The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Since none of you Sony cretins seem to read Digitiser, I'll have to rave about Sony's new console for you!
Anyway, if you read Digitiser today (Monday) or tomorrow (Tuesday) on page 484 then you'll find a 6 page article on the PS3 processor called the Cell.
Now a few months back, the New Scientist had a little article about new processors by IBM. It turns out that manufacturers had been experimenting by mixing silicon with other materials to make it better (I can't remember which way) and IBM had finally made something of it.
As a result, they'd managed to make a prototype that ran at 110 Ghz.
It was obvious that this prototype was could and would be improved on.
Now IBM (working with Toshiba) have announced the "Cell", a new processor that's meant to reach the 250 Ghz range (roughly a thousand times more powerful than the current PS2 processor, the Emotion Engine).
This is a major breakthrough in technology and could lead to Nintendo eating their words about new hardware being uneccessary.
I know it takes more than just a processor to make a good console, but seeing as graphics and sound chips are merely processors dedicated to one task, I expect the same technology will be used to improve them by similar amounts.
I'm sure that other parts like RAM and Cache will also get their fair share of improvements.
With this power, games will be able to have full scale wars, with thousands of graphically detailed characters, each with their own advanced AI to give some really exciting possibilities.
I think after this, hardware will no longer be a limit - the imagination of the develloper will.
It's not just the standard hardware that should excite, though.
In many ways, the PS2 was just a prototype.
The DVD player and possibility of a Broadband adaptor made it seem like a true multi media system.
The PS3 is supposed to take this to the full level.
Yes, it'll have a DVD player and the broadband adaptor will likely be packaged as standard (broadband will most likely be widespread in the UK by the time this new console is released) and I expect Sony will take a leaf from Microsoft's book and include a hardrive too.
But it's supposed to take online activity to a new level with various features from games playing and browsing the web to shopping and ordering films - sky box-office style - and broadcasting digital television.
Now I know that's no big deal as most of these can already be done, but Sony intends to put it all into one neat little box, and make it more user friendly and efficient for "casual" gamers.
Online gaming will obviously get a big boost (the PS2 is just an experimental prototype in this area!) and, with the power of these new chips and speed of broadband communications, could support huge war scale online battles.
It would be interesting to see what devellopers can make out of this opportunity.
The other thing is that they'll most likely learn from many of the PS2's mistakes. And there were many.
The machine was a pig to devellop for, the launch was lacklusture, gamers had to wait 6 months for a title which really used the power (and although GT3's graphics were tremendous, little else of the game was anything innoative or revolutionary).
It was only after a whole year had gone that the killer likes of Grand Theft Auto 3 and Metal Gear Solid 2 came out, making the PS2 the good purchase it is today.
The only reason that the machine didn't fail was because Sony had built such a deservedly strong reputation on it's original Playstation which had garaunteed them a huge success before the console had even launched.
And because this reputation drove Sega, along with it's Dreamcast, out of the console business, this left no competition again the PS2 for well over a year.
Shortly after the Xbox and Gamecube were released, Sony acknowledged how much they admired how nice these machines were to devellop for and stated that this would be a main focus point on the Playstation 3.
Another thing (that I found especially disappointing) was that the PS2 only had 2 controller ports. Naturally, Sony will have the sense to put four in this time round and encourage devellopers to stretch the machines capabilities for frantic four player action.
And with the PS3's power, making co-operative missions with numerous AI opponents, detailed environments and advanced AI should come naturally without any slowdown whatsoever.
Sony would also have to touch up the pad. The PS2 pad has the right buttons, mainly in the right places but could do with a few "updates".
The PSOne pad was designed for games with the D-Pad.
It put in a couple of analogue sticks to keep up, but the pad was still designed around the D-pad.
The L and R shoulder buttons are also a bit dated (the same ones that were designed for the Snes over 10 years ago!).
The D-pad and analogue stick would have to change places (after all, more games use the analogue stick now so it should get the priority spot).
I think that the front should buttons (L1 and R1) should be GC style analogue shoulder buttons or Xbox/DC style triggers.
The back buttons (L2 and R2) would be good as N64 style "Z" triggers, best used for FPS games.
Finally the name would need to be changed.
Playstation was fantastic, catchy and well thought out.
The Playstation 2 was meant to show that it was the next step forward.
It's wearing a bit thin now though.
Something along the lines of Powerstation would be familiar yet fresh and new.
