Revised controller?

They go hand in hand, it\'s retard to believe otherwise. ... Sure there\'s been control pads on the market that have had problems like this

It\'s retarded to believe they don\'t go hand-in-hand even when there are products on the market that prove they don\'t go hand-in-hand?
 
They are often considered together because that makes for a quality product. So they should go hand-in-hand, but that\'s up to the product developer.
 
And things like the NES pad and Atari joystick were not ergonomic, despite being efficient means of playing their software.
 
A computer mouse may only have one button, but it is still designed ergonomically.
 
Two separate considerations when designing a product - form and function.
 
-Dan

[Living-In-Clip]

. A complex control is only viable and usable if it\'s designed well and is comfortable. I never had any problems with old nes, snes pads etc. As i said before, as new things have been added to the controls.

You prove my point right there.

Right,a complex control pad does need to be comfortable, but it does not HAVE TO BE. Just like a simple control pad does NOT have to be comfortable. They only go hand-in-hand, because when put together, they make a great product.

A company, like Atari can make a controller that has a lot of buttons and not ergnomic, just as easy as a controller with two buttons can be made ergonomic.

Complexity has nothing to do with the form factor. Don\'t be stupid.

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

It\'s retarded to believe they don\'t go hand-in-hand even when there are products on the market that prove they don\'t go hand-in-hand?
 

did u miss the point?

They are often considered together because that makes for a quality product. So they should go hand-in-hand, but that\'s up to the product developer.
 

 they do go hand in hand, thats the difference between a control pad someone buys and doesn\'t buy..

And things like the NES pad and Atari joystick were not ergonomic, despite being efficient means of playing their software.
 

They were ergonomic, they did what they were meant to do, they did it well and they were comfertable to use, just not by todays standards.

A computer mouse may only have one button, but it is still designed ergonomically.
 

 Depends on the company, you said so yourself. "It\'s retarded to believe they don\'t go hand-in-hand even when there are products on the market that prove they don\'t go hand-in-hand?"  so you\'re now saying they go hand in hand on mouse?  

Two separate considerations when designing a product - form and function.
 
-Dan

Yes, and check sales out on control pads with crappy form, because it effects the function..

I\'m good with most of what you said. I think we\'re using different words to try and say the same things.

We both know what ergonomic means (tho I still disagree regarding NES and Atari controllers) and we understand that a good product is designed with both form and function in mind.

I\'m good. ;]

-Dan

Uh?
The complexity of the game has no impact on the EGRONOMIC design of the controller. The NES controller was not ergonomic, but it was not due to the simple games.

The comfort of the controller has nothing to do with a game being complicated nor does it make it "more important".

Good ergonomic controller design is just that. It\'s nothing more. Simple or complex games don\'t matter. It all comes down to hardware design. Your logic is the games were simple, so ergonomics was not important. Simply not true.

I have to wonder if you even know what the word means.

Ahm you got it totally wrong.

And just to see how simple it is to understand, a controller built like the NES (e rectangle flat thing), with many butons and complicated controlling, would have hurt your hands. It would have been a disaster. Despite that the NES controller was never an subject of debate in its time and nobody cared.

But this very forum and not only are proof that despite that the PS2 controller is 1000 times more ergonomic than the NES controller, some wont hesitate to discuss how much it is supposed to hurt their hands, how incomfortable it is balh blah blah.

This would have never happened if all games were simple needed a cross shaped d-pad and 2 buttons like Super Mario Bros. Instead todays games need more finger movement  and there are more buttons that are highly important and on which more fingers have to be placed on, than just one thump pressing button a and b.

You posted a definition of the word ergonomics and you accidentally showed that you dont know the meaning of the things you post. Well duh you just described what exactly prooves my point right

DMC would have been a disaster on a NES controller with more buttons. But games like that didnt exist then, so nobody cared. The NES controller was perfect just as it was.

The NES pad was later redesigned to be more ergonomic despite only having 4 face buttons (including start select) and a d-pad.

Complexity doesn\'t neccesitate good form. The two are just often considered together out of desire to make a comfortable product.

Your 2 button mouse isnt a cube for a reason.

The NES pad was later redesigned to be more ergonomic despite only having 4 face buttons (including start select) and a d-pad.

Complexity doesn\'t neccesitate good form. The two are just often considered together out of desire to make a comfortable product.

Your 2 button mouse isnt a cube for a reason.

I agree but thats irelevant.

I didnt point anywhere in my post that complexity neccesitates a good or better form. Thats a completely different subject and totally off topic to my post.

