Let's design the perfect controller by combining parts from ones that already exist

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Waiting to see how this works.

Sonic Doctor:

Souplex:
The perfect controller already exists. It's the 360 controller.

I agree totally.

lordlillen:
image
if the replace the R1 and L1 with the playstation versions this would be my dream controller.

Ugh! That would be awful. I just picked up my 360 controller to see how that would work with my thumbs and it would be a nightmare. Holding it in the most comfortable way would mean that the tips of my thumbs would touch and that when I move one it would nudge and mess up the placement of the other. This also isn't because I have big hands and tumbs, I have very small hands and thumbs.

I believe Microsoft knew this as a possibility, and that is why they created the awesomeness of having staggered joysticks. Besides, I've never understood how people have had complaints about where the d-pad is, because it has actually been awesome having it below my left thumb and to the right and not above my left thumb and to left like one the PS controllers. When I use to have a PS2, I found the placement of the d-pad very awkward.

i have never had any of those problems in my life with the PS controller layout. and testing on my ps3 controller right now, for me at least, you would have to be controlling the analog sticks using the joints half way down your thumb for that to happen.

so the above pic would also be my perfect controller.

I would say an XBOX360 controller but with the same analog sticks in the same position

There's this thing called a keyboard and mouse, best controlling device in history. Using the mouse to turn eliminates the keyboards swerving issues.

I'll be going with the PS controller layout but it could be a nicer fit in one's hands. Oh and to all those saying keyboard and mouse, using a mouse to play Cthulhu Sleeps on Audiosurf is a very bad idea.

LetalisK:

Xzi:

Thing on the left looks kinda good depending on its size, but what's the max DPI tracking on the mouse?

I believe it's a 2000 dpi mouse. Not that it matters, because it does a hack job of translating movement. It's still better than a thumbstick, though.

Now, if you want a more fluid experience, you get one of these:
image

The developer kicked ass with the XIM3. It does an amazing job at translating mouse movements and makes it feel exactly like on the computer. It's expensive, but mine has paid for itself because I can now rent games on a console instead of having to pay full price, often for games I don't want to play very long. It works on the PS3 too if you get an adapter. It's just not "officially" supported by the developer.

Interesting. I'm not sure it would warrant the price for me, just because so many of the 360's games eventually get released on the PC anyway, but I can see how it would be useful for others. Would also give you a huge advantage over other XBL players.

Popido:
Waiting to see how this works.

Looked good in the Portal 2 demonstration, but I doubt it will be better than a mouse and keyboard in game content not specifically designed for it. Now, if you could do one of the hand peripherals in one hand and the mouse in the other, that would be awesome. But then I wouldn't want to be paying its full price, either.

Um, wasn't this done a week ago?

image

funguy2121:
Um, wasn't this done a week ago?

image

Yes, and it was already mentioned:

Xzi:
A needlessly bulky controller which draws attention from the screen where all the action is happening? Certainly not perfect by any means. Far from it, as a matter of fact.

Not to mention that touchscreen controls tend to be even less accurate than motion controls. Nintendo finally got a decent response time out of those, so I guess it was time to take a step backward again.

It also uses the crappy little nub sticks from the 3DS. Not accurate, not comfortable, and incredibly gimmicky. Probably the farthest you can get from the perfect controller.

shasjas:

Sonic Doctor:
Argh, have to snip.

i have never had any of those problems in my life with the PS controller layout. and testing on my ps3 controller right now, for me at least, you would have to be controlling the analog sticks using the joints half way down your thumb for that to happen.

so the above pic would also be my perfect controller.

Why did you remove my spoiler edit of lordillen's picture? I'm trying to keep the thread reasonable, medium and bigger pics should be spoiled, posting so many large pics in a thread is frowned upon on this site.

Now to my regular response: I didn't mention about how I had problems with the PS controller because the sticks were next to each other on the same height line on the controller.
I said I had a problem with the position of the d-pad on the PS controllers. Other than that, the sticks were spaced fine on the PS controller and I didn't have problems with my thumbs.

