I have the benefit of not having played the PS2. Which means I never got used to the PS2 controller. I've played the GameCube, original XBOX (S controller), Logitech knockoffs, mad catz knockoffs, and now the best, the XBOX 360 controller.
We recently added a PS3 to our collection, and while I'm impressed with the console hardware (much higher quality than the 360), I think Sony missed an opportunity to modernize this controller.
The left thumbstick is just broken. If you take away the two thumbsticks, you basically have the original PS1 controller. The sticks were tacked on in response to Nintendo's innovative thumbstick for the Nintendo 64, and they're STILL tacked on. Your left thumbstick, which is the primary control, is unnaturally low. The distance from the "triggers" to the thumbstick is too far. My 7 year old can play the XBOX and Gamecube conrollers, but complained within minutes of his hands hurting while trying to play Formula 1 on the PS3. Also, I'd like a little more resistance in the sticks--after going back to the XBOX controller they almost felt too stiff in comparison, so maybe there's a happy medium.
Which brings me to the triggers . . I think the level of control with the XBOX triggers is more precise.
I never thought a controller could weigh too little, but this one does. I'd prefer the heft of most the other controllers, which comes from having rumble feedback and larger batteries to run the rumble.
On the plus side, you can charge it with a standard USB cable, without having to buy the "play and charge" kit that Microsoft sells. Also, it's more intuitive getting it connected to your console.
I understand that controllers are a matter of personal preference--and if you've played hours on the PS2 then you're probably going to love the PS3 controller. But I think an objective look at it would conceded that they should have evolved--the XBOX controller has evolved twice since "the duke" came out originally.
Get more detail about
PlayStation 3 Wireless Sixaxis Controller.
Posts
