Mibu no ookami
Member
It's so interesting that neither Microsoft nor Sony have released an official controller with their competitor's control scheme. They've largely left it up to 3rd parties to do this with less-than-ideal results.
You would think they would want to create an avenue to attract consumers from a different ecosystem.
This is something we've seen so much in the competition between Android and iPhone, yet we've really never seen it with Microsoft and Sony.
If we look at how the PlayStation Controller first came to be, it was designed after the Super Nintendo controller since the PlayStation was going to be a disc-based SNES. That controller scheme was attractive to many who were familiar with it. It is largely the foundation of most gamepads today.
I think it was that general scheme that gave the Snes an advantage over the Genesis which launched with a 3-button control scheme. I think Sega's control scheme evolution was part of the reason why it failed to catch on with Saturn and Dreamcast.
I also think that the N64 and Gamecube's massive departures from the SNES controller contributed to both systems' underperformance. And I think Nintendo had more success when they realized they needed to support more traditional controllers at least as an option and the Switch Pro controller (one of the best-selling accessories on Amazon).
I think one reason for the Xbox's relative success is due to following a more "standard" control scheme, which makes it easier for consumer adoption but also 3rd party support.
I guess the other argument is that it could just as easily allow people to leave your ecosystem, but not being the standard controller, I don't think that would be the case.
It just feels analogous to designing a game but only providing inverted controls.
You would think they would want to create an avenue to attract consumers from a different ecosystem.
This is something we've seen so much in the competition between Android and iPhone, yet we've really never seen it with Microsoft and Sony.
If we look at how the PlayStation Controller first came to be, it was designed after the Super Nintendo controller since the PlayStation was going to be a disc-based SNES. That controller scheme was attractive to many who were familiar with it. It is largely the foundation of most gamepads today.
I think it was that general scheme that gave the Snes an advantage over the Genesis which launched with a 3-button control scheme. I think Sega's control scheme evolution was part of the reason why it failed to catch on with Saturn and Dreamcast.
I also think that the N64 and Gamecube's massive departures from the SNES controller contributed to both systems' underperformance. And I think Nintendo had more success when they realized they needed to support more traditional controllers at least as an option and the Switch Pro controller (one of the best-selling accessories on Amazon).
I think one reason for the Xbox's relative success is due to following a more "standard" control scheme, which makes it easier for consumer adoption but also 3rd party support.
I guess the other argument is that it could just as easily allow people to leave your ecosystem, but not being the standard controller, I don't think that would be the case.
It just feels analogous to designing a game but only providing inverted controls.