The reason is that if you compare a PS controller and compare to how the d-pad and the right stick on the 360 controller are spaced, if the left stick in the 360 was placed where the d-pad is, the left stick and the right stick would be closer together than compared to how separated the sticks on the PS controller are.

The PS controller is a longer controller horizontally and the sticks are farther apart compared to that modified picture of the 360 controller. That is why the modified controller in the picture wouldn't work, even with my small hands. As I said before, that is why Microsoft designed their controller to have staggered sticks. They didn't want a controller that is as long horizontally as the PS controller. Instead of bringing the hands too far apart like the PS, the 360 isn't as long and is fat and rounded on the handle sides. Because of that the 360 controller's shape fits better, practically melding perfectly with the palms and under-fingers of each hand.

Xzi:

It also uses the crappy little nub sticks from the 3DS.

I'm unsure of that. Most of the journos who demo'd the controller said that they're not the "crappy little nub sticks" from the 3DS, and that they're more like the older analog sticks but without the tension that builds up when you have to hold your thumb against the spring pressure in a certain direction for prolonged periods. In fact, all of the reviews I've read from people who actually used the controller were overwhelmingly favorable. Now IGN is saying that they do use the same circle pads as the 3DS, but even IGN are very excited about the new controller.

Xzi:

Not accurate, not comfortable, and incredibly gimmicky.

You haven't played with the thing, so unless you're referring exclusively to the circle pads (and I would ask if you're a 3DS owner), I wonder how you came about this info. I have spent some time with a 3DS and the circle pad is very accurate and very comfortable. As for the rest of the controller, please tell me you're not joining the other posters who judged "uncomfortable" based on a photograph and against the advice of the entire gaming journalism community, who have collectively assured us that the controller is very intuitive and very comfortable. And gimmicky? When did it become a debate gimmick to use the word "gimmick?" Let's discuss some Nintendo gimmicks from the past. Analogue sticks. Gaming in 3D (not "Avatar" 3D, polygonal 3D). Rumble. Local multiplayer support for 4 players. Intuitive, tactile button layouts.

Xzi:
Probably the farthest you can get from the perfect controller.

And yet, when Microsoft and Sony emulate some of its features in the next couple of years, the complainers will still be on board.

as far as i'm concerned, the GameCube controller is pretty much my ideal controller. all the buttons are easily within reach and it works really well

funguy2121:
You haven't played with the thing, so unless you're referring exclusively to the circle pads (and I would ask if you're a 3DS owner), I wonder how you came about this info. I have spent some time with a 3DS and the circle pad is very accurate and very comfortable. As for the rest of the controller, please tell me you're not joining the other posters who judged "uncomfortable" based on a photograph and against the advice of the entire gaming journalism community, who have collectively assured us that the controller is very intuitive and very comfortable. And gimmicky? When did it become a debate gimmick to use the word "gimmick?" Let's discuss some Nintendo gimmicks from the past. Analogue sticks. Gaming in 3D (not "Avatar" 3D, polygonal 3D). Rumble. Local multiplayer support for 4 players. Intuitive, tactile button layouts.

I've played with a 3DS for some time, didn't care for it. The fact that it has thumb sticks at all is what makes it inaccurate, though, in case you misunderstood. We were discussing that earlier in the thread. A mouse has to be a part of the overall control scheme in order for it to be considered "perfect," or anywhere near that, really.

As for being uncomfortable, I CAN tell that just by looking at it. No matter how light it is or how well it sits in your hands, it's not something I'd want to hold for long periods of time, simply due to its bulkiness. Same reason the original Xbox controller sucked.

Lastly, I don't remember anyone calling analog sticks or 4-player support gimmicks. Maybe you do. But the virtual boy was very gimmicky. As was the Wii. And a touchscreen on the controller for a home console? Gimmick overload. It will allow games to be played in a different way. But not a more accurate or intuitive way. People will have to spend a lot of time learning the intricacies of each game's controls on the WiiU. And that's why it's a gimmick. Also why the WiiU will have very little third party support, like the Wii. The rest of the industry will be moving on in a year, and Nintendo will be taking a back seat as usual. Had they released this console instead of the Wii at the same time as the PS3, then maybe developers would have had a chance to give a shit. But that window is long past.

