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

[pmprog]

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

Read it in context with the first sentance - about buttons encroaching on right nub space.

That defeats the purpose of an all-in-one device, which Pandora tries to be

Are you referring to my "GCW-Zero-esque Fighter"? If so, I wasn't referring to the Pyra being one. It was just a comment about I'd buy one for fighters.

 

[bzar]

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.

I can assure you, I'm not trying to misunderstand you. Some sentences just are ambiguous and people will interpret them differently. In this case I interpreted you were arguing for "six face buttons instead of four" and not "if we have six buttons, how should they be laid out". My mistake.

 

[WizardStan]

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.

A properly designed interface shouldn't require any acclimation, it should be entirely natural. Having the left thumb and right thumb requiring the same movements is important to making an intuitive interface. If there is some minor non-symmetry like two extra buttons that are rarely used then it's not a major problem, but if you shift two frequently used buttons suddenly your left and right thumbs are doing different things regularly. You might not think it makes a difference but it does. The majority of consoles, even new ones just coming out, use a 4 button cross. That's not a coincidence.

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.

Yes yes, two extra buttons could be useful. That means absolutely nothing when discussing whether they should be prominent at the expense of two others or made smaller to the side and keep the existing 4 as primary.

 

[Saber]

Adding two more buttons should be possible, maybe.

 

[KillRoXx]

Id rather keep the current 4 buttons. adding an extra 2 would improve n64 emulation. but we have complications when it comes to the keyboard and the number row. the buttons either have to be very small or very close to eachother.

 and another complication. the hardware to add two extra buttons could waste space and possibly make it harder to design any modifications to the pyra..

as for the shoulder  buttons. there are going to be l1 l2 and r1 r2 buttons. yet we dont have an r3 and l3. making ps2 hardware emulation difficult. the problem is nubs. they cannot click in. and they wont click in. if we thicken the nubs and move it down a couple of cm we might be able to add a mechanism which allows it to click in for r3 and l3 capabilities

(thicken the nubs to improve durability)

 

[Neelix]

the problem is nubs. they cannot click in. and they wont click in.

Not on the pandora perhaps but ED has said that the new nubs he's looking at for the Pyra can be clicked.  (though only when the nub is centred)

- Neelix

 

[Askarus]

the problem is nubs. they cannot click in. and they wont click in.

Not on the pandora perhaps but ED has said that the new nubs he's looking at for the Pyra can be clicked.  (though only when the nub is centred)

- Neelix

For about 75% of the range they can click.

Only not close to the rim.

I wouldn't worry about that.

 

[_wb_]

I still think my 8-button layout makes sense, with 4 main buttons like they are now and 4 smaller additional ones on the diagonals, so all buttons arranged in a 3x3 grid with nothing in the middle. The small buttons could perhaps also be made of a material that feels a bit different, have a somewhat different shape (e.g. concave buttons instead of convex ones), and/or be more recessed so they are not as easy to press as the main buttons.


1 | Y | 2
---+---+---
A | | B
---+---+---
3 | X | 4

The main advantages of this layout are that it doesn't need any extra space, it's completely backwards compatible, and it is nicely symmetric and suitable to be used as a second dpad. Also the extra buttons can be used as dedicated insert/delete/backspace keys (and maybe enter?), leaving more room in the keyboard section for other stuff.

The main disadvantages are that maybe 8 buttons is a bit much (adds cost, might be confusing/overwhelming), and that 6-button layouts don't map that well to this. There are however several options to choose from that may or may not be nice for a particular 6-button game:

• two horizontal rows: 1 Y 2 and 3 X 4
• two vertical columns: 1 A 3 and 2 B 4
• two kind-of-diagonal rows: A Y 2 and 3 X B
• two other-kind-of-diagonal rows: 1 Y B and A X 4
• two corner-clusters: A 1 Y and X 4 B, or A 3 X and Y 2 B

You get the point: you get quite some flexibility with this layout.

 

[Askarus]

What about giving the option for  hackers like we have with R2/L2 on Pandora?

I would like to hack the buttons if possible.

Don't know if it's good for default

Especially the one in the bottom right bight be pressed by accident.

 

[WizardStan]

What about giving the option for  hackers like we have with R2/L2 on Pandora?

That still leaves those like God Ginrai with the existing cross pattern that they don't want.

 

[Askarus]

Especially the one in the bottom right bight be pressed by accident.

I tried and I surely will press this one by accident.

 

[_wb_]

Especially the one in the bottom right bight be pressed by accident.

I tried and I surely will press this one by accident.

I still think my 8-button layout makes sense, with 4 main buttons like they are now and 4 smaller additional ones on the diagonals, so all buttons arranged in a 3x3 grid with nothing in the middle. The small buttons could perhaps also be made of a material that feels a bit different, have a somewhat different shape (e.g. concave buttons instead of convex ones), and/or be more recessed so they are not as easy to press as the main buttons.

 

[Grench]

Especially the one in the bottom right bight be pressed by accident.

 I tried and I surely will press this one by accident.

 

I still think my 8-button layout makes sense, with 4 main buttons like they are now and 4 smaller additional ones on the diagonals, so all buttons arranged in a 3x3 grid with nothing in the middle. The small buttons could perhaps also be made of a material that feels a bit different, have a somewhat different shape (e.g. concave buttons instead of convex ones), and/or be more recessed so they are not as easy to press as the main buttons.

At that point put one in the middle and you have a 9 key calculator style input.

Isn't the whole point of having dedicated game pad keys so that they give clear easy tactile usage for those keys without confusion of what button your thumb is on? Adding more keys to it could become a detriment to game play.

