31st August 2010, 11:40 AM
(This post was last modified: 31st August 2010, 11:50 AM by Dark Jaguar.)
I remember the dreamcast controller. I remember the d-pad on it sucked too. In fact I'd rank it worse than the 360 d-pad. You're right that the shape isn't really the issue, it's the underlying design. Nintendo d-pads are just a chunk of plastic over standard rubber contacts. It's simple, elegant, and works great. However it's patented, so if you look at Sega's design for example, they put a ball bearing in the very center to "balance" the d-pad around. Otherwise it's more or less the same, but different enough they can't be sued. The shape is another matter, I never really cared if it was circular or cross shaped. The Sony d-pad is more or less a d-pad but to make it different enough, they had the plastic "cross" dive under the face of the controller right in the middle, ostensibly a new way to "hold the pad in place" but it accomplishes the design goal of having an addition to the design to avoid patent issues.
Both Sega and Sony's solutions do well enough. I no longer have a Sidewinder (I gave mine away ever since I found newer sound cards no longer had "Game Ports" on them, and never bothered getting a USB version), but I think that one used the same "balanced on a ball bearing" design as the Genesis. That design seems to have been inherited on the Saturn and the Dreamcast, but in the case of the Dreamcast it's so exxagerated that it's downright awkward. I found removing the ball bearing does wonders for "fixing" that design flaw.
The XBox and 360 have their own way around the patent issue. The d-pad doesn't rest directly on top of the rubber contacts. Rather, the part you manually adjust narrows down to a cylinder which descends into the face plate of the controller, where it then widens out into another d-pad-shaped portion which itself rests on top of the rubber contacts. I suppose the argument for patent lawyers would probably be something about protection from dust and spills. Anyway, it's different enough to avoid patent issues, but it presents it's own problems. It would probably work well enough, as it did on the two XBox original controller designs, but it is again "taller" than it needs to be, combined with a very narrow "pit" where the d-pad rests which causes it to hit the sides during use. Others have gone over more details as to where the flaws are.
Anyway, ideally this new "patent avoiding" design means they can scrap the "outer d-pad linked to inner d-pad" model entirely and just go for a direct overlay, just with the "circle to cross" shape adjustment worked in.
Both Sega and Sony's solutions do well enough. I no longer have a Sidewinder (I gave mine away ever since I found newer sound cards no longer had "Game Ports" on them, and never bothered getting a USB version), but I think that one used the same "balanced on a ball bearing" design as the Genesis. That design seems to have been inherited on the Saturn and the Dreamcast, but in the case of the Dreamcast it's so exxagerated that it's downright awkward. I found removing the ball bearing does wonders for "fixing" that design flaw.
The XBox and 360 have their own way around the patent issue. The d-pad doesn't rest directly on top of the rubber contacts. Rather, the part you manually adjust narrows down to a cylinder which descends into the face plate of the controller, where it then widens out into another d-pad-shaped portion which itself rests on top of the rubber contacts. I suppose the argument for patent lawyers would probably be something about protection from dust and spills. Anyway, it's different enough to avoid patent issues, but it presents it's own problems. It would probably work well enough, as it did on the two XBox original controller designs, but it is again "taller" than it needs to be, combined with a very narrow "pit" where the d-pad rests which causes it to hit the sides during use. Others have gone over more details as to where the flaws are.
Anyway, ideally this new "patent avoiding" design means they can scrap the "outer d-pad linked to inner d-pad" model entirely and just go for a direct overlay, just with the "circle to cross" shape adjustment worked in.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)