around. Maybe it shouldn't have any buttons at all, but should slightly resemble a St. Bernard.

[TheGame]

I think it'll be good for backward compatibility to keep things similar too.

[Vampyr]

I think the dual shock and the 360 controllers are both perfect...hope they never change. I slightly prefer the 360 one though, because of the trigger design.

[BreakABone]

Personally not a fan of the DualShock controller.

Prefer the placement of the analog stick on the 360 controller and the likes.

And on the SixAxis still feel the R2/L2 buttons feel so filmsy.

I doubt Sony will try much new though, which is odd.

[TheSlyMoogle]

I prefer Sony's controller design for fighting games. However I haven't played fighting games on a standard controller in 3 years now. So... Yeah.

Other than that I don't really notice the difference too much between the two except it would honestly have been nice to have the analogs some other way. They're uncomfortable to use.

[gekko]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

What you call "cheap", I call "cost effective" and "efficient".

Really? Come on now, you can't possibly sit there with a straight face and say a shorter USB cable helps keep the price of PS3 down. Cutting costs is removing the backwards compatibility, leaving out rumble, removing accessories which used to be packaged in, etc. A longer USB cable costs pennies when buying in these numbers.

Even Microsoft has never changed the Xbox controller, technically.

They haven't made drastic changes, but it's definitely changed. Xbox shipped with a huge "thing" called a controller. Then they released in Japan with a radically re-designed controller. Then came the S in the US, which is the same basic shape as the Japanese controller, but the resistance in the sticks and triggers is different, and the buttons are a glossy plastic instead of a hard plastic (think DC buttons).

The Xbox 360 controller has changed a little bit during its life too. The D-pad on a newer controller is actually much better than the launch controllers, they just never advertised the change. They released a special edition controller for a soccer game where they improved the d-pad again, and now they have the limited-edition switchable d-pad which also modified the thumbsticks.

I will also say I don't like the PS3 controller. Nice for d-pad games, but those are a minority. Would like to see the left thumbstick move, and the triggers should be concave like every other controller ever made with analog triggers.

[Angrist]

So now that we've discussed most of that... where does the Wii Classic Controller (Pro) fit in? Too much like a Dual Shock without the rumble?

[Typhoid]

Would like to see the left thumbstick move, and the triggers should be concave like every other controller ever made with analog triggers.

Well, except the original PS controller, dualshock 1, dualshock 2, dualshock 3, and whatever the other non-rumble controller is called. Oh, and theres the non-concave joystick of the N64 and the Gamecube.

Come to think of it, only 3 controllers have concave sticks. The Xbox 360 controller, and the Xbox controllers.

That seems to be 7 that don't indent, and 3 that do.

The Xbox 360 controller has changed a little bit during its life too.

They removed some plastic. Sweet. They went from:



To:



Buttons are still all in the same spot, relatively. No major additions or subtractions. No real changes. [I don't count the black and white button as "major changes"]

Opposed to this:



to



to



to



That is what I meant by changes. A complete overhaul. Not changing the colour, removing some plastic and keeping the layout.

[Vampyr]

He said analog triggers, not analog sticks.

Also Nintendo systems have been around for much longer, and had to endure the transition from 2D to 3D. Also neither the N64 controller or the gamecube controller were very good, probably because they were trying to change and be different for the heck of it. The only reason I like the N64 one is because of nostalgia.

But really, I don't see the point of change for the sake of change.

[Angrist]

I really like how the N64 one holds. For example, the way you held the stick, up was up for your thumb. Instead of the angled grip on other controllers. I liked the A + B + 4xC buttons, they were all very easy to reach (and tell apart). I really think they should have had 6 face buttons on the Wii Classic Controller...

[Vampyr]

I also wanted to point that that Typh is incorrect about the differences between the original Xbox and the 360 controllers:

1. 360 does not have the white and black buttons of the original, which were impossible to hit.

2. The 360 has left and right bumpers which the original didn't have

3. The 360's start and back buttons are in a more accessible location

4. "removing a bit of plastic" is an understatement, the slimming down was a huge improvement.

[Angrist]

And in the meanwhile Sony is using a SNES controller with some extra plastic, shoulder buttons and sticks. No drastic changes, so it's the same controller.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Vampyr

He said analog triggers, not analog sticks.

That's what I thought at first, but then I realized that only 3 controllers have had indented shoulder buttons (both xbox and 360, and GC controller), so that couldn't have been what he meant.