Also about the mouse I dont think it can be compared in the same way as a gamepad. Using the mouse example and the gamepad example together is like comparing a plane with a ship.

Despite that I ll try to make the effort to use your example.

Yeah mouse has to have "curved" surface, otherwise it would have been more tiredsome after long uses. But lets assume that the mouse evolves into something that has more buttons and funtcions, more issues than just the vurvy surface would have been taken into consideration on the design of it to make it ergonomic.

More than a decade ago, mouses had a more rectangular shape since DOS were still very popular, and windows based applications werent as widespread as they are today, and neither was the mouse function as extensively used or developed through applications. That shape wasnt as much of an issue back then but still they could have made all mouse have the more comfortable shape. Back then it was an option.

The same can be similarly said for gamepads. I can play for hours Super Mario Bros on the rectangle shaped NES pad without a prblem and enjoy it. Develop the same controller shape with shoulder buttons, analog sticks, triggers, motion sensing (See Wii\'s completely different approach) which games will use all, and things that originally werent necessarrilly an issue or as important, now are.

Its no longer just an option to make the controller\'s shape more curvy, change the button possition etc as in the NES occasion. Its a necessity

[Living-In-Clip]

I agree but thats irelevant.

I didnt point anywhere in my post that complexity neccesitates a good or better form. Thats a completely different subject and totally off topic to my post.

Also about the mouse I dont think it can be compared in the same way as a gamepad. Using the mouse example and the gamepad example together is like comparing a plane with a ship.

Despite that I ll try to make the effort to use your example.

Yeah mouse has to have "curved" surface, otherwise it would have been more tiredsome after long uses. But lets assume that the mouse evolves into something that has more buttons and funtcions, more issues than just the vurvy surface would have been taken into consideration on the design of it to make it ergonomic.

More than a decade ago, mouses had a more rectangular shape since DOS were still very popular, and windows based applications werent as widespread as they are today, and neither was the mouse function as extensively used or developed through applications. That shape wasnt as much of an issue back then but still they could have made all mouse have the more comfortable shape. Back then it was an option.

The same can be similarly said for gamepads. I can play for hours Super Mario Bros on the rectangle shaped NES pad without a prblem and enjoy it. Develop the same controller shape with shoulder buttons, analog sticks, triggers, motion sensing (See Wii\'s completely different approach) which games will use all, and things that originally werent necessarrilly an issue or as important, now are.

Its no longer just an option to make the controller\'s shape more curvy, change the button possition etc as in the NES occasion. Its a necessity

You typed a lot and got NOTHING accomplished. It is still an option to make an umcofortable non-ergonomic controller, it\'s just companies know the controller and system would flop. You don\'t get the idea that ergonomics is a form factor and has NOTHING to do with the complexity of the controller.


Not sure how many times the same thing has to be posted for you to grasp it. Ergonomics is it\'s own thing, it does not depend on the complexity of the games.

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

LIc, do a engineering course, then come back.  You have no clue.

Actually...take an industrial design course.  Engineers don\'t know what the hell they are talking about.

[Living-In-Clip]

LIc, do a engineering course, then come back.  You have no clue.

Hush up, Aussie. I\'m sorry that common logic is something your kind cannot understand.
:thumb:

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

Actually...take an industrial design course.  Engineers don\'t know what the hell they are talking about.

pfft.. part of my course outlay is design. Guess it just depends on where you do your schooling.
Lic, do me a favour, draw a box, put a d-pad in it, Analog stick, 10 buttons. Then shape it to what you would like and would find comfortable. Tell me if the complexity of amount of buttons needed by games doesn\'t affect the design structure of the control pad or will you just simply ignore button location?

Well, I gotta side with LiC\'s point of view on this one, but in any event, I think that this arguement is pretty much over with.  You guys are just repeating yourselves, I doubt any of you will change your minds at this point....

You typed a lot and got NOTHING accomplished. It is still an option to make an umcofortable non-ergonomic controller, it\'s just companies know the controller and system would flop. You don\'t get the idea that ergonomics is a form factor and has NOTHING to do with the complexity of the controller.


Not sure how many times the same thing has to be posted for you to grasp it. Ergonomics is it\'s own thing, it does not depend on the complexity of the games.

And I thought I had comprehension problems. Too bad.

pfft.. part of my course outlay is design. Guess it just depends on where you do your schooling.
Lic, do me a favour, draw a box, put a d-pad in it, Analog stick, 10 buttons. Then shape it to what you would like and would find comfortable. Tell me if the complexity of amount of buttons needed by games doesn\'t affect the design structure of the control pad or will you just simply ignore button location?

exactly