Pressure sensitive keyboard with a macro-able mouse.

Sorry have to represent my favorite, but I'll tell you what, I vote on an actual controller and you hypothetically back me up when I tell console designers to let me use my control scheme.

Dual Shock 3 but maybe have a bit of a click to the marshmellow triggers before the pressure sensitivity kicks in. Just so they are harder to bump and have more feedback.

Since I won't use it you can really do whatever you want but I'll note that I don't like the way an xBox controller is held, with handles that slant inward, I like the parallel handled controls of the GCN, PS, and N64(Though yes the rest of this controller can burn in controller hell).

Maybe a controller with free form handles that can lock into a few different angles to suit the PS and the xBox users?

Xzi:

funguy2121:
You haven't played with the thing, so unless you're referring exclusively to the circle pads (and I would ask if you're a 3DS owner), I wonder how you came about this info. I have spent some time with a 3DS and the circle pad is very accurate and very comfortable. As for the rest of the controller, please tell me you're not joining the other posters who judged "uncomfortable" based on a photograph and against the advice of the entire gaming journalism community, who have collectively assured us that the controller is very intuitive and very comfortable. And gimmicky? When did it become a debate gimmick to use the word "gimmick?" Let's discuss some Nintendo gimmicks from the past. Analogue sticks. Gaming in 3D (not "Avatar" 3D, polygonal 3D). Rumble. Local multiplayer support for 4 players. Intuitive, tactile button layouts.

(1) A mouse has to be a part of the overall control scheme in order for it to be considered "perfect," or anywhere near that, really.

(2) As for being uncomfortable, I CAN tell that just by looking at it. No matter how light it is or how well it sits in your hands, it's not something I'd want to hold for long periods of time, simply due to its bulkiness. Same reason the original Xbox controller sucked.

(3) Lastly, I don't remember anyone calling analog sticks or 4-player support gimmicks. Maybe you do. (4)But the virtual boy was very gimmicky. (5)As was the Wii. (6)And a touchscreen on the controller for a home console? Gimmick overload. It will allow games to be played in a different way. But not a more accurate or intuitive way. (7)People will have to spend a lot of time learning the intricacies of each game's controls on the WiiU. (8)And that's why it's a gimmick. (9)Also why the WiiU will have very little third party support, like the Wii. The rest of the industry will be moving on in a year, and Nintendo will be taking a back seat as usual. Had they released this console instead of the Wii at the same time as the PS3, then maybe developers would have had a chance to give a shit. But that window is long past.

(1) This is a PC gamer perspective. If you want to be able to turn and aim with superhuman speed, then you're right. If you want a setup that feels and functions more like the way that people moving about in the real world do, a good controller is more precise.

(2) It sounds like the fact that your hands will be a couple of inches farther apart is what's really bothering you. Do you really think this will make the controller uncomfortable? Did you read the text that you quoted? All of the journos said it's very comfortable, even after they've used it for a while.

(3) Anytime a company like Nintendo (or their competitors, for that matter) try something different, a whole bunch of fanboys cry "gimmick," usually without even qualifying it. To this day, people still talk shit about the N64 controller, even though we have it to thank for the analog stick and rumble support. And fanboys still talk shit about the system itself, even though with a much smaller catalogue it still had a great deal more 3D games than its jaggie-fied competitor, the PSOne, and had out-of-box 4-player support. That's what I was saying.

(4) This isn't exactly a bold statement. Almost nobody purchased the Virtual Boy and almost no one thinks that it was a well-advised idea.

(5) The tens of millions of consumers who bought a Wii in lieu of an XBox or a PS3 disagree with you, as do the creators of the XBox and PS3,, who designed peripherals to emulate the Wii. Also, the gamers who appreciate what the IR pointer has done for control, especially in FPS shooters, and can't go back, disagree with you.

(6) How does allowing new kinds of games to be made equate to a gimmick in your mind? And how does having to pause to combine and then use potions, equipment, weapons and spells, and pause or obscure part of the main screen to see the map, mean "precise and intuitive" to you?

