Keeping In Control

In a way, I miss a stick with a red button next to it. Painfully simple and yet an iconic legend that defines a generation and era; when I think about the greatest controls ever conceived for a video game the black plastic Atari 2600 joystick stands as the Venus de Milo of an industry.

Even in an age when I waggle, tilt, squeeze and scroll my way in and around games with levels of precision that would have once seemed the stuff of science fiction, I vaguely miss the forced simplicity of eight directions and one action. It serves as a stark reminder that the most elegant solutions are often the simplest, a point never lost on me when I am ripped from my suspension of disbelief because I have to remember which combination of triggers and buttons allow me to bring up crucial radial menus and execute special moves.

We take for granted, I think, how much a controller and control scheme impacts our gaming experience, and even how much a poor implementation can ruin a game. I suppose the easy whipping boy here would be Lair, the poster child for bad controls for this generation, but I actually return to Saints Row 2 — a game I love on the Xbox 360 and had to put away on the PS3.

It seems odd to me that Sony could so botch the Sixaxis, because I count the PS2 Dual Shock among perhaps the top 5 control systems of all time. The highly refined controller that delivered games like God of War, Shadow of the Collosus and Final Fantasy X was as well implemented a controller as I had seen since perhaps the days of River Raid and Combat. It is equally remarkable how few concrete changes it took to convert that exemplar piece of engineering into an unmitigated disaster.

I can’t even fully pinpoint the flaws in the basic PS3 controller. It’s too light. The triggers seem off. The control dead zone seems more pronounced. That damnable sixaxis nonsense that is wedged annoyingly into games where it makes no sense. It’s a symphony of failure, each issue playing a small part into a greater whole, and the more I dwell on the Sixaxis the more I detest it.

This is particularly true when compared to the Xbox 360 controller, which frankly feels like everything that can go right. Hefty, solid, ergonomically satisfying with well placed and sensitive control sticks, this hunk of white plastic is now the gold standard by which everything else is defined. If someone were to peg me in the pigeonhole of Xbox fanboyism -- and I suppose they would not be the first -- the reason would have less to do with games and interface, and more to do with the controller. Given the choice between playing Cyber-Yeti Maching Gun Attack 3 on the PS3 or 360, my choice would be automatic.

Less elegant, more complex and infinitely more technologically advanced than that classic Atari joystick, the Xbox controller disappears in my hand in the exact same way. Where the 360 controls are an extension of my will, the Sixaxis is a piece of machinery in my hand that I must manage. For that matter, so is the Wiimote.

Now, shall we truly enter the realms of sacrilege, because as a writer in the realm of games it is naturally assumed that I worship at the feet of Nintendo and their unimpeachable genius creating the magnificent Wii. I do not.

While the Wiimote certainly succeeds in creating a natural mechanism for bowling with tiny feetless blobs of pseudo-personality and perhaps golf, the reinvention of the wheel seems to have left most 3rd party developers flummoxed and expected to insert unnatural solutions to problems that didn’t exist. Game after Wii game demands strange calisthenics that do nothing to enhance my enjoyment of the system and does everything to make me look like an uncoordinated dolt.

If I were to praise Nintendo for anything it’s the DS, which fundamentally offers the same kind of interactive experience but with far more on-screen precision. Once again, given the choice between playing most 3rd party games on any system, I choose the Xbox not because Microsoft brain engineers have inserted post-hypnotic suggestions in my psyche as I sleep, but because the controller has the least barriers to entry for in-game immersion.

Except, of course, for my first and true love — the mouse and keyboard combo. Ask me to explain why the most complex and least immersive of all the control schemes devised by man is superior, go ahead I dare you. I’m not sure I can fully explain it myself, except to say that the mouse is the perfect blend between the ideas explored in the joystiq and the Wiimote. It offers the smooth and natural motions of the typical controller with a direct interactivity and speed that those mechanisms can not recreate. With it, I can act quickly, and more importantly I can error correct quickly. It accelerates the game while making it more precise, and that is something that no controller to my mind has ever accomplished.

