The PS4 VS Xbox One battle is still raging, with Microsoft about to try and catch up to the PlayStation 4 with the launch of the Titanfall Xbox One edition . But are both the Xbox One and PS4 controllers poorly designed based upon what they could have been?
In a related report by The Inquisitr , In part 1 of this series we discussed how the both PS4 and Xbox One GPU should have been faster based upon a cost comparison to previous generations. Both Sony and Microsoft have tried to avoid letting their system be huge loss leaders for the next gen, but to the detriment to gamers. In fact, in part 2 of this series we analyzed how the Xbox One and PS4 hard drives could have been much faster and yet not have cost very much at all.
So at this point I probably should start by saying I was biased against the PlayStation 4 controller from the start. The design is great for fighting games, or anything else that uses the D-Pad heavily, but otherwise I’ve long felt the placement of the analog sticks were practically slapped on in an ad hoc fashion during the PS2 years. I was hoping the PS3 would fix these placement issues, never mind the PS4 controller, which just tweaked each component.
All in all, the Xbox One controller supposedly features 50 plus improvement and the PS4 controller also has its nifty touchpad along with the share button (yay for social streaming?). I do believe that both controllers are improved significantly from the PS3 and Xbox 360. But, quite frankly, both companies dropped the ball when it comes to expand the gaming experience.
Now I wasn’t expecting them to pull a Nintendo and create a completely new type of controller that expands the gameplay potential. Nor was I expecting something like the Occulus Rift , although the Sony virtual reality headset may be coming soon-ish. But it seems they could have made more technology standard in order to ensure that game developers support them well.
The Kinect 2.0 does have that potential since it is now standard. Even the original Kinect was largely held back by the processing power and memory limitations of the Xbox 360. So, while the Kinect 2.0 did raise the Xbox One cost by $100, I’m hoping future games will use this technology to its full advantage.
But the Xbox One controller should have been designed to augment more capabilities console from the start. First off, an embedded microphone could have helped the Kinect 2.0 with picking up the voice more accurately during gaming (the headset doesn’t count). Second, why is the Xbox One media controller sold separately instead of being standard? Third, why didn’t Microsoft copy the success of the PlayStation Move and build in similar functionality into the new controller?
Speaking of the PlayStation Move, it does function on the PS4 but Sony isn’t exactly heavily advertising that fact, nor are they heavily promoting its usage by developers as far as I can tell. The only good news is that the DualShock 4 features some motion-sensing and location-sensing capabilities which allows the PS4 controller to be tracked around the room and in relation to other controllers. So far the only thing I’ve seen that uses this tech is a sculpting tech demo by Media Molecule, maker of Little Big Planet. But Sony is missing the exact opposite of the equation as the Xbox One, because the PlayStation Eye should have become standard equipment with the PS4 in order for game developers to be willing to invest into the tech.
In the end, I believe the PS4 VS Xbox One battle has gamers picking sides instead of calling out both companies for not making better gaming systems. What do you think?