My brief review of the Splitfish FragFX

[DanTMWTMP]

This will be a relatively brief review.

After the really promising IGN review, and the not-so-promising comments from users who said it sucked, I refrained from buying it.

But curiosity and my extreme frustration of the PS3 controller got the best of me.
btw, PS3 controller SUCKS. It was great for PS1 and PS2, but this generation, after using GC controller, and the awesome 360 controller (IMO the best conventional console controller ever made in the history of mankind), I really hate the ps3 controller.

Anyways, I bought the Splitfish FragFX from Fry's. I figured that if i didn't like it, I'd just return it.

I'm glad I bought it. Yes, you heard that right.

The only game that this thing absolutely sucks at is Resistance. It's absolutely unplayable in that game. It's ok in Darkness demo, but really wierd. I couldn't really get used to it, but it was better than Resistance. Again: Don't use the Splitfish on Resistance. It sucks.

Once I used it in Warhawk, I nearly cried in ecstacy. It worked REALLY well. Of course it's not 100% like a mouse, but you can turn on a dime, and blast that bastard who's behind you or who's 90+ degrees away from you.

As a person who has played too much FPS' on the computer since the good ol' wolfenstien 3d, quake, original unreal days... it was really natural. It only took like an hour to get fully used to it.

I fired up CoD4 with it, and I jizzed all over the place. Never have I dreamed that I can play an fps naturally in front of my 40 inch 1080p sammy lcdtv. It works really really well in CoD4. Not 100%, but pretty damn friggin close. After playing it for awhile, I almost can't tell a difference anymore (Except I do miss using my Logitech G5..hehehe). Too bad the FragFx mouse itself is too small and too lightweight for my taste.

Pros:
-Good with CoD4 and Warhawk.

-Mouse FPS'ers will feel at home with this for sure (CoD4, Warhawk at least).

-Man, who knew playing a thumbstick/joystick as a means to move around is superior to the legendary WASD??

well..that's the only pro's.. I have a larger list of cons.

Cons:
-Build quality sucks

-The mouse is too small for my hands.

-The buttons briefly gets mapped to other buttons (there's different modes on the FragFX, so every button has a preset map depending on which mode you put it on) on-the-fly w/o you doing anything..this is really bothersome since whenever I shoot in CoD4, it keeps on switching weapons when i press the fire (R1) button. It's really annoying.

-The button sensitivity blows. You have to press super hard on some of the buttons in order for them to work. However, all the buttons are pressure sensitive/analog. There will be a new firmware update coming out that will fix this and allow you to set the sensitivity of these buttons.

-Build quality really sucks.

-I hate the position of the D-Pad.

-Build quality is lacking...

-Priced too high.

-It really sucks in Resistance.

-a bit complicated to switch between the different modes the fragfx offers.

---
K so there you have it. For me who was really desperate for something other than that horrible PS3 controller (worse controller of this generation of consoles period. Absolutely horrid in FPS games. 360 controller is a absolute joy to play on even in Halo3).

Bottom line:hmm...so all of you, DO NOT BUY this controller. Build quality sucks, and I want to keep my perceived advantage over other controller users when I play CoD4 online...don't want people using the FragFx against me.


EDIT: http://www.splitfish.com/
woot!! the new 2.20 firmware is OUT!! YES!!! I hope it fixes a bunch of things I was worried about like build quality haha jk. Oh, and it's WinXP only

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: DanTMWTMP

But curiosity and my extreme frustration of the PS3 controller got the best of me.
btw, PS3 controller SUCKS. It was great for PS1 and PS2, but this generation, after using GC controller, and the awesome 360 controller (IMO the best conventional console controller ever made in the history of mankind).

Here here! I really can't figure out why anyone prefers the Dualshock/Sixaxis other than they've gotten used to it. It's really a poor design. The only advantage it has over the 360 controller is that the L1/R1 buttons are better than LB/RB IMO. I've always been a fan of the GC controller too, although it has a few flaws. I love the button placement though.