But my point remains the exact same essentially. Here, I'll even re-write and revise it:

Would like to see the left thumbstick move, and the triggers should be concave like every other controller ever made with analog triggers.

Well, except the original PS controller, dualshock 1, dualshock 2, dualshock 3, and whatever the other non-rumble controller is called. Oh, and theres the non-concave buttons of the N64 controller, SNES controller and the classic wii controller.

Come to think of it, only 4 controllers have concave shoulder buttons. The Xbox 360 controller, the original xbox controllers, and the Gamecube controller.


That seems to be 8 that don't indent, and 4 that do.

I also wanted to point that that Typh is incorrect about the differences between the original Xbox and the 360 controllers:

1. 360 does not have the white and black buttons of the original, which were impossible to hit.

2. The 360 has left and right bumpers which the original didn't have

3. The 360's start and back buttons are in a more accessible location

This is why I said this:

No real changes. [I don't count the black and white button as "major changes"]

They moved around 4 buttons in pairs of two, twice each. They didn't change the layout of the controller other than those 4 buttons. The joysticks were the same. The abxy buttons where in the same spot, the d-pad was in the same spot. There was no complete overhaul of the controller. Sure, they added 2 shoulder buttons. Is that an overhaul? No. It's a simple addition. The controller wasn't revolutionized. It wasn't drastically changed. I wasn't talking about slight changes from an original xbox s controller to a 360 controller which resemble eachother completely. By "changes" I meant a complete change. The N64 controller does not resemble a GC controller. a GC controller does not resemble a wiimote. I said all of this in my post before.

You seem to think I'm saying this as some type of knock on the Xbox or something, as if you have stock in the company.

The reason I'm making the point, is because it's smarter to change a controller as little as possible, so people are always used to it, and can just pick up and play.

I always go to this [again, this isn't a knock against Nintendo] but most people I know just clearly prefer the GC controller when playing Wii games, because they're USED to it. Nobody I know plays Mario Kart or Smash with a Wiimote and nunchuck, they use a GC controller, because they know how to use it, and it's familiar, and there is a learning curve with playing a game you already relatively know, with a brand new completely different button layout and controller style.

And in the meanwhile Sony is using a SNES controller with some extra plastic, shoulder buttons and sticks. No drastic changes, so it's the same controller.

Thank you. I'm glad you're agreeing with me.
If you were able to look back and read the posts, this is the point I was trying to make the whole time.
That it is BAD to completely overhaul your controller every system. You typically want it to be as familiar as possible every time. This is why I said it's good for Sony that their controller has stayed exactly the same [not counting the addition of the joysticks or pressure sensative shoulder buttons], because this means someone who played a lot of PS1, and never touched a PS2, can pick up a PS3 controller and it will still feel familiar to them.

I don't know how you guys started assuming I was on the side of "controller change is great, Microsoft needs to change their controller!", because that wasn't my point. My point was 2 of the 3 [histories of] systems haven't really overhauled their controllers other than every Nintendo controller. Each Xbox controller resembles an Xbox controller, and each Playstation controller is the same previously.

[gekko]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Well, except the original PS controller, dualshock 1, dualshock 2, dualshock 3, and whatever the other non-rumble controller is called. Oh, and theres the non-concave buttons of the N64 controller, SNES controller and the classic wii controller.

Those are not analog triggers. You have Saturn, Dreamcast, GameCube, Xbox, Xbox 360, PS3, and the Wii Classic controller. PS3 and the Wii Classic are the only controllers where the buttons are convex. You should be able to squeeze hard and have your fingers not slide off the buttons. That's my beef with the PS3 design..

You seem to think I'm saying this as some type of knock on the Xbox or something, as if you have stock in the company.

I do have stock in the company.

Microsoft also has Kinect. There's a controller revolution for you.

I think you are missing the point here. Those of us who said we don't like the PS3 controller were not asking for a revolution, just tweaking it a bit. Exactly what Microsoft has done going from the S to the 360. In fact, given the response to the Wii, Kinect, and Move, not sure controller revolutions are too popular around here... except BaB.

I always go to this [again, this isn't a knock against Nintendo] but most people I know just clearly prefer the GC controller when playing Wii games, because they're USED to it.

I prefer the GC controller too, but it has nothing to do with being used to it. More to do with my feelings toward motion controls.