(7) And a brand new gamer would have to spend a good deal of time figuring out how to use the controller for the N64, X-Box, Gamecube or any one of the Playstations. Is not learning to play a new way part of the fun? You know what? Scratch that. I took for granted that your assertion was accurate, which of course it isn't. Being able to pause the game but not having to do so to look up inventory or map details or use a tracker or cam chat with NPCs won't have much of a learning curve, and if it does, you can pause the game. How is having a touch screen going to confuse gamers?

(8) That's not the definition of a gimmick.

(9) Remember that you said that in a year, when Tecmo, EA, Sega, Ubisoft and all the rest keep on making games for the new system.

As an effort to end console vs. PC hate I have to say a controller that emulates the precision of a mouse and offers the ability to have the buttons of a keyboard. (Anything that requires a keyboard is usually poorly design on the controls but this is just to stop the bitching). Not sure how you can do this but a more precise motion control might offer this kind of control. Also, isn't it odd that we're trying to cobble together existing tech to make a controller then coming up with new technology. This is a theoretical discussion and I know that current technology is no-where near any sort of peak so shouldn't we be coming up with better stuff then what exists?

Mine would be a PS2 controller with XBOX360 Triggers.

PS2 felt great in weight, shape, buttons and everything. However, the XBOX360 triggers felt good and are better than those PS3 triggers who I feel like the can break any moment.

Size: Xbox 360
Battery area(and space it uses): PS3
Thumbstick shape: Xbox 360
Thumbstick Position: Xbox 360
Trigger/[letter here]2 buttons: Xbox 360
Bumper/[letter here]1 buttons:PS3
START button: PS3 size with Xbox solidity
Back/Select Button:Xbox 360 solidity w/ PS3 size, Xbox 360 Name
Middle Button:size in between Xbox & PS3
D-Pad:PS3
Headset Compatibility: preferably PS3, with that as the default, but has technology(FREE) that uses Bluetooth and transforms the signal to the Xbox 360 Plug.

mouse and keyboard with pressure sensitive mouse buttons and an analogue stick replacing WASD

faspxina:

lordlillen:
image
if the replace the R1 and L1 with the playstation versions this would be my dream controller.

this

i find the thumbsticks to be uncomfortable there(prefer xbox thumbsticks as is)

but your preference is your preference

funguy2121:
(1) This is a PC gamer perspective. If you want to be able to turn and aim with superhuman speed, then you're right. If you want a setup that feels and functions more like the way that people moving about in the real world do, a good controller is more precise.

(2) It sounds like the fact that your hands will be a couple of inches farther apart is what's really bothering you. Do you really think this will make the controller uncomfortable? Did you read the text that you quoted? All of the journos said it's very comfortable, even after they've used it for a while.

(3) Anytime a company like Nintendo (or their competitors, for that matter) try something different, a whole bunch of fanboys cry "gimmick," usually without even qualifying it. To this day, people still talk shit about the N64 controller, even though we have it to thank for the analog stick and rumble support. And fanboys still talk shit about the system itself, even though with a much smaller catalogue it still had a great deal more 3D games than its jaggie-fied competitor, the PSOne, and had out-of-box 4-player support. That's what I was saying.

(4) This isn't exactly a bold statement. Almost nobody purchased the Virtual Boy and almost no one thinks that it was a well-advised idea.

(5) The tens of millions of consumers who bought a Wii in lieu of an XBox or a PS3 disagree with you, as do the creators of the XBox and PS3,, who designed peripherals to emulate the Wii. Also, the gamers who appreciate what the IR pointer has done for control, especially in FPS shooters, and can't go back, disagree with you.

(6) How does allowing new kinds of games to be made equate to a gimmick in your mind? And how does having to pause to combine and then use potions, equipment, weapons and spells, and pause or obscure part of the main screen to see the map, mean "precise and intuitive" to you?

(7) And a brand new gamer would have to spend a good deal of time figuring out how to use the controller for the N64, X-Box, Gamecube or any one of the Playstations. Is not learning to play a new way part of the fun? You know what? Scratch that. I took for granted that your assertion was accurate, which of course it isn't. Being able to pause the game but not having to do so to look up inventory or map details or use a tracker or cam chat with NPCs won't have much of a learning curve, and if it does, you can pause the game. How is having a touch screen going to confuse gamers?