-Man, who knew playing a thumbstick/joystick as a means to move around is superior to the legendary WASD??

Console gamers.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: mugs
Here here! I really can't figure out why anyone prefers the Dualshock/Sixaxis other than they've gotten used to it. It's really a poor design. The only advantage it has over the 360 controller is that the L1/R1 buttons are better than LB/RB IMO. I've always been a fan of the GC controller too, although it has a few flaws. I love the button placement though.

I actually think people make too big of a deal about the stick placement on the PS3 controllers. I DO think they are too loose, but complaints about the placement? Overblown. Here's why....

Think about it logically. Does anyone complain about the placement of the right analog sticks? Nope. And that's arguably the most important one in FPS games since it's the one responsible for turning and aiming unless you're playing with a southpaw set-up. And where is the right analog stick placed on all conventional controllers? Yup, they all mirror the PS3's left stick... the one lots of people like to complain about. But guess what? You're hands are mirrors of each other too. Given that, it's quite simply impossible for their to be some sort of disadvantage due to the physical location of the left analog stick on the PS controllers without the same disadvantage being in place for all right analog sticks on all the current conventional controllers.... the 360's controller included. Yet no one ever complains about the placement of the right analog sticks on any of the controllers.

So, IMO, complaints about the sticks being too loose or the fact that they are convex instead of concave are perfectly valid, but complaints about the placement simply hold no water beyond a personal preference. There is no logical way for there to be any true disadvantage without the same disadvantage existing on right analog sticks. And since no one ever complains about those then... well... too late to make that argument.

Just throwing that out there

 

[Ackmed]

I have really considered a Frag FX. But I want the wireless version. There are some FPS on the PS3 I want to try, but refuse to use a gamepad for a FPS game. Ive got Darkness, and Resistance, but havnt played due having to use the gamepad. Ive also got Warhawk, which would be great with a mouse. I cant find what their firmware fixed on their site.. its not laid out that well.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: mugs
Here here! I really can't figure out why anyone prefers the Dualshock/Sixaxis other than they've gotten used to it. It's really a poor design. The only advantage it has over the 360 controller is that the L1/R1 buttons are better than LB/RB IMO. I've always been a fan of the GC controller too, although it has a few flaws. I love the button placement though.

I actually think people make too big of a deal about the stick placement on the PS3 controllers. I DO think they are too loose, but complaints about the placement? Overblown. Here's why....

Think about it logically. Does anyone complain about the placement of the right analog sticks? Nope. And that's arguably the most important one in FPS games since it's the one responsible for turning and aiming unless you're playing with a southpaw set-up. And where is the right analog stick placed on all conventional controllers? Yup, they all mirror the PS3's left stick... the one lots of people like to complain about. But guess what? You're hands are mirrors of each other too. Given that, it's quite simply impossible for their to be some sort of disadvantage due to the physical location of the left analog stick on the PS controllers without the same disadvantage being in place for all right analog sticks on all the current conventional controllers.... the 360's controller included. Yet no one ever complains about the placement of the right analog sticks on any of the controllers.

So, IMO, complaints about the sticks being too loose or the fact that they are convex instead of concave are perfectly valid, but complaints about the placement simply hold no water beyond a personal preference. There is no logical way for there to be any true disadvantage without the same disadvantage existing on right analog sticks. And since no one ever complains about those then... well... too late to make that argument.

Just throwing that out there

the fact that I can bump my thumbs together while using the PS3 controller is what pisses me off just as much as it's looseness and convex'ness.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: DanTMWTMP

But curiosity and my extreme frustration of the PS3 controller got the best of me.
btw, PS3 controller SUCKS. It was great for PS1 and PS2, but this generation, after using GC controller, and the awesome 360 controller (IMO the best conventional console controller ever made in the history of mankind).

