[Cushman]

Okay, well, that's kind of the point. Why are you holding a device designed to fit the human hand a particular way in a different way to get around its design limitations while claiming it's superior to another device designed without those limitations? The PHP hammer springs to mind.

[slantyyz]

It's not a design limitation. Gamepads are designed to handle multiple use cases, not just one. That's why the analog joystick works as a substitute for the D-pad for many games.

To presume that there's only one way to hold it is just narrow thinking.

Hell, this guy (Brolylegs) was a top bracket player in Street Fighter in EVO and he uses his face on a gamepad to play a game that requires directional control and six buttons to play properly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Va2QO-qtb_Q

--edit--

>> claiming it's superior to another device designed without those limitations? The PHP hammer springs to mind.

So "hey, I can use a device designed for text entry as a game controller" isn't like a PHP hammer?

[Cushman]

> It's not a design limitation.

Of course it is. The ergonomics of controller design are profoundly based on gripping the device with both palms while pushing buttons with the thumbs. The buttons are too small and too close together to rest several fingers on, while the button groups are spaced too close together to fit both hands over. There are buttons on either side of the device, and big paddle-shaped appendages that vibrate.

Is it the only way it's physically possible to hold it? No, and the very fact that competitive players need to hold it in a way it wasn't designed for indicates the fact that the design is limiting.

> Hell, this guy (Brolylegs) was a top bracket player in Street Fighter in EVO and he uses his face on a gamepad to play a game that requires directional control and six buttons to play properly.

Hey, don't get me wrong, consoles are great for accessibility. The same design tradeoffs that make them approachable and comfortable to gamers in general mean it's relatively easy to use assistive devices without sacrificing too much performance.

By contrast, the keyboard-mouse setup which is designed to wring as much speed and accuracy as possible out of the human hands is much less accessible.

> So "hey, I can use a device designed for text entry as a game controller" isn't like a PHP hammer?

It might be if there were something better. We're in the second decade of gaming keyboard design, but it's pretty hard to beat having a couple of buttons under every finger. The keyboard was designed, back in the day, to let you push a large number of different buttons quasi-arbitrarily and very, very quickly. It's hardly random that they work well for video games.

But, again, don't get me wrong. You don't always want to play a really serious video game. Most people never do. Consoles were designed this way on purpose, because most people just want to hang out on the couch and have a good time. There's nothing wrong with that at all.

[slantyyz]

>> Of course it is. The ergonomics of controller design are profoundly based on gripping the device with both palms while pushing buttons with the thumbs.

Let's agree to disagree on that then. The Playstation 1 controller introduced the exaggerated grip design language. Look at the "Classic" controller for the Wii, which looks similar to the Super Nintendo controller. Rounded but no appendages.

The original PS1 controller design has a flat backside that let people who were used to holding the old-style controllers (like me) to continue doing so. Believe me, the piano style of hitting the action buttons on a game controller predates the PS1. I basically hold PS1 controllers the same way I held Genesis/Super Nintendo/Saturn controllers.

>> The buttons are too small and too close together to rest several fingers on, while the button groups are spaced too close together to fit both hands over.

I have no problem playing piano style on any console controller of Japanese origin (that of course, excludes Microsoft's controllers).

>> We're in the second decade of gaming keyboard design

Again, the keyboard is a text entry tool that has been adopted by gamers. At its core, yes, it's a board covered in buttons. But, it's still designed for text entry.

That is a PHP hammer (devil's advocate hat on), especially if you're using it to play Tony Hawk, a game originally designed for a console controller.

>> It might be if there were something better.

See links below:

http://www.hitboxarcade.com/

http://shoryuken.com/2012/07/03/rts-x-fighters-check-out-the...

[Cushman]

> Let's agree to disagree on that then.

Absolutely. We obviously have very different backgrounds, and I certainly don't want to seem like I'm telling anyone the right way to have fun :) If you'll indulge me for just one more point on keyboards, though:

> http://shoryuken.com/2012/07/03/rts-x-fighters-check-out-the...

Is this controller as effective as a good mechanical keyboard and mouse? Hell no, but that wasn’t the point!

That's an art project, not a gaming peripheral. A few companies do make more game-focused devices (https://www.google.com/search?q=gaming+keypad&tbm=isch), but they haven't seen wide adoption, partially because they look a bit silly, but mainly because one grid of programmable keyswitches is much like another. They just haven't conferred the kind of reliable advantage that a good mouse, or even a 120hz monitor do.

[slantyyz]

Yeah that second link was more illustrative of the idea than a proven market point. The hitbox is real and used by high level players though.

--edit-- On a side note, however, it's seems that you're coming more from a PC gaming perspective than an arcade/console perspective, which is probably the root of our ideological divide on the controllers.