Topic: Controller Evolution: Is It Necessary?

[PIAC]

they should return to having the classic D pad, if space dictates. i mean its classic!

other than that i cant really think of any way to improve the current controller, but then im not working for nintendo R&D, they have some smart cookies over there

[Stimutacs Addict]

i wouldnt have minded the Kidney shaped B button, but if it really did get in the way, then i suppose the change was for the best


and i would love to see the NES dpad back in action, as well..


why is the  B button always on the left and A button  always on the right? does it have to do with Japanese reading right to left? i suppose so.. but oh well ..

[Termin8Anakin]

the GC controller, to me, is perfect.
To this day, is till don't know which buttons are which on the right side of the PS2 or Xbox controller.

[boggy b]

Personally, I find the DS2 to be the best controller around at the moment, but it has definite room for improvement.

[Sea Dragon]

It's always interesting to compare different controllers. I remember ranting and raving about analog control sticks on controllers, since I couldn't imagine giving up my D-pad. However, I find that I like it for Dragon Warrior VII - it feels a lot more natural.

I think the dual shock is pretty good, but I like the Game Cube controller better. I didn't like it at first, but after an hour with it on Metroid Prime, I grew quite comfortable with it. I still don't really like the Z-button or the kidney bean X and Y - they look and feel kind of cheap to me,  but overall it's very comfortable (and I have large hands.)

[ThePerm]

ok heres an idea, lets design a controller that looks like a remote with a d-pad..throw in some kirby tilt and tumble sensors. And forget all those buttons..just one big one and asome shoulder buttons.

[wandering]

Sounds good...but I think there should be a way to let you point at the screen too. Like a light gun....except it shouldn't read the screen directly, instead maybe there should be a seperate thing for it to sense. Like a sensor bar, maybe?

[Shecky]

Quit stealing unclebob's job!

[SixthAngel]

It is very necessary.  The ps controller was good when it first came out but is now the worst controller on the market.  Just having the analog in the primary spot would do wonders.  Making it biggger would be excellent too since it hurts my hands.  The boomerang would probably have been a good improvement if people didn't freak out just because it looked like a boomerang.  The GC controller solved the two worst aspects of the ps controller.  Strangely enough I loved the original xbox controller though, it just seemed to fit my hands perfectly.

[Galford]

I just realized this thread is over 3 years old.  
When I say a post by Grey Ninja I thought he was back.

Really the GC was nice except for the d-pad.  
It was too small and placed in an arkward spot.

I can't entirely blame Sony for the DS series of controllers.
If it ain't broke why fix?

[Shin Gallon]

In my years of playing games, the closest any controller has ever come to perfection is the Japanese Saturn pad. The best d-pad I've ever felt coupled with the proper 6-face buttons and 2 shoulder buttons. I bought 2 of the PS2 Saturn pads when they came out last year and since then fighting games have been heaven on the PS2. When the Dreamcast came out, my first thought was "Why didn't they just use the NiGHTS Saturn controller? That was pretty much perfect". Seriously, give that controller a better analog stick and a VMU slot and it would have been a perfect version of the DC pad.
The PS2 controller is, overall, really good, with only the mucked-up d-pad and lack of 6 face buttons marring it. 4 face buttons is fine for action games, but if you want to play Street Fighter on that system, you better have an arcade stick or PS2 Saturn pad handy.
I really really love the GC pad, but the analog stick and c-stick having those notches inside their movement hole makes using them a little awkward to me. I love how the grips are shaped, though, it's like a more ergonomic Dual Shock. I just wish they'd put 4 top buttons on it instead of 2 big ones and a little tiny z-trigger. I don't even mind the d-pad (I played all the resident Evil games on GC using the pad, I find running around with the analog stick in those games impossible to steer).
I never play FPS games on consoles, I HAVE to have mouse/keyboard. Trying to aim with an analog stick is like trying to write with my left hand (I'm right handed).
The worst pads I've ever used are the regular Xbox pads (worst button placement ever, you need dislocated thumbs to use the white and black buttons well) and the N64 pad (analog stick would break at the drop of a hat, and the buttons were pretty poor).