Don't get me wrong, I've not become a Sony convert.
I still think Nintendo are the world's best games company and plan to keep my Gamecube.
But, while the Gamecube is getting some of the best games around, as a stand alone games machine, there's also some things it can't do.
Nintendo's lack of online plans is one thing, a DVD player is another.
That doesn't mean that I'd choose this new PS3 over a Nintendo machine, but like any true gamer, I want to have the best of both worlds (and by the time Sony's new machine arrives on these shores, I'll probably be earning a good enough wage to buy ALL the consoles).
Don't get TOO excited yet. It's not set to arrive here for atleast 3-4 years, but as future's go, it's not a bad one to be heading our way. :-)
Anyway, if you read Digitiser today (Monday) or tomorrow (Tuesday) on page 484 then you'll find a 6 page article on the PS3 processor called the Cell.
Now a few months back, the New Scientist had a little article about new processors by IBM. It turns out that manufacturers had been experimenting by mixing silicon with other materials to make it better (I can't remember which way) and IBM had finally made something of it.
As a result, they'd managed to make a prototype that ran at 110 Ghz.
It was obvious that this prototype was could and would be improved on.
Now IBM (working with Toshiba) have announced the "Cell", a new processor that's meant to reach the 250 Ghz range (roughly a thousand times more powerful than the current PS2 processor, the Emotion Engine).
This is a major breakthrough in technology and could lead to Nintendo eating their words about new hardware being uneccessary.
I know it takes more than just a processor to make a good console, but seeing as graphics and sound chips are merely processors dedicated to one task, I expect the same technology will be used to improve them by similar amounts.
I'm sure that other parts like RAM and Cache will also get their fair share of improvements.
With this power, games will be able to have full scale wars, with thousands of graphically detailed characters, each with their own advanced AI to give some really exciting possibilities.
I think after this, hardware will no longer be a limit - the imagination of the develloper will.
It's not just the standard hardware that should excite, though.
In many ways, the PS2 was just a prototype.
The DVD player and possibility of a Broadband adaptor made it seem like a true multi media system.
The PS3 is supposed to take this to the full level.
Yes, it'll have a DVD player and the broadband adaptor will likely be packaged as standard (broadband will most likely be widespread in the UK by the time this new console is released) and I expect Sony will take a leaf from Microsoft's book and include a hardrive too.
But it's supposed to take online activity to a new level with various features from games playing and browsing the web to shopping and ordering films - sky box-office style - and broadcasting digital television.
Now I know that's no big deal as most of these can already be done, but Sony intends to put it all into one neat little box, and make it more user friendly and efficient for "casual" gamers.
Online gaming will obviously get a big boost (the PS2 is just an experimental prototype in this area!) and, with the power of these new chips and speed of broadband communications, could support huge war scale online battles.
It would be interesting to see what devellopers can make out of this opportunity.
The other thing is that they'll most likely learn from many of the PS2's mistakes. And there were many.
The machine was a pig to devellop for, the launch was lacklusture, gamers had to wait 6 months for a title which really used the power (and although GT3's graphics were tremendous, little else of the game was anything innoative or revolutionary).
It was only after a whole year had gone that the killer likes of Grand Theft Auto 3 and Metal Gear Solid 2 came out, making the PS2 the good purchase it is today.
The only reason that the machine didn't fail was because Sony had built such a deservedly strong reputation on it's original Playstation which had garaunteed them a huge success before the console had even launched.
And because this reputation drove Sega, along with it's Dreamcast, out of the console business, this left no competition again the PS2 for well over a year.
Shortly after the Xbox and Gamecube were released, Sony acknowledged how much they admired how nice these machines were to devellop for and stated that this would be a main focus point on the Playstation 3.
Another thing (that I found especially disappointing) was that the PS2 only had 2 controller ports. Naturally, Sony will have the sense to put four in this time round and encourage devellopers to stretch the machines capabilities for frantic four player action.
And with the PS3's power, making co-operative missions with numerous AI opponents, detailed environments and advanced AI should come naturally without any slowdown whatsoever.
Sony would also have to touch up the pad. The PS2 pad has the right buttons, mainly in the right places but could do with a few "updates".
The PSOne pad was designed for games with the D-Pad.
It put in a couple of analogue sticks to keep up, but the pad was still designed around the D-pad.
The L and R shoulder buttons are also a bit dated (the same ones that were designed for the Snes over 10 years ago!).