So, can I deem the mouse and keyboard combo the pinnacle of games control and just get it over with? No, of course not. I suspect the deeper truth of the matter is achingly familiar and despite all evidence to the contrary, the real issue is not with machine but design. Killzone 2 isn’t weakened because of the controller, but because the developers didn’t overcome the obstacles posed by the controller and adapt the game to meet the technology. Bioshock on the 360 counts among the few FPS games I played and finished on a console because the game was so well tuned to the interface that I was able to get past my natural bias.

I don’t know for sure how much attention is paid the controls in the development and testing phase of software design, but I’m not sure it's possible to invest too much time or resources. There are few investments that can pay higher quality dividends for a game than making sure that the game plays as though gamers are directly imparting their will rather than fumbling with a piece of molded plastic.

Though not sexy to talk about, and distinctly lacking in awesome buzzwords, I have increasingly come around to thinking about how purely and fundamentally a game's controls affects the experience of playing. While I am not above some fundamental bias in the plastic that feels most natural in my hand, the final responsibility lies not with the buttons and stick, but how the developers use them.

Comments

I wholeheartedly agree with you regarding the six-axis crap and the 360 controller. However, there is one area where the DualShock controller truly trumps the 360 controller, and that is the huge pile of ass that is the directional pad on the 360 one. When it comes to Mega Man 9 or Street Fighter 4 (without a joystick obviously), the PS3 controller spanks the hell out of the 360 controller as far as my hands are concerned.

DorkmasterFlek wrote:

I wholeheartedly agree with you regarding the six-axis crap and the 360 controller. However, there is one area where the DualShock controller truly trumps the 360 controller, and that is the huge pile of ass that is the directional pad on the 360 one. When it comes to Mega Man 9 or Street Fighter 4 (without a joystick obviously), the PS3 controller spanks the hell out of the 360 controller as far as my hands are concerned.

Strange... I agree that the D-Pad sucks, but for fighting games, I prefer the thumb-stick.

Trying Hadouken's with a D-Pad usually results in skinless thumbs. And forget doing a full 360º on that!

Good stuff Elysium!

I thought the Dual Shock was a great controller.. until I got an Xbox 360 and realized that all other controllers have failed miserably compared to the 360's wireless controller. Microsoft rarely gets anything right the first or second time around.. but usually their 3rd try they do.

Where the original Xbox controller was just way to large and full of fail.. the Xbox S controller was pretty good.. and by the time they got to the 360 they had achieved "perfection"

And I'm 100% with you on the Wii..and with you again on the Mouse/Keyboard. For games where it makes sense its the best.. but increasingly I find myself using the 360 controller on my PC to play certain games.. it just feels "right"

in fairness this was the worst controller ever made

http://classicgames.about.com/od/con...

the article wrote:

I can’t even fully pinpoint the flaws in the basic PS3 controller. It’s too light. The triggers seem off. The control dead zone seems more pronounced. That damnable sixaxis nonsense that is wedged annoyingly into games where it makes no sense. It’s a symphony of failure, each issue playing a small part into a greater whole, and the more I dwell on the Sixaxis the more I detest it.

Well, to be fair, a lot of the frustration with Sixaxis isn't a question of ergonomics as much as it is implementation; it has taken developers over two years to figure out a decent way to integrate motion sensitivity (Flower), and there is a long list of failures left in the wake of that discovery.

That being said, I do share your bafflement with the Sixaxis and even, to a lesser extent, the DualShock 3. The DS3 helps by adding some much-needed heft to the controller, but the buttons still feel a little unresponsive somehow - all of them (and the trigger buttons in particular) always feel kind of mushy to me and the analog sticks don't seem to be as tightly wound or centered as those on the DualShock 2.

I've been thinking a lot lately about how game controllers affect the gaming experience. That is, can your appreciation of a game change depending on the controller you use to interact with it? There is, of course, the obvious example of playing a shooter with analog sticks as opposed to playing it with a keyboard and mouse, but I'm wondering to what extent changing even console controllers can affect the experience beyond the relative comfort levels of the different controllers.