[Shin Gallon]

Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy

Yeah, the dual shock 2 has analouge face buttons(Not really, like it has hard and softer), but they are pretty worthless to use in game. As there is only like 1-2 mm of space from your thumb to the face and in the heat of the game, you are not going to press the button right.

Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3 made excellent use of the pressure sensitive buttons. Quickly releasing the square button fired a shot, rapidly tapping it shot rapid-fire, and slowly letting off the button made Snake put his gun down without shooting. The shoulder buttons would move the camera further depending on how hard you were pressing them, as well.
To be honest, though, outside of those and racing games, most games on the PS2 don't even bother with the pressure sensitivity thing in the buttons.

[couchmonkey]

On analog "buttons", one of the crazy rumours for Revolution was controllers with squeezable handles...I think they were supposed to contain some kind of gel or maybe be made out of rubber, and you'd squeeze them harder or less to get your results.  That still seems like a fun way to get analog to me, although it's not super-intuitive.

Anyway, I think the answer to the question posed in this thread was "yes", because well, where else do you go once the graphics reach their limit?

[Smoke39]

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
Anyway, I think the answer to the question posed in this thread was "yes", because well, where else do you go once the graphics reach their limit?

There's much more to games than just graphics and a method of input.

[KDR_11k]

The PS2 controller is, overall, really good, with only the mucked-up d-pad and lack of 6 face buttons marring it.

And the "grips" causing cramps.

Quickly releasing the square button fired a shot, rapidly tapping it shot rapid-fire, and slowly letting off the button made Snake put his gun down without shooting.

I recall the fun I had with the pressure sensitive buttons in Star Ocean: Till The End Of Time where I was never sure how I should press it in order to register as fast or slow pressing. Using an analog input to represent multiple digital values is stupid.

[Rhoq]

I've never cared much for the PlayStation controller. I've always preferred Nintendo's designs the best. Hell, I didn't even mind the smaller-than-it-should-have-been D pad on the GameCube controller.

I also like Microsoft's XBox controller. It's set-up is just as comfortable as the GameCube.

[KnowsNothing]

I hope you mean their 360 controller because otherwise I'm going to have to hit you in the gob.  Even then, the 360 controller isn't as smooth and sexy as the GC's.

[couchmonkey]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smoke39

Quote
Originally posted by: couchmonkey
Anyway, I think the answer to the question posed in this thread was "yes", because well, where else do you go once the graphics reach their limit?

There's much more to games than just graphics and a method of input.

No, there isn't.


Hee hee hee hee, okay, yeah, there is, but in terms of new creating a new piece of hardware, these are the main things we see.  Nintendo has put a lot of thought into Wii and has come out with a smaller, more efficient system than the competitors.  That's really cool, and it may contribute to Wii's popularity, but in terms of what you're selling your console on, nowdays you've got power or input, I think the other selling points are secondary.  (WiiConnect and Wii Channels may prove that the OS is a third way to sell the system, but for now I also suspect they're secondary).

Now, games from the software perspective, sure there's lots of room for change there.  In fact, Ian loves to argue that Nintendo could do way more with software innovation and is being lazy by inventing new controllers instead.  He's right that there's still room for innovation in software, but changing the method of input not only speeds software innovation along, it encourages everyone to do it.   If Nintendo made a pledge to create only innovative games from now on but otherwise made Wii exactly like the competition, it would be a big uphill battle because third parties would still be putting the same crap-o ports on it.

[Galford]

KDR the best way to play SO3 is to take it out of your PS2 and smash it to pieces with a
hammer/brick/blunt object.

I hate that game...

[Smoke39]

couch: "power" can affect more than just graphics.  Someone brought that up recently in another thread, and mentioned Miyamoto wanting to have Mario ride a dinosaur, but technical limitations prevented it 'til the SNES.  AI and physics can also be quite CPU intensive as they become more robust and thorough.

I bring this all up primarily for the sake of completeness, though.  You can do some cute stuff with fancy physics, but so far I haven't seen it used in any really critical gameplay mecahnics.  And AI can be faked pretty well.  So, from a hardware perspective, I agree with you that mixing things up on the input side is a good way to encourage experimentation with game design.

[Spak-Spang]

This is an interesting question.

And I don't have a definative answer...here are few random thoughts.