The D-pad and analogue stick would have to change places (after all, more games use the analogue stick now so it should get the priority spot).
I think that the front should buttons (L1 and R1) should be GC style analogue shoulder buttons or Xbox/DC style triggers.
The back buttons (L2 and R2) would be good as N64 style "Z" triggers, best used for FPS games.
Finally the name would need to be changed.
Playstation was fantastic, catchy and well thought out.
The Playstation 2 was meant to show that it was the next step forward.
It's wearing a bit thin now though.
Something along the lines of Powerstation would be familiar yet fresh and new.
Don't get me wrong, I've not become a Sony convert.
I still think Nintendo are the world's best games company and plan to keep my Gamecube.
But, while the Gamecube is getting some of the best games around, as a stand alone games machine, there's also some things it can't do.
Nintendo's lack of online plans is one thing, a DVD player is another.
That doesn't mean that I'd choose this new PS3 over a Nintendo machine, but like any true gamer, I want to have the best of both worlds (and by the time Sony's new machine arrives on these shores, I'll probably be earning a good enough wage to buy ALL the consoles).
Don't get TOO excited yet. It's not set to arrive here for atleast 3-4 years, but as future's go, it's not a bad one to be heading our way. :-)
Page:
ps2_proud wrote:
> Sony were very clever with the release of the PS2. They new Dreamcast
> would soon fade away.
Well, not really. You've got to admit, the PS2 was completely and utterly rushed so Sony could cash in thanks to the PSOne's reputation. The pad was identical, the actual machine had a large amount of bugs in and there were only two controller ports! And don't make me go into the launch titles...
Even though I'm a Ninty really, I think my PS2's great (thanks to MGS2, GTA3) but Sony could have improved it a lot - and they chose not to.
> Sony were very clever with the release of the PS2. They new Dreamcast
> would soon fade away.
Well, not really. You've got to admit, the PS2 was completely and utterly rushed so Sony could cash in thanks to the PSOne's reputation. The pad was identical, the actual machine had a large amount of bugs in and there were only two controller ports! And don't make me go into the launch titles...
Even though I'm a Ninty really, I think my PS2's great (thanks to MGS2, GTA3) but Sony could have improved it a lot - and they chose not to.
Little Alex wrote:
> Please don't take this as a slagging I respect your opinion and I hope
> you respect mine, I just think if it ain't broken don't fix it.
Well the fact is - it is broken. The PS2 was so rushed it was riddled with bugs, and had a terrible launch line up. As Strafex says, the PSOne controller was designed for D-Pad gaming, which is an era quite far behind us now. Sony need to take a leaf out of Nintendo's book (as I believe the GameCube controller is the best ever designed) and spend some more time on each and every aspect of their console.
Really, the main reason the PS2 succeeded was because of the reputation the PSOne gained.
> Please don't take this as a slagging I respect your opinion and I hope
> you respect mine, I just think if it ain't broken don't fix it.
Well the fact is - it is broken. The PS2 was so rushed it was riddled with bugs, and had a terrible launch line up. As Strafex says, the PSOne controller was designed for D-Pad gaming, which is an era quite far behind us now. Sony need to take a leaf out of Nintendo's book (as I believe the GameCube controller is the best ever designed) and spend some more time on each and every aspect of their console.
Really, the main reason the PS2 succeeded was because of the reputation the PSOne gained.
ps2_proud wrote:
> ...::The Controller::...
> I think the controller is fine.
The Snes controller was fine, the N64 controller was fine, the original Playstation controller (without the analogue sticks) was fine, but there always have been, and always will be room for improvement.
And no. If you stuck an analogue stick
> where the D-Pad is it wouldn't be better. It would be too high and it
> would be impossible for most gamers to control properly. It's fine
> where it is. You can just reach accross and play away.
It's a pain having to reach across.
If the analogue stick is too high then Sony should lower it, but it should be where the D-Pad should be.
> This new 'style' button that wookieman conjured up. Well. As it is, I
> think the controller is fine. But if they did make this I know the two
> perfect places for it.
Wookiee was talking about updating the shoulder buttons.
The current ones are a bit plain and could do with being spiced up a bit.
The neat Gamecube style shoulder buttons are one possible example.
> Maybe a different type of port would change things a little, or the
> cylinder shaped thing thats near the port. Maybe they could change
> that somehow.
Yeah. Screw backwards compatibility this time round.