(8) That's not the definition of a gimmick.

(9) Remember that you said that in a year, when Tecmo, EA, Sega, Ubisoft and all the rest keep on making games for the new system.

1. Right, which is also why I suggested a control stick and more standard buttons for movement/weapon selection and etc in one hand, while the mouse would be used purely for accurate aiming and firing/scoping. Infinitely more accurate than a second control stick would be.

2. Yes, that does/would bother me on a controller. Speaking purely from my own perspective, it wouldn't be comfortable, regardless of what the game journalists say.

3. Perhaps so, but again, I don't remember anyone calling Nintendo's innovations in the N64 era gimmicks. Before, during, or after the fact. If it did happen, it was rare. Whereas a lot of their newer stuff is called that often, and with good reason. With the N64, you had optional controller attachments, so everybody was happy using or not using them. The Wii and WiiU, on the other hand, have non-standard functionality that's absolutely integral to the functionality of the console.

4. Which just goes to show that Nintendo doesn't lay a golden egg every time. There's selling well, and then there's accomplishing the task which they have set forth for themselves. On point one, I think the WiiU will do very well. On point two, which is to say, an attempt to reclaim the core gamer base they lost after the Gamecube, I don't think it will succeed.

5. See point four. Selling well doesn't make it any less of a gimmick. The pet rock sold very well too, but I don't think that even the people who bought it would claim it to be a useful purchase. There's no way to gather data on how many Wiis just sit on tables gathering dust.

6. If these "new kinds of games" rely entirely on the console's unique functionality as spectacle in order to sell, that's the very definition of gimmick. After all, how many mini-game compilations did we see released on the Wii as a result of it's rather singular usefulness?

Pausing the game isn't intuitive or necessary. But that's why mini-maps and hotkeys were invented, yes? So that you never have to look away from where the action is happening and won't get killed due to poor game design. Or in the WiiU's case, poor console design.

7. I never said it would confuse them. I said that there would be a separate learning curve for each game on the WiiU. Because it's entirely dependent on how each developer decides to utilize the controller. Whereas if you learn one FPS game on an Xbox 360 gamepad, you've pretty much learned them all. Confusing? No. Annoying and unnecessary? Yes.

8. You're right, but the WiiU does fit at least two definitions of gimmick:

an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, especially one designed to attract attention or increase appeal.

to equip or embellish with unnecessary features, especially in order to increase salability, acceptance, etc.

Basically it's unnecessary functionality that looks cool at first glance, and thus increases sales, but then later turns out to be very limited in scope and follow-through.

9. Like I said, VERY LITTLE third-party developer support. I didn't say none. And I don't even want to guess at the outrageous number of mini-game compilations the companies you listed produced for the Wii. Third-party developer support only really counts as support when they're releasing the games which are the main focus of those developers on your console. The WiiU will probably get that type of full support for a year or so, until the next generation of consoles is released by Sony and Microsoft. At which point Nintendo will be thrown right back under the bus.

This is all quite off-topic, however, as we were discussing the perfect controller. And while the Gamecube controller or some of Nintendo's older hardware might be in the running, the WiiU's controller is another story entirely. It's an unknown for the most part. Based on looks alone, however, I don't think most gamers would be so audacious to make the claim that it's perfect. Or even close.

Souplex:
The perfect controller already exists. It's the 360 controller.

This. Honestly I can't find anything to fault with it. It fits nicely in your hand, its robust, nice feeling buttons and good analogs. It's a good size too, unlike the PS controllers which are quite small in the hand.

Xzi:

funguy2121:
(1) This is a PC gamer perspective. If you want to be able to turn and aim with superhuman speed, then you're right. If you want a setup that feels and functions more like the way that people moving about in the real world do, a good controller is more precise.

(2) It sounds like the fact that your hands will be a couple of inches farther apart is what's really bothering you. Do you really think this will make the controller uncomfortable? Did you read the text that you quoted? All of the journos said it's very comfortable, even after they've used it for a while.

