6 buttons AB/CD/XY and 4 shoulder buttons?


_wb_ said:
Are you sure that the current Pandora key maps to the "windows key"? I think it doesn't. I think it already maps to "menu".
Click to expand...
Not 100%, because I don't know what Linux calls all those keys, I just thought that.

WizardStan said:
It's up to the fighting game people, what do y'all think? Does the way they're added seem like they could be used for the 2x3 games? Or is the fact that they're smaller and not strictly in a line going to be a problem?
Click to expand...
Personally, difficult to know without trying them, but sounds okay.
 
WizardStan said:
I can't find a reason to complain about the 4 smaller buttons. :p

They're not interfering with the original 4, not forcing them to change shape or move at all, and that was my primary concern.

It's up to the fighting game people, what do y'all think? Does the way they're added seem like they could be used for the 2x3 games? Or is the fact that they're smaller and not strictly in a line going to be a problem?
Click to expand...
I can get behind the idea of 8 buttons, but I just can't stand a grid of buttons like _wb_ is proposing. Anything with a 6 button layout would feel weird to me on that, and having the A and B surrounding my C buttons like that would also feel really weird.

I was thinking about the height issue, which is why _wb_ said he did not want a layout like this:

Code: 
   |   | Y |
---+---+---+---
   | A |   | B 
---+---+---+---
 C |   | X |
---+---+---+---
   | Z |   |
If we shift the 2 inner columns of the buttons up, we can have a 6-button layout that is much more acceptable and still takes up the same height as the 4-button diamond we currently have. Also, since it is only a slight shift, it mostly retains a diamond shape whichever pair of columns you look at.

Code: 
   |   | Y |
---+-A-+---+---
 C |   |   | B 
---+---+-X-+---
   | Z |   |
-God Ginrai
 
Last edited by a moderator:
God Ginrai said:
If we shift the 2 inner columns of the buttons up
Click to expand...
Which is what I'm hoping to avoid. Having four buttons arranged in a traditional cross I think is more important than adding two extra buttons. It's familiar, it's symmetrical with the D-Pad, it gives you a second pseudo-D-pad, and is the most comfortable layout for 4 button gaming which I honestly believe (presently without evidence unfortunately, just gut feeling) will continue to account for the majority of use. We need a poll.  ^_^
 
WizardStan said:
God Ginrai said:
If we shift the 2 inner columns of the buttons up
Click to expand...
Which is what I'm hoping to avoid. Having four buttons arranged in a traditional cross I think is more important than adding two extra buttons. It's familiar, it's symmetrical with the D-Pad, it gives you a second pseudo-D-pad, and is the most comfortable layout for 4 button gaming which I honestly believe (presently without evidence unfortunately, just gut feeling) will continue to account for the majority of use. We need a poll.  ^_^
Click to expand...
The difference in the setup I suggested and a traditional cross is so minimal that it takes almost no time to get acclimated to it.

Also, you suggest that 4-button gaming will still be most prevalent on the Pyra, however, I believe that many homebrew or ported games would welcome two extra buttons to assign actions to. As for emulation, any 4-button system emulator could use them for actions like quick-save and fast forward.

Honestly, suggesting that we keep the traditional cross feels the same way to me as someone who would suggest using a cross dpad because they grew up w/ a SNES rather than a Megadrive. I think it's more due to habit and less due to experience, and isn't a good reason for limiting the number of buttons.

-God Ginrai
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Personally I'd love to see the A button on the right or bottom of the formation so that it becomes an obvious main button for games authors. As is when trying out a new PND you have to take a moment to figure out whether the author used the A button as main, or the B button (Nintendo style), or the X button (Sega style).


Granted, moving the buttons around might break compatibility with some existing PNDs, but just swapping around A and B might be enough. Although to support a logical arrangement of 6 buttons, I'd suggest we switch to a more regular arrangement of letters, assuming there are no commercial restrictions on doing so any more. I realise the Pandora was apeing the GP32 layout, but really that's just daft.
 
Levi said:
Personally I'd love to see the A button on the right or bottom of the formation so that it becomes an obvious main button for games authors. As is when trying out a new PND you have to take a moment to figure out whether the author used the A button as main, or the B button (Nintendo style), or the X button (Sega style).

Granted, moving the buttons around might break compatibility with some existing PNDs, but just swapping around A and B might be enough. Although to support a logical arrangement of 6 buttons, I'd suggest we switch to a more regular arrangement of letters, assuming there are no commercial restrictions on doing so any more. I realise the Pandora was apeing the GP32 layout, but really that's just daft.
Click to expand...
As WizardStan mentioned earlier, what each button should be called can, and will, be argued. :p

I was merely showing the layout. I would prefer it to be Megadrive/Saturn-style ABC bottom row XYZ top row, but that kind of discussion is for after we convince people of the layout.

And yes, the Pandora used the same layout as the GP2X for the ABXY buttons. As far as compatibility is concerned, there can be plenty of ways around that. I don't think we need to worry about that at this point in time.

-God Ginrai
 
I think of _wb_'s suggestions came close to how I would do it, but I would have flipped it.

Code: 
   | Y | Z
---+---+---
 A |   | B
---+---+---
 C | X |
- Neelix
 
God Ginrai said:
WizardStan said:
I can't find a reason to complain about the 4 smaller buttons. :p


They're not interfering with the original 4, not forcing them to change shape or move at all, and that was my primary concern.