> ...::The Name::...
> Playstation is a brand name. Not only that, it is a house-hold name,
> much like nintendo. But X-Box, it will be a long time before that
> happens. If sony took away that name, people would lose trust or
> interest. Some might think,
>
> "They're having a new look at thiongs, I might stick with the
> tried and trusted Nintendo brand."
>
> Maybe they could call it "PlayStation III". But make the
> numerals in a cool font. Or, "Playstation: The Third Place"
> after all, what were all those ads about, eh?
Or they might think: "Just ANOTHER Playstation? I really can't be bothered this time round. Why can't they come up with something new??"
> ...::PS3's Competition::...
> Sony were very clever with the release of the PS2. They new Dreamcast
> would soon fade away. So they released the PS2 when there was no
> compitition. This meant, all the previous owners of the PS1 bought the
> console and new comers thought,
>
> "This is the only thing on the market, and it blows me away, BUY
> IT MOMMY!"
>
> With PlayStation III they should wait another year or so to develop
> the Cell. By this time, nintendo and Microsoft will probably be
> releasing their new 'Super Consoles" so sony can release the
> ultimate home entertainment system. Which they previously failed to do
> with the PS2.
It's not a case of power.
The Cell uses a new type of semi conductor which is why it's made such a huge leap in power. After this, better chips will be made, but as it is, I doubt ANY develloper will properly use the power of the Cell, so insignificant improvements on newer chips will be more or less needless.
Sony would be better off getting in first.
> The reason Sony can wait this long is because of one simple fact. You
> all remember the first couple of years of the PS1 right? Well,
> remember how 'shabby' the graphics seem? Well, do you also remember
> how the graphics improved with every new Big release? I knpow this
> will happen with Ps2 and it is alread starting. Enjoy the ride.
That was because devellopers were all used to 2D games and didn't know how to make 3D games yet. The PS2 also started relatively shabby down to how it was a pain to work with, but devellopers have got to gribs with it now and are more or less getting the best out of it.
> ...::The Controller::...
> I think the controller is fine.
The Snes controller was fine, the N64 controller was fine, the original Playstation controller (without the analogue sticks) was fine, but there always have been, and always will be room for improvement.
And no. If you stuck an analogue stick
> where the D-Pad is it wouldn't be better. It would be too high and it
> would be impossible for most gamers to control properly. It's fine
> where it is. You can just reach accross and play away.
It's a pain having to reach across.
If the analogue stick is too high then Sony should lower it, but it should be where the D-Pad should be.
> This new 'style' button that wookieman conjured up. Well. As it is, I
> think the controller is fine. But if they did make this I know the two
> perfect places for it.
Wookiee was talking about updating the shoulder buttons.
The current ones are a bit plain and could do with being spiced up a bit.
The neat Gamecube style shoulder buttons are one possible example.
> Maybe a different type of port would change things a little, or the
> cylinder shaped thing thats near the port. Maybe they could change
> that somehow.
Yeah. Screw backwards compatibility this time round.
> ...::The Name::...
> Playstation is a brand name. Not only that, it is a house-hold name,
> much like nintendo. But X-Box, it will be a long time before that
> happens. If sony took away that name, people would lose trust or
> interest. Some might think,
>
> "They're having a new look at thiongs, I might stick with the
> tried and trusted Nintendo brand."
>
> Maybe they could call it "PlayStation III". But make the
> numerals in a cool font. Or, "Playstation: The Third Place"
> after all, what were all those ads about, eh?
Or they might think: "Just ANOTHER Playstation? I really can't be bothered this time round. Why can't they come up with something new??"
> ...::PS3's Competition::...
> Sony were very clever with the release of the PS2. They new Dreamcast
> would soon fade away. So they released the PS2 when there was no
> compitition. This meant, all the previous owners of the PS1 bought the
> console and new comers thought,
>
> "This is the only thing on the market, and it blows me away, BUY
> IT MOMMY!"
>
> With PlayStation III they should wait another year or so to develop
> the Cell. By this time, nintendo and Microsoft will probably be
> releasing their new 'Super Consoles" so sony can release the
> ultimate home entertainment system. Which they previously failed to do
> with the PS2.
It's not a case of power.
The Cell uses a new type of semi conductor which is why it's made such a huge leap in power. After this, better chips will be made, but as it is, I doubt ANY develloper will properly use the power of the Cell, so insignificant improvements on newer chips will be more or less needless.