(3) Anytime a company like Nintendo (or their competitors, for that matter) try something different, a whole bunch of fanboys cry "gimmick," usually without even qualifying it. To this day, people still talk shit about the N64 controller, even though we have it to thank for the analog stick and rumble support. And fanboys still talk shit about the system itself, even though with a much smaller catalogue it still had a great deal more 3D games than its jaggie-fied competitor, the PSOne, and had out-of-box 4-player support. That's what I was saying.

(4) This isn't exactly a bold statement. Almost nobody purchased the Virtual Boy and almost no one thinks that it was a well-advised idea.

(5) The tens of millions of consumers who bought a Wii in lieu of an XBox or a PS3 disagree with you, as do the creators of the XBox and PS3,, who designed peripherals to emulate the Wii. Also, the gamers who appreciate what the IR pointer has done for control, especially in FPS shooters, and can't go back, disagree with you.

(6) How does allowing new kinds of games to be made equate to a gimmick in your mind? And how does having to pause to combine and then use potions, equipment, weapons and spells, and pause or obscure part of the main screen to see the map, mean "precise and intuitive" to you?

(7) And a brand new gamer would have to spend a good deal of time figuring out how to use the controller for the N64, X-Box, Gamecube or any one of the Playstations. Is not learning to play a new way part of the fun? You know what? Scratch that. I took for granted that your assertion was accurate, which of course it isn't. Being able to pause the game but not having to do so to look up inventory or map details or use a tracker or cam chat with NPCs won't have much of a learning curve, and if it does, you can pause the game. How is having a touch screen going to confuse gamers?

(8) That's not the definition of a gimmick.

(9) Remember that you said that in a year, when Tecmo, EA, Sega, Ubisoft and all the rest keep on making games for the new system.

1. Right, which is also why I suggested a control stick and more standard buttons for movement/weapon selection and etc in one hand, while the mouse would be used purely for accurate aiming and firing/scoping. Infinitely more accurate than a second control stick would be.

2. Yes, that does/would bother me on a controller. Speaking purely from my own perspective, it wouldn't be comfortable, regardless of what the game journalists say.

3. Perhaps so, but again, I don't remember anyone calling Nintendo's innovations in the N64 era gimmicks. Before, during, or after the fact. If it did happen, it was rare. Whereas a lot of their newer stuff is called that often, and with good reason. With the N64, you had optional controller attachments, so everybody was happy using or not using them. The Wii and WiiU, on the other hand, have non-standard functionality that's absolutely integral to the functionality of the console.

4. Which just goes to show that Nintendo doesn't lay a golden egg every time. There's selling well, and then there's accomplishing the task which they have set forth for themselves. On point one, I think the WiiU will do very well. On point two, which is to say, an attempt to reclaim the core gamer base they lost after the Gamecube, I don't think it will succeed.

5. See point four. Selling well doesn't make it any less of a gimmick. The pet rock sold very well too, but I don't think that even the people who bought it would claim it to be a useful purchase. There's no way to gather data on how many Wiis just sit on tables gathering dust.

6. If these "new kinds of games" rely entirely on the console's unique functionality as spectacle in order to sell, that's the very definition of gimmick. After all, how many mini-game compilations did we see released on the Wii as a result of it's rather singular usefulness?

Pausing the game isn't intuitive or necessary. But that's why mini-maps and hotkeys were invented, yes? So that you never have to look away from where the action is happening and won't get killed due to poor game design. Or in the WiiU's case, poor console design.

7. I never said it would confuse them. I said that there would be a separate learning curve for each game on the WiiU. Because it's entirely dependent on how each developer decides to utilize the controller. Whereas if you learn one FPS game on an Xbox 360 gamepad, you've pretty much learned them all. Confusing? No. Annoying and unnecessary? Yes.

8. You're right, but the WiiU does fit at least two definitions of gimmick:

an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem, especially one designed to attract attention or increase appeal.

to equip or embellish with unnecessary features, especially in order to increase salability, acceptance, etc.

Basically it's unnecessary functionality that looks cool at first glance, and thus increases sales, but then later turns out to be very limited in scope and follow-through.