 

[_wb_]

A 9 key calculator? I don't know how you do things, but in decimal notation you need 10 keys just for the numbers.

 

[Granitehead]

The small buttons could perhaps also be made of a material that feels a bit different, have a somewhat different shape (e.g. concave buttons instead of convex ones), and/or be more recessed so they are not as easy to press as the main buttons.

Adding more keys to it could become a detriment to game play.

Not if you do it right.

 

[Askarus]

Especially the one in the bottom right bight be pressed by accident.

I tried and I surely will press this one by accident.

I still think my 8-button layout makes sense, with 4 main buttons like they are now and 4 smaller additional ones on the diagonals, so all buttons arranged in a 3x3 grid with nothing in the middle. The small buttons could perhaps also be made of a material that feels a bit different, have a somewhat different shape (e.g. concave buttons instead of convex ones), and/or be more recessed so they are not as easy to press as the main buttons.

It is exactly where my thumb is placed when using the gaming buttons.

It's disturbing at least.

 

[Grench]

At that point put one in the middle and you have a 9 key calculator style input.

 

A 9 key calculator? I don't know how you do things, but in decimal notation you need 10 keys just for the numbers.

Get your eyes checked. I stated, "calculator style input". 

Not if you do it right.

I'm not the one doing it. My concern, though, is that we're filling every blank spot of the case with buttons - which is contrary to, 'the point' of having dedicated gaming controls. At some level we may as well just re-map a few keys in the center of the keyboard as A/B/X/Y.
There is a point of diminishing returns.

 

[Askarus]

 

Not if you do it right.

I'm not the one doing it. My concern, though, is that we're filling every blank spot of the case with buttons - which is contrary to, 'the point' of having dedicated gaming controls. At some level we may as well just re-map a few keys in the center of the keyboard as A/B/X/Y.

There is a point of diminishing returns.

That's a good point.

2 More (6 buttons) is good.

4 More is too much I think.

 

[God Ginrai]

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.

A properly designed interface shouldn't require any acclimation, it should be entirely natural.

A 6-button layout as I suggested is natural. Do you happen to know why the 4 buttons are arranged as a diamond instead of say, as a square? It's because your thumb approaches the buttons from an angle, like so:

THMB
\ /
\/
/ Point of Leverage
/
Due to this, it is better to have subsequent buttons diagonally from buttons you have your thumb on. In Nintendo's case, they made 2 rows of 2. So that you could easily move between X and Y, and if you move your thumb downward, you are on a new axis that allows you to press A and B. In Sega's case, they made 2 rows of 3. Top row being X, Y, and Z, and the bottom row being A, B, and C. It doesn't matter if it makes a perfect diamond for it to be comfortable, only for it to be a diagonal slope. This same concept is also why the original X-Box Duke controller's ABXY buttons were angled.
The only reason I even mentioned acclimation is because there are people who are stuck in their ways and always will require acclimation. A circle Dpad, for example, is natural. However, many people who grew up only on Nintendo consoles will have to get acclimated to it, because they can't imagine a Dpad that is not a cross.

Symmetrical movement has nothing to do with it. If that were true, then the X-Box 360 controller, widely regarded as the best controller for FPSes, would be completely unintuitive with it's non-symmetrical Analog sticks.

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.

Yes yes, two extra buttons could be useful. That means absolutely nothing when discussing whether they should be prominent at the expense of two others or made smaller to the side and keep the existing 4 as primary.

 It means just as little as your suggestion that we keep a cross at the expense of all 6-button emulation and gaming being completely gimped.

I still think my 8-button layout makes sense, with 4 main buttons like they are now and 4 smaller additional ones on the diagonals, so all buttons arranged in a 3x3 grid with nothing in the middle. The small buttons could perhaps also be made of a material that feels a bit different, have a somewhat different shape (e.g. concave buttons instead of convex ones), and/or be more recessed so they are not as easy to press as the main buttons.

 2 rows of 3 buttons all on a straight line is very hard to use because of the reasons I mention earlier in this post about diagonal layouts.

What about giving the option for  hackers like we have with R2/L2 on Pandora?

 Adding 2 extra buttons in a decent layout once a 4-button layout was implemented would be an even harder task than adding L2 and R2 to the Pandora.

Not if you do it right.

I'm not the one doing it. My concern, though, is that we're filling every blank spot of the case with buttons - which is contrary to, 'the point' of having dedicated gaming controls. At some level we may as well just re-map a few keys in the center of the keyboard as A/B/X/Y.
There is a point of diminishing returns.

That's a good point.

2 More (6 buttons) is good.

4 More is too much I think.

Agreed.

-God Ginrai

 

[WizardStan]

It means just as little as your suggestion that we keep a cross at the expense of all 6-button emulation and gaming being completely gimped.

1) Not it doesn't. The quote I responded to was you making arguments as to why 6 buttons is important. Nowhere in the reasoning you gave in that block of text did you touch on why a straight line 2x3 pattern specifically was strictly superior to anything else. We're in agreement, 6 buttons is better than 4, the extra 2 buttons is useful for a lot of things, you don't need to make the argument for that case anymore at all. The problem at hand is where to put them.2) Having a cross and two others not in a straight line hardly seems like gimped gaming and emulation. Hyperbole generally makes for poor arguments, you won't convince anyone that you're right that way, not while I'm around. I've tried to give reasons why I believe maintaining a cross pattern is important, with two additional buttons added around them somewhere; Your arguments basically amount to "6 buttons is important" and "I want it like this".