It's up to the fighting game people, what do y'all think? Does the way they're added seem like they could be used for the 2x3 games? Or is the fact that they're smaller and not strictly in a line going to be a problem?
Click to expand...
I can get behind the idea of 8 buttons, but I just can't stand a grid of buttons like _wb_ is proposing. Anything with a 6 button layout would feel weird to me on that, and having the A and B surrounding my C buttons like that would also feel really weird.


I was thinking about the height issue, which is why _wb_ said he did not want a layout like this:


| | Y |
---+---+---+---
| A | | B
---+---+---+---
C | | X |
---+---+---+---
| Z | |

If we shift the 2 inner columns of the buttons up, we can have a 6-button layout that is much more acceptable and still takes up the same height as the 4-button diamond we currently have. Also, since it is only a slight shift, it mostly retains a diamond shape whichever pair of columns you look at.

Code: 
   |   | Y |
---+-A-+---+---
 C |   |   | B 
---+---+-X-+---
   | Z |   |
-God Ginrai
Click to expand...
The problem (or advantage, depending on your point of view) with that layout is that you can only interpret that layout as two rows of three buttons, and nothing else. If you want to use ABXY as a dpad, A will feel like it's left-up and B will feel like it's right-down. Not to mention that you might be accidentally pressing CXZA instead of ABXY.

Moreover, any layout that is not a square has the problem that it breaks symmetry. Assuming we want to place the two nubs symmetrically, with the dpad to the left of them and the action buttons to the right, the action buttons group has to have the same area as the dpad. So it's not just height that matters, also the width matters. If you need more width for the action buttons, you also need to add extra padding around the dpad. Increasing the width of the action button group by 1cm means the device becomes 2cm wider.
 
_wb_ said:
The problem (or advantage, depending on your point of view) with that layout is that you can only interpret that layout as two rows of three buttons, and nothing else. If you want to use ABXY as a dpad, A will feel like it's left-up and B will feel like it's right-down. Not to mention that you might be accidentally pressing CXZA instead of ABXY.

Moreover, any layout that is not a square has the problem that it breaks symmetry. Assuming we want to place the two nubs symmetrically, with the dpad to the left of them and the action buttons to the right, the action buttons group has to have the same area as the dpad. So it's not just height that matters, also the width matters. If you need more width for the action buttons, you also need to add extra padding around the dpad. Increasing the width of the action button group by 1cm means the device becomes 2cm wider.
Click to expand...
Honestly, Your first point doesn't seem to be a problem at all to me.

I understand where you are coming from with your second point. The problem of symmetry is worth considering. However, I believe that is just a matter of extending the left side so the nubs are the same distance from the edges. This also gives you some breathing room to move the dpad horizontally so it is at a position that is easiest to use. (Should it move inward? etc.)

-God Ginrai
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do you guys would have such a problem with a P2 that is a centimeter broader because of a traditional 6 button layout?

It doesn't have to be anyway, you could just move the nubs and start+select a bit more together, this may get us some room for a throttle axis right of the d-pad too. ;)
 
I wouldn't call it "traditional" except in arcade cabinets. Even sega moved to four face buttons in dreamcast. Also SNES, NDS, NDSi, N3DS, PS, PS2, PS3, PS4, PSP, PSVita, XBox, Xbox360, Xbox One use four face buttons. How is it traditional?
 
Traditional layout for 6 button controls. *sigh*

Sometimes I think, you want to understand everything wrong. -.-°

I never used a sega controller and we never had arcade cabinets in my area, at least none that I knew of.

Saitek_P2600_Rumble_Force_First_Person_Shooter_GamepadqwdDetail.jpg


The 4 main buttons are a cross and the two additional ones are slightly out of the line: Perfect for me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Klumpen said:
Traditional layout for 6 button controls. *sigh*

Sometimes I think, you want to understand everything wrong. -.-°
Click to expand...
The problem with this - is the physical space it takes. If you're aimed for the same size (roughly) as the Pandora, you're encroaching on both the right nub and the keyboard.
If you ditched the right nub, then sure, but then you lose twin-stick shooters.

Personally, I'd pay for a GCW-Zero style device designed purely for fighters. Even thought about trying to make one myself, but other than thinking about trying to put a Pi in a box that would be uncomfortable to hold, I don't really know how to go about it.
 
pmprog said:
If you ditched the right nub, then sure, but then you lose twin-stick shooters.
Click to expand...
No one wants to get rid of the two sticks, who brought this up? I see people posting about it, like someone actually wants this. Oo

pmprog said:
The problem with this - is the physical space it takes. If you're aimed for the same size (roughly) as the Pandora, you're encroaching on both the right nub and the keyboard.
[...]


Personally, I'd pay for a GCW-Zero style device designed purely for fighters. Even thought about trying to make one myself, but other than thinking about trying to put a Pi in a box that would be uncomfortable to hold, I don't really know how to go about it.
Click to expand...
That defeats the purpose of an all-in-one device, which Pandora tries to be.

I even think, that a slightly more broad design (you never would need more than 5-10 additional mm) would be quite comfortable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

segaprophet
6 face buttons necessary?
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
11K
Xaeo
Xaeo
P
  • Poll
Four Shoulder Buttons?
2
Replies
24
Views
4K
Pritchy
P
Javacat
  • Poll
Action Buttons
2
Replies
24
Views
6K
quartercast
quartercast
_wb_
Mouse buttons on shoulders without losing shoulder modifiers
2
Replies
26
Views
9K
elw3
elw3
thatgui
Time for speculations: First dummy board video
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
6K
xiongxioi
X
Back
Top