9. Like I said, VERY LITTLE third-party developer support. I didn't say none. And I don't even want to guess at the outrageous number of mini-game compilations the companies you listed produced for the Wii. Third-party developer support only really counts as support when they're releasing the games which are the main focus of those developers on your console. The WiiU will probably get that type of full support for a year or so, until the next generation of consoles is released by Sony and Microsoft. At which point Nintendo will be thrown right back under the bus.

This is all quite off-topic, however, as we were discussing the perfect controller. And while the Gamecube controller or some of Nintendo's older hardware might be in the running, the WiiU's controller is another story entirely. It's an unknown for the most part. Based on looks alone, however, I don't think most gamers would be so audacious to make the claim that it's perfect. Or even close.

Sorry, it really wasn't fair of me to argue with you when your browser wasn't working properly. Let me know when your internet's working better so you can make some informed points :P.

The perfect controller is a helmet that lets your mind control the actions in the game. Virtual virtual reality if you know the Futarama ref.

fragmaster09:

faspxina:

lordlillen:
image
if the replace the R1 and L1 with the playstation versions this would be my dream controller.

this

i find the thumbsticks to be uncomfortable there(prefer xbox thumbsticks as is)

but your preference is your preference

I like the controller this way because it has the size and concave triggers of the 360 controller (more ergonomic in my opinion) and the symmetry of the ps3.

Basically, I just want the 360 controller to be symmetrical like the ps3 one. Because, in a way, a controller conditions how games will play in the future.

By having a controller with the stick on top and the d-pad on the bottom we automatically create this rule that all games will use the stick to move your avatar and the d-pad for something secondary.

Imagine playing Katamari with the 360 controller (for those who never played it, you use a stick to control each of your hands, which make role a giant ball in the direction you want), which by the way is a game that innovates the way you can use the Playstation controller.

Souplex:
The perfect controller already exists. It's the 360 controller.

mitchell271:

Souplex:
The perfect controller already exists. It's the 360 controller.

what about its d-pad?
360 controller with the Nintendo D-pad would be perfect

But still lacks a mouse ;)

faspxina:

I like the controller this way because it has the size and concave triggers of the 360 controller (more ergonomic in my opinion) and the symmetry of the ps3.

Basically, I just want the 360 controller to be symmetrical like the ps3 one. Because, in a way, a controller conditions how games will play in the future.

By having a controller with the stick on top and the d-pad on the bottom we automatically create this rule that all games will use the stick to move your avatar and the d-pad for something secondary.

Imagine playing Katamari with the 360 controller (for those who never played it, you use a stick to control each of your hands, which make role a giant ball in the direction you want), which by the way is a game that innovates the way you can use the Playstation controller.

i see what you mean about the concavity, but i guess that i prefer the xbox positioning because i'm used to it, also(i found this out just now), if i were playing a CoD(for example), and i wanted to walk right as fast as possible while looking to the left as fast as possible, i would hit my thumbs together, which would be uncomfortable, but considering how little i use killstreaks(on account that i'm useless at CoD), i never get this problem

i also find the PS3 buttons to be just a little too shallow, and the Xbox ones to be too rounded(but they stand out better colourwise)

i prefer the PS3 D-pad

I don't know if this qualifies:

It's not perfect yet, but we're getting there.

image

image

/thread

This is an impossible exercise. You're hoping to please the Unpleasable Fanbase. Can't be done. Even if you make a decent controller, the PC crowd is just going to scoff at you anyway.

Moriarty:
I actually like holding the Wii controller + nunchuck. If they'd creaty a new version of those with "hardcore" gaming in mind, that would be perfect.

Unless it can provide physical feedback, I'm not sure if it will really work for hardcore gaming.

A blend between the 360 and PS2 controller would be perfect. Probably just needs the d-pad of the PS2 controller instead of the 360 one actually.

lordlillen:
image
if the replace the R1 and L1 with the playstation versions this would be my dream controller.

I came.

Seriously, that looks sweet.

I know I'm gonna be called a fanboy (I'm not), but I prefer the Dualshock the 360's. Anyway, stick the 360's triggers on a Dualshock, throw away the motion control bollucks, stick the SNES's D-pad on, put a small touchscreen in the middle and stick the select and start buttons on the back.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here