Sony would be better off getting in first.
> The reason Sony can wait this long is because of one simple fact. You
> all remember the first couple of years of the PS1 right? Well,
> remember how 'shabby' the graphics seem? Well, do you also remember
> how the graphics improved with every new Big release? I knpow this
> will happen with Ps2 and it is alread starting. Enjoy the ride.
That was because devellopers were all used to 2D games and didn't know how to make 3D games yet. The PS2 also started relatively shabby down to how it was a pain to work with, but devellopers have got to gribs with it now and are more or less getting the best out of it.
Seems good.
Im happy enough with my PS2 for now though.
:)
Im happy enough with my PS2 for now though.
:)
I did a threadf on the Cell's being finalised last week.
Cretin THAT!
Cretin THAT!
Keeping the Playstation name for the next console is all good and well considering the previous console has good success.
Just a few examples...
NES (great success) --------> SNES (same name, just SUPER! and again, great success) ------> N64 ( not too bad....but the name change! the market grew while Nintendo's market share fell) -------> GameCube (started off pretty damn well and the complete name change was a good idea especially after the bad vibes of the N64...The Name GameCube is pretty similar to the playstation in the way in what it defines what it is...Game=play....Cube=station....WTF IS XBOX EH?)
ahem....
Then you got the amzing sucess of GameBoy which i dont need to go into.
Just a few examples...
NES (great success) --------> SNES (same name, just SUPER! and again, great success) ------> N64 ( not too bad....but the name change! the market grew while Nintendo's market share fell) -------> GameCube (started off pretty damn well and the complete name change was a good idea especially after the bad vibes of the N64...The Name GameCube is pretty similar to the playstation in the way in what it defines what it is...Game=play....Cube=station....WTF IS XBOX EH?)
ahem....
Then you got the amzing sucess of GameBoy which i dont need to go into.
OK. I have read all the replies and have made my own opinions. I'll add anything that i forget later.
...::The Controller::...
I think the controller is fine. And no. If you stuck an analogue stick where the D-Pad is it wouldn't be better. It would be too high and it would be impossible for most gamers to control properly. It's fine where it is. You can just reach accross and play away.
This new 'style' button that wookieman conjured up. Well. As it is, I think the controller is fine. But if they did make this I know the two perfect places for it.
1) Between the start and select buttons.
2) Between the four shaped buttons. Square, triangle, O, X.
A little bit more grip around the handles or analogue sticks would be a bit helpful.
Maybe a different type of port would change things a little, or the cylinder shaped thing thats near the port. Maybe they could change that somehow.
...::The Name::...
Playstation is a brand name. Not only that, it is a house-hold name, much like nintendo. But X-Box, it will be a long time before that happens. If sony took away that name, people would lose trust or interest. Some might think,
"They're having a new look at thiongs, I might stick with the tried and trusted Nintendo brand."
Maybe they could call it "PlayStation III". But make the numerals in a cool font. Or, "Playstation: The Third Place" after all, what were all those ads about, eh?
...::PS3's Competition::...
Sony were very clever with the release of the PS2. They new Dreamcast would soon fade away. So they released the PS2 when there was no compitition. This meant, all the previous owners of the PS1 bought the console and new comers thought,
"This is the only thing on the market, and it blows me away, BUY IT MOMMY!"
With PlayStation III they should wait another year or so to develop the Cell. By this time, nintendo and Microsoft will probably be releasing their new 'Super Consoles" so sony can release the ultimate home entertainment system. Which they previously failed to do with the PS2.
The reason Sony can wait this long is because of one simple fact. You all remember the first couple of years of the PS1 right? Well, remember how 'shabby' the graphics seem? Well, do you also remember how the graphics improved with every new Big release? I knpow this will happen with Ps2 and it is alread starting. Enjoy the ride.
...::The Controller::...
I think the controller is fine. And no. If you stuck an analogue stick where the D-Pad is it wouldn't be better. It would be too high and it would be impossible for most gamers to control properly. It's fine where it is. You can just reach accross and play away.
This new 'style' button that wookieman conjured up. Well. As it is, I think the controller is fine. But if they did make this I know the two perfect places for it.
1) Between the start and select buttons.
2) Between the four shaped buttons. Square, triangle, O, X.
A little bit more grip around the handles or analogue sticks would be a bit helpful.