When I've spoken with people about The Legend of Zelda: The Ocarina of Time, people who are underwhelmed by it tend to have played it on a GameCube or Wii. Owning the game on all three of the systems on which its been released, I have to admit that it's best played on the Nintendo 64 because the gameplay is so finely tuned to that controller in a lot of subtle ways, and I say this as someone who prefers the GameCube controller to just about anything else. The relationship between the game's actions, particularly when playing the ocarina, and the Nintendo 64 controller's A, B, and C buttons is very natural; playing the ocarina with the game's original controller can at times feel like playing an instrument, while playing the same song with a GameCube controller feels disconnected and arbitrary. The game itself hasn't changed, but the relationship between the controller and the game has changed.

Great article. The 360 controller is the best controller around for consoles and would be undefeatable if it just used the SNES D-pad so that fighting and classic games were more manageable. I was always terrible at fighting games with a joystick but with the SNES D-pad I shined.

Of course, the keyboard/mouse combination of PC gaming is the pinnacle of precision.. but it's got tough competition when you have the comfort of both your 360 controller and the couch tempting you away from the computer.

I feel much the same Elysium does.

Joystick was the pinnacle of simplicity. I liked the D-pad setup for the NES/Sega Master/Gameboy-era.

I am pretty much a button masher with any Sony controller. I had an N64, but to me, the controller was totally cumbersome... XBox and 360 controllers I love.

Right now I am struggling with the Wii controllers. I just got a Wii, and it's kinda trying to play a game. The flow is so different to I (and all of us) are used to...

I gotta say though for complex games, nothing comes close to mouse and keyboard.

I feel much the same Elysium does.

Joystick was the pinnacle of simplicity. I liked the D-pad setup for the NES/Sega Master/Gameboy-era.

I am pretty much a button masher with any Sony controller. I had an N64, but to me, the controller was totally cumbersome... XBox and 360 controllers I love.

Right now I am struggling with the Wii controllers. I just got a Wii, and it's kinda trying to play a game. The flow is so different to I (and all of us) are used to...

I gotta say though for complex games, nothing comes close to mouse and keyboard.

You went an interesting direction with this article. When you started with the 2600's simple stick, I thought of my father, who won't try any game because of the frightening complexity of any post-NES controller.

Instead, you assumed familiarity with the existing "grammar" of controllers and talked about ergonomics and responsiveness. I think you reflect the thoughts of most gamers; I know I'm in the small minority that I prefer the Sixaxis to the 360 controller. (This might have to do with my preference for RPGs to shooters...?)

I especially like your comments on the Wii. Although lowering barriers for people like my father by making control schemes more intuitive to non-gamers, the lack of precision is frustrating to players like us.

Also, I'm glad adam.greenbrier mentioned the N64 controller. Although I didn't like the N64 hardware and the library was thin, the controller is my favorite in console history and the handful of games that utilized it well were a joy to play. I think I could say the same about the GameCube, which had my second favorite controller; somewhat less ergonomic, but with a daring button arrangement that begged developers to design around it.

As iconic as it is, I was never fond of the short, skinny handle and the rubbery creakiness of the original atari controllers. As little as my child-hands were, they felt all together too insubstantial, too light. Not quite connected. My dad, in his enthusiasm for this new trend in consoles, immediately found something lacking in its experience and sought out a more flexible and responsive after market controller in Wilco's Command Control Joystick.

It's base-heavy. Solid in the hand, well balanced, and brightly colored. The Red Button, just like the ones in the arcade, clicked solidly if you chose to use it. I didn't very much. Being a lefty, I was immediately drawn to the little white button on the top of the joystick. Great for Phoenix or River Raid. Small children are drawn to small things in large contexts, so I think my love of shooters began with this simple detail. The rapid-fire seemed pretty excellent.

This controller set a standard for me in games that many others failed to live up to, and I agree that the 360 controller nailed it in this respect. I remember being disappointed with the NES, the SNES, and only slightly appreciative of the direction the Sega Genesis went with it's wider, Batwing-shaped controllers. The N64 or the Dreamcast were almost there, but there was something still clumsy there in the balance that the 360 controllers improved upon.

I agree that the natural feel of the controls and their inherent responsiveness in the hand helps maintain the continuity between the self and game content. It's true that if you play with anything long enough, you will adapt accordingly. However, I think if the control system is done well, this adaptation may happen more quickly and seamlessly. I think part of what makes the mouse and keyboard so engaging for many of us was our relative familiarity with the relationship between those two things and the monitor before the gaming process. It just feels natural.

Amoebic wrote:

I think part of what makes the mouse and keyboard so engaging for many of us was our relative familiarity with the relationship between those two things and the monitor before the gaming process. It just feels natural.

Although I lose gamer cred every time I say it, in general, I don't like playing game's with a mouse and keyboard. I enjoy the precision of the mouse, but I find the overall setup to be clumsy and cumbersome. It is so clearly a system that was intended for other purposes that has been adapted to gaming; it feels completely unnatural to me.

adam.greenbrier wrote:

Although I lose gamer cred every time I say it, in general, I don't like playing game's with a mouse and keyboard. I enjoy the precision of the mouse, but I find the overall setup to be clumsy and cumbersome. It is so clearly a system that was intended for other purposes that has been adapted to gaming.

Agreed. One of the biggest problems I have playing TF2 (or all shooters/mmo's I've ever tried) is left-hand migration. I have a bad habit of changing weapons when trying to move forward, calling for a medic when trying to strafe, etc. The nice thing about controllers is that if your hands are on it, they're likely in the correct position by default.

Great article. I agree entirely regarding the 360 controller; it has been the deciding issue in just about every multiplatform game for me, since I rarely play online.

I was extremely disappointed when I saw my first PS3 with it's dated controller. I was never that big a fan of it, but one of the keys to a system launch for me is getting to know a new controller, and this just felt like the same thing I had been using for years, except far too light, and with the wire chopped off.

Please, for the love of god, spell Colossus with 3 esses and one el. It makes me flashback to marking GCSE students' essays to see it any other way! I'll stop being spelling monitor now.

I'm a fan of the XBox360 controller, but it is hell on my wrists. I wish that it was set up symmetrically, with two buttons on each side rather than the 4-button diamond on the right. This would reduce stress on the right thumb, which currently has too much to do in many games.

Also, why don't consoles come with a keyboard/mouse option or even better, the gamepad /mouse option? I would really like to be able to type in text without using those annoying on-screen keyboards, and some games are just better with the precision of a mouse.

The main problem with the mouse is that it is even worse for my wrists than the XBox360 controller, just in different ways.

Man, I bet that if they built telepathic controllers, I would get RSI in my brain.

beeporama wrote:

I know I'm in the small minority that I prefer the Sixaxis to the 360 controller.

I'm with you. I LIKE the smallness and lightness of the Sixaxis. The 360 controller is just way too bulky for me... it feels like I'm playing with a brick. It does have better analog sticks, though. Of course, nothing beats the keyboard and mouse for me, especially shooters.

I've never owned an Xbox or a 360. I've always been mainly a PC gamer and I now own a Wii. For a long time I used a Logitech controller that was a clone of the PS2 controller. I recently picked up a 360 controller for my PC and I'm amazed. The feel of this controller beats everything I've ever played with.

One thing I would be forced to admit is that Microsoft has always done a good job on controllers. The PC controllers they made in the late 90s and early 00s was very good. I still have a gamepad and a couple joysticks that I still use. The sidewinder series of joysticks were and still are some of the best I think.

It's amusing that you begin your article by comparing the Atari 2600 controller to one of our greatest works of art and end by saying that you are "increasingly coming around" to the importance of a game's control scheme. It's been said that if you got your start with the Intellivision and its infinitely superior "direction disc" alternative to the joystick, not to mention all the other options provided by the keypad, then you likely have a much greater appreciation for control schemes. The NES and Genesis controllers were a step back from this little marvel--I think it was the N64 and its thumbstick that finally moved things forward from where Intellivision had started.

IMAGE(http://obviousdiversion.com/images/intellivision-controller.jpg)

Couldn't agree more though about both the quality of the 360 controller and the superiority of the mouse/keyboard.

Funny, my recollection of the Intellivision controller was that it was clumsy and imprecise. There were very few games on the Intellivision and Atari 2600, so it is difficult to compare the two "apples-to-apples" as it were, but I do think I preferred the simpler to use Atari controller, even though those damn joysticks seem to break constantly.

I'm still a fan of the Dual-Shock 2 and it breaks my heart that Sony has screwed up its latest incarnation.

I do like the current X-Box controller. I was never a fan of the S-Controller because it went back too small. The original X-Box controller was great for me because I have long skinny fingers. It was the first time I didn't feel like my hands were cramping and it was essential for racing games despite the lack of ergonomics for the white and black buttons. The 360 controller is a definite improvement and I feel like the difference between it and the S-controller are about as pronounced as the original Playstation controller and the original Dual Shock.

I'm not going to try to dredge the well of distaste I hold for the Sixaxis. Suffice it to say I agree with you. But not just because of bad game implementation or it's cheap-ass build. Ergonomically, that thing is a nightmare. I don't know how you guys stand it. I wear Men's Large gloves and a size 10 ring, so our hands aren't that different. I can hardly deal with it long enough to play a demo in the store.

The Wiimote is also awful for this. The whole gang down at the assisted living complex by my house has a hard time with it. Keeping your wrist bent like that for long periods is hard on arthritic hands, as is the way you have to hold it steady in space for many of the games. That's part of why WiiSports does so well with this crowd; not only is a triumph of immersion, but the motions don't require you to stay in that pose all the time. MarioKart Wii didn't go over well with this crowd because of it until we got out the Gamecube controllers (two edged sword, there, though). If they made a 'Mote with a bend in it like Darth Tyranus' light sabre they'd make a killing.

The Dualshock III has the same dimensional problems as the DSII, but at least it has some weight and substance to it. That does help me. I can last about an hour with it comfortably and with reasonable assurance that the problems I'm having with the game are caused by my suckage rather than an outgrowth of the issues I have. It might not be as much help to someone else, though.

The Xbox360 controller does work very well. It's a little small, but I don't run into problems with it. Or let's just say other things limit my time with it before my hands do. I do miss The Duke, though. That thing was just about perfect for me.

Keyboard and mouse are the way to go for some games. I've considered trying one of those dedicated gaming keyboards, but I haven't taken the plunge yet. Nothing's really come out the last year or so that makes me want to marry myself to the PC that much. We'll see what some of the stuff coming down the pike like Starcraft II does. But I miss my joystick. Or I should say, I miss NEEDING my joystick. I have a sweet Sidewinder II from back in the day, but I can't find the driver disks for it.

As gamers age, it's going to become more and more of an issue. Not all solutions will work for all people, because everyone's issues will be different. Someone who's got arthritis will need different accomodations than someone with carpal tunnel. And someone with Parkinson's will need others.

I wonder if someone's going to think about this for the next versions of the console hardware, or if we're going to end up trying for a bunch of plastic holders a la the Wiimote?

Man, I loved the Intellivision but that controller was bunk. That damn disc just wracked my thumbs.

In spite of the poor D-Pad, I think the 360 wireless is the best controller ever made. It just melts in my hand and turns invisible when I'm using it.

I swear, if someone would just make a converter-dongle that would let me use a 360 controller on PS3, I'd have Sony's new console in my home today. I think there actually is a device out there that does it, but from what I understand it costs over $100 and that's just crazy, imo.

EDIT:

article wrote:

While the Wiimote certainly succeeds in creating a natural mechanism for bowling with tiny feetless blobs of pseudo-personality and perhaps golf, the reinvention of the wheel seems to have left most 3rd party developers flummoxed and expected to insert unnatural solutions to problems that didn’t exist. Game after Wii game demands strange calisthenics that do nothing to enhance my enjoyment of the system and does everything to make me look like an uncoordinated dolt.

This part really struck me. Maybe Nintendo can tighten things up with the WiiMote Plus attachment, but as it stands I'm simply not a fan of Wii's controls. They're awkward and imprecise, imo. On top of that, I do not enjoy waving them around when gaming. Maybe I'm just too set in my ways or something, but I don't consider "waggle" motions fun at all.

The thing that really frightens me is that if (and when) MS and Sony try to ape Nintendo's success next gen, they will do away with controllers altogether in favor of motion controls. Yuck.

It would be a tragic loss to see MS throw out the 360 controller design in favor of WiiMote-like controls next gen.

Aaron D. wrote:

The thing that really frightens me is that if (and when) MS and Sony try to ape Nintendo's success next gen, they will do away with controllers altogether in favor of motion controls. Yuck.

It would be a tragic loss to see MS throw out the 360 controller design in favor of WiiMote-like controls next gen.

These are my fears as well. I don't need waggle in my next Xbox. Sony tried with the Sixaxis and look how everyone responded. Developers don't really use it effectively and gamers don't really want/need it. Keep what works Microsoft! (please?)

For games that require the use of a d-pad, I like the Sony controllers. But, the triggers on the PS3 are crap. Not sure why they did that.

The Xbox controllers are OK but a bit heavy and large and the d-pad is crap. I like the size of the PS2/3 controllers more, but I have smallish hands.

I actually find it hard to play (say) HL2 with the keyboard/mouse now. Aiming is easier, but movement through the environment is harder. Also, the dual sticks give you an ability to smoothly move and turn at the same time which the mouse/keyboard does not.

Aaron D. wrote:

Man, I loved the Intellivision but that controller was bunk. That damn disc just wracked my thumbs.

The Intellivision was my first gaming console, and I loved it was well. And for me it wasn't the disc but the tiny side buttons that destroyed my fingers.

Yeah, those side buttons were pretty bad. Too shallow, required too much force to press.

I prefer to play everything with Rock Band drums. Nothing beats drumming my way through Metal Slug 3.

Where I think Nintendo got it very right is with the pointer. I still think motion control can be fun and good if implemented properly (Wario Ware is basically perfect), but it's limited in its uses, whereas the pointer is totally awesome all over the place.

MechaSlinky wrote:

I prefer to play everything with Rock Band drums. Nothing beats drumming my way through Metal Slug 3.

Where I think Nintendo got it very right is with the pointer. I still think motion control can be fun and good if implemented properly (Wario Ware is basically perfect), but it's limited in its uses, whereas the pointer is totally awesome all over the place.

Maybe I need to spend more quality alone time with the wii controllers (I don't own one, myself, but there's one in rotation at family get-togethers). The separation of the left and right hand with two totally separate control types messes with my sense of rightness in the world. I feel like grandma learning how to use a TV remote for the first time. The wii makes me feel old. I find the pointer to be spastic and a little frustrating, like trying to walk on a foot that's fallen asleep.

Anyone else out there play with their wii controllers touching each-other?
I'd like to give a nod to Nintendo, though, for taking into consideration the backwards compatibility with old N64 controllers.

Even if it is less responsive, it seems highly - no, EXTREMELY incongruous to say that the DualShock 2 was amazing and the DualShock 3 is terrible. They're still basically the same controller.

Of course, I've held that the PS controller has been terrible since the launch of the PSX. I was looking forward to trying the stupid-looking boomerangs - after all, they could hardly have felt worse!

If they just would have made the second analog stick a proper one instead of that stupid nub, my vote would be for the Gamecube controller, but as it stands I agree with the crowd - 360 is the clear winner. I hope they don't even bother making new controllers for the next one.

notomtolose wrote:

Even if it is less responsive, it seems highly - no, EXTREMELY incongruous to say that the DualShock 2 was amazing and the DualShock 3 is terrible. They're still basically the same controller.

Actually, they're quite different in materials, and it matters a lot. Particularly if you're playing FPS that require precision and RPG's that require staying power over a hundred hours of play.

And I think most of us are saying that the DualShock II was pretty good, the Sixaxis sucks so hard it unbalances the air conditioning, and the DualShock III is a pretty strong step back in the right direction but it still has it's quirks.

Its funny that people complain that the sixaxis is too light because I feel that the 360 controller is like holding a lead weight. I don't disagree that the sixaxis is a light controller but I prefer that over something that weighs as much as the 360 controller. The dualshock 3 is a decent weight.

As for the controls, I do find myself accidentally hitting the triggers and that can be maddening. I haven't had that problem with the 360 yet (though I only got it in January). For the feel, either one feels ok for me. Personally I hate controllers when playing FPS games but for other types like little big planet, the sixaxis works well.

I have saints row for PS3 and I guess the 30 hours I put into GTA IV makes this game feel comfortable with the PS3 controller. Never tried it on the 360 so I can't compare.