PS3 Rumble Controller Confirmed

IGN was playing a build of the upcoming title Burnout: Paradise when they noticed something new about the controller in their hands: it was shaking. The rumble-equipped PlayStation 3 controller is almost certainly a reality at this point, with Kaz Harai's keynote tomorrow expected to officially announce the product. "The controller we were using to play the demo looked exactly like a standard Sixaxis, except that it had a sticker on the bottom that said 'RUMBLE.' It also felt notably heavier than the standard Sixaxis."

Comments

Adding Rumble helps, but please fix the rest...

[trdrstv]

Ok, I missed Rumble (at least in MotorStorm), but please can you fix a few other things while you're at it?

1) Sixaxis Tilt is Not nearly sensitive enough to be useful. Please figure out a Fix or Hire someone who worked on ExciteTruck to do it for you.

2) The R2 & L2 Buttonie-trigger thing. Either make them proper buttons (like L1, R1), or triggers (like the 360), don't care which but this inbetween solution you have now is bad.

3) Swap the left Analog and Dpad. MS, Nintendo and Sega all did so because it is more comfortable to play 3D games that way. Bolting the Dual analogs at the bottom made sense in the PS1 era, but not 2 gens later.

4) User replaceable Battery. Make it AAA, AA, or Proprietary; I don't care which so long as I can swap it with another in a few seconds without disassembly.

Re:Adding Rumble helps, but please fix the rest...

[Chris Burke]

5. Don't listen to this guy. Leave the D-Pad right where it is. It's 1000x better that way. If you're going to move them, put them in the same place on both sides of the controller. If you're going to move them up, you'll have to make the controller wider, otherwise your thumbs won't be properly aligned with the analog sticks.

Don't listen to the guy who thinks unnecessary hand stress is 1000x better. No, really. Putting the most used control down and to the right means you have to bend your thumb outward away from it's natural configuration. The reason you don't put them in the same place on both sides is because on the right side you want the buttons to be where it is most natural to push them -- imagine if they put the 4 primary buttons where the right analog stick is now. Hard to hit them, right? Right, because it's an unnatural position. The goal is to have the most neutral hand position for the most common items. MS and N understand this.

Back in the PS1, when the DPad was the most common item, Sony put the analog stick where it is for that reason. Keeping it out of the way of the DPad, so the DPad would be just as familiar and comfortable as it used to be. There was no excuse for keeping it in the same place on the PS2, and for the PS3 still having the mostly useless DPad where the thumb most naturally rests is idiotic. They keep it that way solely because of the brand recognition. But some people have convinced themselves that these historical reasons that de-emphasized the analog stick are actually ergonomic reasons that favor the analog stick. That the current location is the ideal spot for the analog stick, even though it was originally put in that spot exactly because it isn't the ideal spot for primary input.

If you really think down and to the right is the best, most optimal and comfortable position for the primary input method, why did zero controllers have that setup with the Dpad? The original PS1 controller didn't put the D-pad or buttons in that area, they put it in the upward position so that it's easiest to reach, just like everyone else.

Re:last gen?

[Kohath]

Way to go. What a zinger! You really zinged them.

That will teach them to try to promote their choices as the best ones. They won't try that again.

I look forward to the future of marketing slogans you've created. "It's only as good as it is", "We like it, but you should make up your own mind", "Adequate. At least for us.", and so on.

No more hype ever. Not for us. Someone on the net might have a counterpoint, after all.

(This post makes me feel British.)

Re:But....

[JordanL]

Will this save the PS3? Consider that Heavenly Sword was supposed to be a console seller...it turned out to be a 5 hours affair with 2 hours of cutscenes and gameplay that made me think of God of War, Dynasty Warriors and Ninety-Nine Nights....'cept with a much prettier lead character.

First, I work as a video game reporter, among other things. I've been to these shows, though sadly I didn't make it to TGS this year. (Last year was fun though.)

Us people in the know have been very harsh on Sony about Heavenly Sword's length, but you know what, all the common video game consumer friends I have with a PS3 have called me up to ask if I absolutely loved the game as much as them... and when I tried to explain that it was great but short, most of them told me in a matter of fact way that the game was like an epic movie that you got to play, and that being short made sense to them because it kicked ass in the short time it played and it didn't have tons of filler, which they didn't want.

Us 'elite' gamers have been giving it a bad rap, and I know that this is simply anecdotal, but it appears to me that the ho-hum consumer actually appreciates the shortness vs. the content.

Battery life?

[neumayr]

I'd imagine that rumble feature to be quite power hungry, so what will that do to sixaxis' battery life? Get it down to wiimote level or even worse?

Re:Whee!

[bateleur]

what do i want to play today on my 360....decisions, decisions...

An FPS? ;-)

Re:But....

[ivan256]

But my favorite part of first-person shooters are the parts where you fight your way back through areas you were already in to extend the playtime. I especially appreciate it when they strip you of all your weapons first.

BTW, Doom 3 is my favorite game ever.