1)Controllers are an extention of ourselves playing the game.  It is a device that basically allows us to interact with a virtual world.  In that sense controls need to constantly evolve until we can interact within the gaming world naturally and with the most intuitive form possible.  This doesn't mean Matrix-estic mind manipulation of the game world...it just means that we can effectively communicate and manipulate the game characters flawlessly with the desired mechanics by the game designers.

2)A standard should be formed.  This idea is simple.  The people that like computer games will play computer games period.  It is a market that will grow and fall, but basically is made up of the same general people.  In this logic, game controllers need to just evolve to a point where a happy standard could be met that the gaming public enjoys.  In this concept, the controller is like a canvas for a painter, and the artist crafts his thoughts and ideas into the canvas, then the gaming audience appreciates the canvas for its art and plays the game.  The standard for gaming may or may not have been perfectly formed yet.  But one thing to appreciate by this idea is that control has a limitation.  Much great art is achieved when you must work within your limitations to create something grand.  If you had perfect thought and brain controls, then the game may not truly be a game anymore but a simple thought excercise...so taking the limit out destories gaming completely.

3)I believe the answer is truthfully somewhere between these concepts, and actually probably closer to thought 2 instead of 1.  Computer gaming should always have some sort of control or limitation, and that limitation will be set by the control methods of the games, not the graphics or sounds.  Evolve the control too much and you create a completely new entity...that is not gaming as we know it today.  Some might think this is good...and it could very well be, but it is also comparing apples to oranges.  Consider this:  Arena Football.  Basically, in an attempt to evolve the game of Football a new sport was formed.  Some like it more...while others hate the concept completely.  But, the rules are changed of the game (or the controls of the game) and you don't have football now, but you have Arena football a different game that shares similarities to its brother.  If Football was completely replaced with the new sport it would be a very sad day.

I think that is what I love most about Nintendo and the Wii.  We a futuristic control mechanism for games combined and married with modern gaming and classic gaming.  It is like a trinity of gaming to use a religious metaphor which I probably shouldn't.  

[Rhoq]

Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
I hope you mean their 360 controller because otherwise I'm going to have to hit you in the gob.  Even then, the 360 controller isn't as smooth and sexy as the GC's.

I was actually talking about the "S" controller for the original XBox, however the 360 controller isn't much different. I like the XBox controller almost as much as the GameCube's.

[Spak-Spang]

Here is how I would rate controllers I have used:

Best to Worst:

Super Nintendo-Gamecube-Xbox 360-Nintendo 64-Genesis-Dreamcast-PS2-NES-Xbox (either)-original PS-Jaguar-Atari


So I think the simpliest and easiest to use was the Super Nintendo.  Gamecube, and Xbox 360 are close.  NES is low on the list because with just two buttons not alot could be done with the controller.  Dreamcast was great, but Bulky, and had some placement issues of analog stick and D-Pad.  The Xbox pads had horrible buttons, and a D-Pad that was uncomfortable to play with...also buttons on the analog sticks are a complete NO NO!!!  

[KDR_11k]

I disagree, the SNES controller was worse than the GC controller due to its general lack of an ergonomic shape and buttons that cannot be differentiated by touching. The "select" (Z) button is positioned better on the GC, too.

[Ian Sane]

I don't know how anyone could say with a straight face that the Cube controller is better than the SNES.  The SNES controller is ergonomic and functional.  I have never had to fight with the SNES controller.  With the Cube I had to because the d-pad was useless and the button layout was awkward for most non-exclusive games.  The SNES controller is Nintendo's peak as a controller developer.  Not only was it innovative and introduced new ideas but it was incredilby flexible for all game types.  Since Nintendo decided to put "camera buttons" on the N64, instead of having general purpose buttons assigned to camera functions for Super Mario 64 they have had tunnel vision regarding controller design.  They look at how they are going to use it and design it accordingly without any thought towards other types of games by other types of developers.  Maybe it was a fluke but the SNES controller seemed designed for both Nintendo and the numerous third party developers they had back then instead of just Nintendo.

The Cube control still wins point for comfort though.  It melted in your hand and for Nintendo games it was awesome.  It just sucked for stuff like Capcom vs. SNK 2.