Here here! I really can't figure out why anyone prefers the Dualshock/Sixaxis other than they've gotten used to it. It's really a poor design. The only advantage it has over the 360 controller is that the L1/R1 buttons are better than LB/RB IMO. I've always been a fan of the GC controller too, although it has a few flaws. I love the button placement though.

yep, I completely prefer the 360 controller, although keyboard and mouse own imho. But, one other thing the current SixAxis/DualShock3 has over the 360 controller, is more movement of the joysticks. The joysticks on the 360 controller suck hardcore, too limited in range of movement compared to the PS3 controller. Most 360 people don't notice until they have played with a PS3 controller for awhile though.
But other than that, it's the fanboys who prevent any change to the playstation controller. They are cry foul when Sony presents a concept controller that looks different. Who knows, maybe that boomerang controller was more comfortable? Me, I welcomed the idea because when they presented that, I was like "sweet, a fresh idea. i'm sick of the dualshock design, give me change!". fanboys were like "we have in our minds that no other controller is better. and we will not accept a different controller!"
reading controller discussions and taking part in them on the us.playstation.com forums is rather entertaining, to see how thickheaded and immature so many people there are (and yes, it can be worse than the immaturity of ATOT ). everyone now and then a few individuals agree with my comments on the controller there, but most seem to ignore my blasphemous words.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: mugs
Here here! I really can't figure out why anyone prefers the Dualshock/Sixaxis other than they've gotten used to it. It's really a poor design. The only advantage it has over the 360 controller is that the L1/R1 buttons are better than LB/RB IMO. I've always been a fan of the GC controller too, although it has a few flaws. I love the button placement though.

I actually think people make too big of a deal about the stick placement on the PS3 controllers. I DO think they are too loose, but complaints about the placement? Overblown. Here's why....

Think about it logically. Does anyone complain about the placement of the right analog sticks? Nope. And that's arguably the most important one in FPS games since it's the one responsible for turning and aiming unless you're playing with a southpaw set-up. And where is the right analog stick placed on all conventional controllers? Yup, they all mirror the PS3's left stick... the one lots of people like to complain about. But guess what? You're hands are mirrors of each other too. Given that, it's quite simply impossible for their to be some sort of disadvantage due to the physical location of the left analog stick on the PS controllers without the same disadvantage being in place for all right analog sticks on all the current conventional controllers.... the 360's controller included. Yet no one ever complains about the placement of the right analog sticks on any of the controllers.

So, IMO, complaints about the sticks being too loose or the fact that they are convex instead of concave are perfectly valid, but complaints about the placement simply hold no water beyond a personal preference. There is no logical way for there to be any true disadvantage without the same disadvantage existing on right analog sticks. And since no one ever complains about those then... well... too late to make that argument.

Just throwing that out there

I don't think the placement of the right stick is ideal either, but you have to compromise because the buttons are pretty important too. The d-pad is rarely important. For a FPS, I think a controller like this would be better: http://www.amazon.com/GAMESTER...ref=cm_cr_pr_mention_t

Just because I don't complain about the right stick, that doesn't mean I like it. I just accept that there is a good reason why it is where it is. There's no good reason for putting the left stick where it is on playstation controllers other than aesthetics.

And this may also just be me, but when I hold the Dualshock in my hands, my thumbs fall naturally on the buttons and the D-pad. I have to stretch them to hit the analog sticks. When I hold the 360 controller in my hands, my thumbs fall between the buttons and the analog stick on the right side and between the D-pad and the analog stick on the left side. I can reach either easily. If I'm holding the Sixaxis and let my thumbs fall on the buttons, when I move my thumb to the analog stick my wrist moves out slightly. When I do that on the 360, my wrists don't move at all. The design of the controller handles make it easier to reach everything. Again, maybe it's just me...

Speaking of convexness though, I've complained about that before. I've always loved the concavity and dimples on the Xbox analog sticks. I've never thought of the Dualshock sticks as being too loose, but now that you mention it that may be why I feel like I have a lot better control in FPS on 360.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
the fact that I can bump my thumbs together while using the PS3 controller is what pisses me off just as much as it's looseness and convex'ness.

That's certainly valid as well. I guess a lot of that depends on the size of your hands. Even though I've never had the issue you describe, I've always thought that the Dual Shock controllers could stand to be a bit bigger. I just don't think there's anything wrong with the layout itself.

Here's another point about the Dual Shock layout... hold your hands up next to each other in front of you with your hand relaxed. Where are your thumbs? If you have normal hands, chances are your thumbs are almost exactly in the same position as they are when using the sticks on the Dual Shock controllers.

I think a lot of complaints against it are coming from the fact that many console gamers seem to have this odd desire to see controllers change radically each generation. But I've never understood why. Very few people complained about the original PS controllers. In fact people liked to claim they were a rip-off of the SNES controllers which many of the same people would then claim as the best controllers ever. Same with the original Dual Shock. Few people seemed to have any complaints back then. But as the PS2 and now PS3 have arrived people began to whine more and more about how Sony never changes the controllers... they view them as "old" even though the current PS3 controllers share little in common with the original PS1 gamepads beyond the physical shape (dual sticks, analog buttons, triggers, L3/R3 buttons, motion controls).

What's even more aburd is that Sony showed the famous early prototype of the PS3 controller that quickly became known as the "boomerang". People made all these ridiculous photoshopped pictures of the controller being used as a boomerang. So Sony gave the gamers what they seemed to want and went back to their classic design. Then what happened? Now everyone complains that they haven't changed their design and you'll even see some people comment that they wish Sony had gone on ahead with the early prototype design. WTF!? As often as people complain about Sony having little common sense, I often wonder the same about gamers.

I don't really see the need for a major change. Afterall, no one seems to complain about keyboard layouts being the same for literally decades, but how dare anyone keep console controllers the same! IMO, the Dual Shock series design is good. It works and works well with just about any genre out there. Is it perfect? Nope. There are things I would change:

1. Tighten the damn sticks! This is been an issue since the original DS. I adjust to them pretty quickly, but I seem to be a bit wild with my aiming when I first start playing an FPS on the Playstation.... especially if I just finished playing a game with the 360 controller.

2. Change the shape of the tops of the sticks. Make then concave or flat... convex doesn't seem to make much sense. Also, the material seems to be a bit too slick.

3. Give the L2/R2 triggers a true trigger shape. IMO, this was the biggest mistake on the PS3 controller. Giving the contollers triggers was a good thing, making them convex was a bad thing. They work and have nice smooth pulls to them, but the design doesn't work well when you are required to hold them for long periods of time... your fingers tend to slide down to the bottom of the triggers.

4. Make the controllers a bit more beefy. Make them a bit wider and the handles a bit bigger. Don't go crazy and make them huge, but a bit more size would go a long way.

Despite the list, those are actually fairly minor changes... but they would improve the controllers immensely. IMO, the 360 controllers are the best conventional controllers ever... though I'm a bit pissed they removed the analog buttons. That was dumb. If Sony made those changes I think the DS controllers would be every bit as good and maybe even better since they have analog face buttons and motion controls.

Just watch, if Sony keeps the same design for the PS4 we'll see another sh!t storm. And if MS keeps the same physical controller design too, despite the fact that the current layout is perfectly fine, they'll start to see a lot of complaints. And in neither case will it make any real logical sense.


But as to the topic... thanks for the review of the FragFX, DanTMWTMP. I'd actually consider buying one of those things except for the fact that it's wired, correct? My current placement of my PS3 vs where I sit when I'm gaming really prevents me from using any wired controllers. And I simply don't feel like moving items in my entertainment center around... I like the current layout and I hate re-wiring stuff if it can be avoided.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: mugs
Just because I don't complain about the right stick, that doesn't mean I like it. I just accept that there is a good reason why it is where it is. There's no good reason for putting the left stick where it is on playstation controllers other than aesthetics.

Well, you would honestly be the first person I've ever seen complain about right analog sticks. I've never seen anyone claim they couldn't quite aim right because of the placement or anything similar. I've never had any issues myself. I'm not saying that you don't have any issues, just that you would be the only person I've seen make any complaints.

Originally posted by: mugs
I don't think the placement of the right stick is ideal either, but you have to compromise because the buttons are pretty important too. The d-pad is rarely important. For a FPS, I think a controller like this would be better: http://www.amazon.com/GAMESTER...ref=cm_cr_pr_mention_t

Not sure I agree about the d-pad. It seems to be getting quite a bit of use these days in FPS games as a way to cycle weapons and/or grenades and such... and in some games to use items like health packs or turn on night vision and the like. I think that would end up being a problem with the controller you linked. The D-pad appears to be too far underneath the left stick. It might not be an easy reach to go straight down like that... but I'd have to hold it to really tell.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Thraxen
Same with the original Dual Shock. Few people seemed to have any complaints back then. But as the PS2 and now PS3 have arrived people began to whine more and more about how Sony never changes the controllers... they view them as "old" even though the current PS3 controllers share little in common with the original PS1 gamepads beyond the physical shape (dual sticks, analog buttons, triggers, L3/R3 buttons, motion controls).

People didn't complain back then because there weren't better controllers back then. I didn't complain about the NES controller until the SNES came out. I wouldn't accept an NES controller when there is a clearly better design though.

<boomerang>

Can't really comment on that controller because I've never held it. But I never criticized it myself. I don't care what the thing looks like, I care about what it feels like.

I don't really see the need for a major change. Afterall, no one seems to complain about keyboard layouts being the same for literally decades,

Well - yeah, they do. Many people use a more sensible keyboard layout (Dvorak). But that's not an issue of comfort, it's an issue of typing speed. You seem to think this is about a desire for change, which is absolutely not true. The Xbox 360 controller is pretty much the same as the Xbox-S. Nobody complains that they didn't change that. People DID complain about the original Xbox controller though, and MS changed it and people were happy. Nobody complains that Nintendo kept the Gamecube controller for games that require traditional controllers. Well, except people who hated the GC controller in the first place. It's not about a desire for change.

3. Give the L2/R2 triggers a true trigger shape. IMO, this was the biggest mistake on the PS3 controller. Give the contollers triggers was a good thing, making them convex was a bad thing. They work and have nice smooth pulls to them, but the design doesn't work well when you are required to hold them for long periods of time... your fingers tend to slide down to the bottom of the triggers.

Yeah, I don't know what the hell they were thinking there.

4. Make the controllers a bit more beefy. Make them a bit wider and the handles a bit bigger. Don't go crazy and make them huge, but a bit more size would go a long way.

Size-wize I think it's pretty good. But if they adjusted the handles to stick out at a wider angle I think it'd mitigate the problem with the analog stick placement. The the main part of the controller is pretty much the same size of the Xbox 360 controller, but the design of the handles on the 360 affects how your hand falls on the controller, and that affects comfort a lot.

Just watch, if Sony keeps the same design for the PS4 we'll see another sh!t storm.

Because it'll continue to be a piece of shit.

And if MS keeps the same physical controller design too, despite that fact that the current layout is perfectly fine, they'll start to see a lot of complaints.

They did that this generation, no complaints.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: mugs
People didn't complain back then because there weren't better controllers back then. I didn't complain about the NES controller until the SNES came out.

Only partially valid. Games back then didn't really have the need for more buttons yet. And the non-ergonomic shape is why I think controllers like NES Max existed.

Well - yeah, they do. Many people use a more sensible keyboard layout (Dvorak). But that's not an issue of comfort, it's an issue of typing speed. You seem to think this is about a desire for change, which is absolutely not true. The Xbox 360 controller is pretty much the same as the Xbox-S. Nobody complains that they didn't change that. People DID complain about the original Xbox controller though, and MS changed it and people were happy. Nobody complains that Nintendo kept the Gamecube controller for games that require traditional controllers. Well, except people who hated the GC controller in the first place. It's not about a desire for change.

Well, you see some complaints, but for the most part people are perfectly content with the traditional design of keyboards. You simply don't see the clamoring for a new design every few years like your do with console controllers. I mean, you're hands are basically the same other than what age has done to them. There's no real "need" to change the design unless someone comes up with something truly better or there is a need to add new buttons or features that require a new layout. I honestly think many of the changes that are made are done simply for the sake of making a change and nothing more. IMO, the GC controller is the perfect example of changes for the sake of changes. And I think nobody complains about Nintendo using GC controllers for some Wii games because, one, it's no longer the main controller and, two, because they are sufficiently placated by the Wiimote and Classic controllers being released. Trust me, if they had simply stuck with the GC controller as the main controller there would be a lot of complaining going on.

They did that this generation, no complaints.

Again, trust me, we'll see it. I've actually seen a few people complain that they stuck with the same design. But the complaints are only minor right now and usually only come up as a side conversion when people complain about Sony sticking with the same design. We had the same situation with the PS2. Only a few minor grumblings, but for the most part they died out pretty quick. But when they kept the same design for the PS3 the sh!t hit the fan. I think the same will happen with the next Xbox if the design is kept the same.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: mugs
People didn't complain back then because there weren't better controllers back then. I didn't complain about the NES controller until the SNES came out.

Only partially valid. Games back then didn't really have the need for more buttons yet. And the non-ergonomic shape is why I think controllers like NES Max existed.

that's also true of the psx argument. hardly any games at all required dual analogs.

even on ps2 there were hardly any FPS games, which are by far the ones requiring the most dual analogging at the same time.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: mugs

And if MS keeps the same physical controller design too, despite that fact that the current layout is perfectly fine, they'll start to see a lot of complaints.

They did that this generation, no complaints.

the 360 controller has roughly the same layout of the xbox controller, but far from the same design. i hated the xbox controller. the controller s was better than the regular one, but still sucked.

this generation can be seen as a brand new controller. its overall shape is greatly different, they did indeed alter the layout a little bit, and it's just generally a much better controller.
however, i don't think they'll receive too much flak for keeping the design pretty much the same, if not the exact same, the next generation. why? because people naturally like things staying the same, PLUS if it aint broke, don't fix it. the PS3 controller suffers a different situation. it is broke, just like the past controllers, but fanboys somehow have very large voices and essentially prevent Sony from even changing it. Sony doesn't really think they need to because it appears most playstation owners are happy with it. only problem, a lot aren't, but the voices of the fanboys overshadow the voices of the [controller] haters.

 

[mugs]

Again - with keyboards it's not a comfort issue. That's why people are content. It's easier to stick with the inefficient layout than to change. If it was a comfort issue, people would change.

There IS a truly better controller design, you said yourself that the 360 controller is the best conventional controller ever. I don't know why you dismiss complaints about the PS3 controller as being because of lack of change when you KNOW there is a better controller.

The GC controller was not change for the sake of change. It was change for the sake of making sense. Nintendo recognized that in most games there are buttons that you use a lot more than the other buttons. On the SNES it was all about B and Y. On the Xbox/360 it's all about A and X. So they made some buttons more prominent than others, and they made one button, the primary button, central. From there you can hit every other button easily. It really makes a lot of sense. Not sure why they did what they did with the C stick, and they could have done a better job with the L/R buttons - but at least they were analog with a good amount of travel. Nothing on that controller was change for the sake of change.

Your clinging to this belief that people hate on the Dualshock because of lack of change is as obtuse as Sony sticking with a poor design in spite the existence of better designs.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: destrekor
this generation can be seen as a brand new controller. its overall shape is greatly different, they did indeed alter the layout a little bit, and it's just generally a much better controller.
however, i don't think they'll receive too much flak for keeping the design pretty much the same, if not the exact same, the next generation. why? because people naturally like things staying the same, PLUS if it aint broke, don't fix it. the PS3 controller suffers a different situation. it is broke, just like the past controllers, but fanboys somehow have very large voices and essentially prevent Sony from even changing it. Sony doesn't really think they need to because it appears most playstation owners are happy with it. only problem, a lot aren't, but the voices of the fanboys overshadow the voices of the [controller] haters.

But how is it actually broken? As I said above, there are some issues I would fix, but I just can't logically see how the layout itself is broken (which seems to be the major complaint). And no one really seems to be able to present any reasons why it's broken. People just say they don't like it and that's it. All the evidence seems to point in the opposite direction. Almost no one complains about right analog sticks being difficult to work with and the sticks are positions as mirrors of each other and your hands are mirrors of each other. I honestly think the reason most people have a problem withe sticks is because they are too loose. I think they are incorrectly blaming their problems on the layout when that's not the issue at all.

 

[mugs]

I would just LOVE it if some third party controller maker would just make a 360-style controller for the PS3 and a Dualshock-style controller for the Xbox 360. Let us decide which we prefer.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: destrekor
this generation can be seen as a brand new controller. its overall shape is greatly different, they did indeed alter the layout a little bit, and it's just generally a much better controller.
however, i don't think they'll receive too much flak for keeping the design pretty much the same, if not the exact same, the next generation. why? because people naturally like things staying the same, PLUS if it aint broke, don't fix it. the PS3 controller suffers a different situation. it is broke, just like the past controllers, but fanboys somehow have very large voices and essentially prevent Sony from even changing it. Sony doesn't really think they need to because it appears most playstation owners are happy with it. only problem, a lot aren't, but the voices of the fanboys overshadow the voices of the [controller] haters.

But how is it actually broken? As I said above, there are some issues I would fix, but I just can't logically see how the layout itself is broken (which seems to be the major complaint). And no one really seems to be able to present any reasons why it's broken. People just say they don't like it and that's it. All the evidence seems to point in the opposite direction. Almost no one complains about right analog sticks being difficult to work with and the sticks are positions as mirrors of each other and your hands are mirrors of each other. I honestly think the reason most people have a problem withe sticks is because they are too loose. I think they are incorrectly blaming their problems on the layout when that's not the issue at all.

it ain't comfortable in my hands. layout i have no major gripe with, and a few alterations would make it a nice controller. but the shape and ergonomics suck. at least in my hands.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Thraxen
But how is it actually broken? As I said above, there are some issues I would fix, but I just can't logically see how the layout itself is broken (which seems to be the major complaint). And no one really seems to be able to present any reasons why it's broken. People just say they don't like it and that's it. All the evidence seems to point in the opposite direction. Almost no one complains about right analog sticks being difficult to work with and the sticks are positions as mirrors of each other and your hands are mirrors of each other. I honestly think the reason most people have a problem withe sticks is because they are too loose. I think they are incorrectly blaming their problems on the layout when that's not the issue at all.

If you read my entire first reply to you, I explained exactly how the shape of the controller contributes to the issue of the left analog stick being where it is. The right analog has never been a big issue because 1. As purbeast brought up, with most of the PS2 games I played, my right fingers spent most of their time on the buttons, not on the right stick. 2. On the Xbox 360, which I HAVE used to play a lot of FPS games where the right stick is important, the shape of the controller makes it less uncomfortable to use the right stick as I explained in my first reply to you.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: mugs
There IS a truly better controller design, you said yourself that the 360 controller is the best conventional controller ever. I don't know why you dismiss complaints about the PS3 controller as being because of lack of change when you KNOW there is a better controller.

You're not following what I'm saying. I clearly laid out what I would change on the on the PS controllers. I just don't see any reason to change the stick layout. I think both designs work well and there just doesn't seem to be any logic at all behind the complaints against the DS controller layout... that's what I'm debating here.

The GC controller was not change for the sake of change. It was change for the sake of making sense. Nintendo recognized that in most games there are buttons that you use a lot more than the other buttons. On the SNES it was all about B and Y. On the Xbox/360 it's all about A and X. So they made some buttons more prominent than others, and they made one button, the primary button, central. From there you can hit every other button easily. It really makes a lot of sense. Not sure why they did what they did with the C stick, and they could have done a better job with the L/R buttons - but at least they were analog with a good amount of travel. Nothing on that controller was change for the sake of change.

Completely disagree. The GC controller is garbage. They changed the button layout to work best with their own games with complete disregard for anyone else's games. In some genres you see heavy use of one button, but in many games (FPS, sports, and fighting for example) all the buttons see heavy use. And why is the right analog stick different from the left? It's a near useless nub. Perfect example of a change for the sake of change. It's like Nintendo made it different simply so it would be different than the sticks everyone else was already using. Why doesn't the Z button have a mirror on the other side? Again, it appears to me they didn't want to appear to be copying Sony's 4 shoulder button layout so they made one with 3... WTF? No sense at all. Why do the triggers have that stupid catch in the middle? Again, totally pointless... but they simply wanted to appear different from everyone else. Why is the d-pad ridiculously small? Another pointless change. I could go on and on about the overrated POS of a controller.

Anyway, I'll just add that if Sony changed the stick layout I wouldn't complain. I really have no issues using either arrangement. Six of one, half a dozen of the other. I mainly just wish they would tighten the sticks up.

 

[R Nilla]

Originally posted by: mugs
I would just LOVE it if some third party controller maker would just make a 360-style controller for the PS3 and a Dualshock-style controller for the Xbox 360. Let us decide which we prefer.

You mean like this? Seems to be possible on the PS3, anyway--and without the need for any third party peripherals.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: R Nilla

Originally posted by: mugs
I would just LOVE it if some third party controller maker would just make a 360-style controller for the PS3 and a Dualshock-style controller for the Xbox 360. Let us decide which we prefer.

You mean like this? Seems to be possible on the PS3, anyway--and without the need for any third party peripherals.

Seems to be possible on the PS3 if you're running Fedora Core 5... but I can't play Warhawk in Fedora Core 5.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: R Nilla

Originally posted by: mugs
I would just LOVE it if some third party controller maker would just make a 360-style controller for the PS3 and a Dualshock-style controller for the Xbox 360. Let us decide which we prefer.

You mean like this? Seems to be possible on the PS3, anyway--and without the need for any third party peripherals.

I've often wondered why it's so hard to find third party PS controllers that use the other stick arrangement. Why do almost all third parties insist on mimicing the same layout as the 1st party controllers? There's obviously a market for people that want the other layout, you would think that someone would jump on that. Just search for "playstation controller" over at Amazon and look at them all. All kinds of crazy grips, lights, etc... but they all use the same stick layout.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

You're not following what I'm saying. I clearly laid out what I would change on the on the PS controllers. I just don't see any reason to change the stick layout. I think both designs work well and there just doesn't seem to be any logic at all behind the complaints against the DS controller layout... that's what I'm debating here.

I think we pretty much agree that the issue is ergonomics. You just think it should be solved by modifying the handles, and I think it should be solved by moving the stick. I think either would work, but I'd prefer if they did both.

I mean, the root cause is that the angle of the handles makes it more comfortable to use the d-pad. That's not the case with the 360 controller. It's equally comfortable to use the D-pad or the left stick on the 360. If they fixed the handles, the same would be true on the PS3 and it wouldn't matter where they put the sticks.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: mugs
I think we pretty much agree that the issue is ergonomics. You just think it should be solved by modifying the handles, and I think it should be solved by moving the stick. I think either would work, but I'd prefer if they did both.

Yeah, I honestly don't care if you don't like PS controller and do like GC controllers. I just happen to be the opposite. I just like to debate the issue from time to time. I do sometime think it would be better if Sony just swapped them. I think that would please the majority of the people. You would have a small group of Sony hardcores complain, but most Sony people seem to be happy with either layout.

 

[Gunslinger08]

I just got the FragFX and I like it so far. I use it in Resistance with sensitivity set to 3.5. This results in slightly slower than normal turning, but removes any jumpiness introduced by higher sensitivities.