6 face buttons necessary?

[PokeParadox]

N64 dammit!

 

[thatgui]

An extra two face buttons have no clear purpose outside of a niche interest in portable arcade fighting games and the hazy "more buttons, more options" argument, especially when they clearly can't be integrated properly given the space provided.

I guess the key word is "compromise":Some people voiced their wish to have a six button layout ("sega style") so they can play fighting games more easily, emulated n64 games are easier to play, and some other reasons I can't remember. As Ed tries to listen to the community, he tried to integrate a six button layout as suggested, but failed to do so. In order to still cater somewhat to the orginal wish, he tried another layout so two extra buttons are least "there". Et voilà

 

[segaprophet]

That's not a real reason. You might think those buttons are totally pointless but if even one person finds them useful then they aren't - and I guarantee you that will be the case. So why remove them?

So, if only one person finds them useful - then that should dictate the design of the device for everyone else. Sound logic..

 

[EvilDragon]

I can think of a lot of useful ideas for these two buttons.

As already mentioned above, for INS or DEL.

They would also make comfortable START and SELECT buttons for PSX and SNES games (instead of the ones in the middle).

Maybe also as left / right mouse buttons.

They're not in the way and add new possibilities. I don't see an issue here

 

[Klumpen]

Has a new N64 layout been decided on  yet?

Cl   Cu

B           Cr

Cd   A

And Z on one of the new shoulder buttons?

 

[segaprophet]

I can think of a lot of useful ideas for these two buttons.


As already mentioned above, for INS or DEL.


They would also make comfortable START and SELECT buttons for PSX and SNES games (instead of the ones in the middle).


Maybe also as left / right mouse buttons.


They're not in the way and add new possibilities. I don't see an issue here

Hiya ED, thanks for pitching in! I only mean to encourage yet more reassessment of the current design spec. In my opinion, the additional buttons do look rather awkwardly placed currently.


I can appreciate the physical limitations the DP team is working within towards a production design - but it's kind of the community's job to be the fire under your backsides always...

 

[PokeParadox]

I think the design has been finalised here now anyway? :S

 

[fusion_power]

I can think of a lot of useful ideas for these two buttons.


As already mentioned above, for INS or DEL.


They would also make comfortable START and SELECT buttons for PSX and SNES games (instead of the ones in the middle).


Maybe also as left / right mouse buttons.


They're not in the way and add new possibilities. I don't see an issue here

Just make sure that these buttons can't be hit by accident. Some people have big hands and thumbs.  -_-   A placement as "far away" as possible from ABXY is the key, the Idea to make the additional buttons smaller too, I like this idea.

 

[levi]

I wonder if colouring the two smaller buttons differently to the diamond of four would help to structure the appearance of the buttons without making them look too busy?

 

[Exophase]

So, if only one person finds them useful - then that should dictate the design of the device for everyone else. Sound logic..

Much better than your logic, which is to take them out just because you can't think of a use you want them for. You have to think of an actual downside.

 

[Grench]

ED's solution is novel, efficient and functional.  It's a great compromise between 4 and 6 button layouts.  It adds the additional 2 buttons without compromising the 4 button cross layout or it's position.  It's a win for everyone.

 

[Tenka]

ED's solution is novel, efficient and functional.  It's a great compromise between 4 and 6 button layouts.  It adds the additional 2 buttons without compromising the 4 button cross layout or it's position.  It's a win for everyone.

It's certainly unchallenged that ED's layout doesn't compromise the 4 button cross, but there are evidently more downsides to feel unsatisfied with.  Please don't speak for everyone, it makes me feel concerned that I may appear to qualify. 

 

[RuneIV]

Can't find the link with ED's proposed layout. Could someone point me to it please?

 

[LEOXD]

^ there is a 3D print in this post: http://boards.openpandora.org/topic/16107-the-case-of-the-case/

As well as more of the what-6-button-layout-to-use-discussion

 

[rygD]

I think the 4+2 layout in the above link sorta looks like a fish.

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

That's not a real reason. You might think those buttons are totally pointless but if even one person finds them useful then they aren't - and I guarantee you that will be the case. So why remove them?

So, if only one person finds them useful - then that should dictate the design of the device for everyone else. Sound logic..

So according to your logic, you are not representing the majority as well and hence Ed shouldn't consider your opinion neither.

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

I can think of a lot of useful ideas for these two buttons.


As already mentioned above, for INS or DEL.


They would also make comfortable START and SELECT buttons for PSX and SNES games (instead of the ones in the middle).


Maybe also as left / right mouse buttons.


They're not in the way and add new possibilities. I don't see an issue here

Hiya ED, thanks for pitching in! I only mean to encourage yet more reassessment of the current design spec. In my opinion, the additional buttons do look rather awkwardly placed currently.

I can appreciate the physical limitations the DP team is working within towards a production design - but it's kind of the community's job to be the fire under your backsides always...

You are the fire under his back side not the community. We discussed all possible scheme for the 6 buttons in other threads and Ed demonstrated that it is not technically possible to have the "traditional" layout with the schedule and budget he has. Ok, you've been complaining so where is your solution that Ed can implement?

 

[Exophase]

His solution is to just have the same 4 button scheme as Pandora. I mean, if you can call that a solution.

 

[segaprophet]

His solution is to just have the same 4 button scheme as Pandora. I mean, if you can call that a solution.

And it will be a better device for it. It would be better a better use of energy designing the highest quality and best feeling buttons possible, not just tacking on more where they don't fit.

Quality, not quantity.

 

[WizardStan]

And it will be a better device for it.

So you've said but you have yet to give even a single example of why that cannot be applied to anything else.You say "quality over quantity" but by that definition we should reduce it to two buttons, or even one. Heck, get rid of the keyboard, it's just all excess quantity. Oh, but that's not what you meant, those buttons are ok, four buttons is the magic number, some arbitrary number that you've just decided but can't justify; and the keyboard adds something, some "quality" that you can't be measured.

But two extra buttons? Even when they have literally zero impact on how the rest of the system is used, those are obviously the thing that cross the line. No need to justify it, it is clearly a waste of energy because you said it is.