Maybe a different type of port would change things a little, or the cylinder shaped thing thats near the port. Maybe they could change that somehow.
...::The Name::...
Playstation is a brand name. Not only that, it is a house-hold name, much like nintendo. But X-Box, it will be a long time before that happens. If sony took away that name, people would lose trust or interest. Some might think,
"They're having a new look at thiongs, I might stick with the tried and trusted Nintendo brand."
Maybe they could call it "PlayStation III". But make the numerals in a cool font. Or, "Playstation: The Third Place" after all, what were all those ads about, eh?
...::PS3's Competition::...
Sony were very clever with the release of the PS2. They new Dreamcast would soon fade away. So they released the PS2 when there was no compitition. This meant, all the previous owners of the PS1 bought the console and new comers thought,
"This is the only thing on the market, and it blows me away, BUY IT MOMMY!"
With PlayStation III they should wait another year or so to develop the Cell. By this time, nintendo and Microsoft will probably be releasing their new 'Super Consoles" so sony can release the ultimate home entertainment system. Which they previously failed to do with the PS2.
The reason Sony can wait this long is because of one simple fact. You all remember the first couple of years of the PS1 right? Well, remember how 'shabby' the graphics seem? Well, do you also remember how the graphics improved with every new Big release? I knpow this will happen with Ps2 and it is alread starting. Enjoy the ride.
I think that's already been disproved.
You have to change the controller so it feels new, new console, new games, new generation, new controller. Simple.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> I don't really think there's much room for improvement. Adding any
> more buttons would be ridiculous. With the two analogue sticks now
> firmly established, I think they can do away with the D-pad and
> replace it with four individual buttons, as it's usually only used as
> extra selection buttons anyway (as in Dropship on PS2 and Rogue Leader
> on Gamecube).
Yeah, I agree with that so far.
> The position of the analogue sticks doesn't bother me, as long as they
> are symmetrical and not offset like on the GC and Xbox pads - that
> just feels wrong.
But not that.
I think that the Xbox and Gamecube have it right in terms of Analogue Stick/button placing. The left thumb comfortably sits on the analogue stick while the right thumb can nimbly switch between pressing buttons and the second analogue stick. If the second stick and buttons swapped places, pressing the buttons would be a pain.
You'd find it weird for the first day or two and then wonder who you ever managed with the original DS2 pad.
I remembered thinking that the N64 Pad was the bees knees.
I tried holing one the other day and it just didn't feel right any more.
> Keep the dual vibration function - it provides far better feedback
> than the GC's single motor.
Probably. I've never really thought about it.
> Maybe provide an option of two types of controller - one with
> pressure-sensitive buttons like the current DS2, and another with
> trigger-style buttons such as those on the GC - then you've catered
> for everyone.
Or, make L1 and R1 GC style buttons, and L2 and R2 the pressure sensitive ones - best of both worlds on one single pad.
I don't think I could answer the rest of what you said without holding a PS2 pad.
> I don't really think there's much room for improvement. Adding any
> more buttons would be ridiculous. With the two analogue sticks now
> firmly established, I think they can do away with the D-pad and
> replace it with four individual buttons, as it's usually only used as
> extra selection buttons anyway (as in Dropship on PS2 and Rogue Leader
> on Gamecube).
Yeah, I agree with that so far.
> The position of the analogue sticks doesn't bother me, as long as they
> are symmetrical and not offset like on the GC and Xbox pads - that
> just feels wrong.
But not that.
I think that the Xbox and Gamecube have it right in terms of Analogue Stick/button placing. The left thumb comfortably sits on the analogue stick while the right thumb can nimbly switch between pressing buttons and the second analogue stick. If the second stick and buttons swapped places, pressing the buttons would be a pain.
You'd find it weird for the first day or two and then wonder who you ever managed with the original DS2 pad.
I remembered thinking that the N64 Pad was the bees knees.
I tried holing one the other day and it just didn't feel right any more.
> Keep the dual vibration function - it provides far better feedback
> than the GC's single motor.
Probably. I've never really thought about it.
> Maybe provide an option of two types of controller - one with
> pressure-sensitive buttons like the current DS2, and another with
> trigger-style buttons such as those on the GC - then you've catered
> for everyone.
Or, make L1 and R1 GC style buttons, and L2 and R2 the pressure sensitive ones - best of both worlds on one single pad.
I don't think I could answer the rest of what you said without holding a PS2 pad.
Page: