Poll of the Day > Which button layout do you prefer: Nintendo or Xbox?

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/df9791b9.jpg

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/b/b19a0ebf.jpg

nintendo
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/22bce434.jpg

Playstation.





But also Xbox. The Nintendo layout has always been stupid.

Xbox

Though I grew up with Xbox/Playstation, my only experience with Nintendo was my friend's GameCube

Nintendo is the way to go. No ifs, ands, or buts.

The Xbox layout is fucked.

Y being on the X axis and X being on the Y axis always throws me off with nintendo controllers

It looks like one them is trying to be different...which one came out second?

I like the Nintendo button placement, but the Sony stick placement.

It always makes more sense for Y to be on top, and A in the bottom

I'm an Xboxer for lyfe but keeping it the pro controller is legit.

Dual shock has always been the worst. Both twin sticks in the center bottom of the controller never felt good for fps. 3d platforming? Sure. But I'm more into fps

meundies posted...

It looks like one them is trying to be different...which one came out second?

The Nintendo layout was first used for the SNES in 1990. The Xbox layout was first used on the original Xbox in 2001.

Spelling it out, I'm reminded that the original Xbox is now more than twice as old as the SNES was when the Xbox came out. If you'll excuse me, I've got to go find a corner in which to crumble to dust.

Nade_Duck posted...

nintendo
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/22bce434.jpg

Also this. The most neutral position for the thumb is in the middle of the face button array, not on any one of the four buttons. The GC layout reflects that by placing a "primary" button in that spot and arranging the others around it. Not every game has a "primary" face button that can take proper advantage of that, but many do and it's a real shame that the GC's layout didn't catch on long-term to support that. Subsequent controllers have made other improvements over the GC controller than mean I wouldn't always use a GC controller in place of them (even with a second Z button and sticks upgraded to work as L3/R3 buttons to achieve functional parity), but I do miss that layout.

adjl posted...

The Nintendo layout was first used for the SNES in 1990. The Xbox layout was first used on the original Xbox in 2001.

Spelling it out, I'm reminded that the original Xbox is now more than twice as old as the SNES was when the Xbox came out. If you'll excuse me, I've got to go find a corner in which to crumble to dust.

Also this. The most neutral position for the thumb is in the middle of the face button array, not on any one of the four buttons. The GC layout reflects that by placing a "primary" button in that spot and arranging the others around it. Not every game has a "primary" face button that can take proper advantage of that, but many do and it's a real shame that the GC's layout didn't catch on long-term to support that. Subsequent controllers have made other improvements over the GC controller than mean I wouldn't always use a GC controller in place of them (even with a second Z button and sticks upgraded to work as L3/R3 buttons to achieve functional parity), but I do miss that layout.

Diamond layout makes more sense precisely because the thumb naturally rests in the middle of it, meaning it can go to any button. Also a layout like the GC would force developers to build games around that layout.

For Nintendo it's fine since for example in Mario Kart you accel with A, in Metroid Prime you shoot with A, etc. but most other developers have settled for the right trigger for those actions.

BlackOmnimon posted...

Diamond layout makes more sense precisely because the thumb naturally rests in the middle of it, meaning it can go to any button.

That means, however, that your thumb always has to leave its neutral position to hit a button. The GC layout allows there to be a button that requires no adjustment, while still allowing the thumb to easily reach any of the others. I think it could be improved by making the A button a bit smaller so the travel distance to B/X/Y wasn't quite so great, but otherwise it's got all the advantages of a diamond layout while eliminating the travel distance entirely for one of the four buttons.

BlackOmnimon posted...

Also a layout like the GC would force developers to build games around that layout.

That mostly boils down to "What action will the player be doing the most of? We should bind that to A." That's a process developers already go through in designing their control schemes, usually binding those actions to A or B if they feel a face button is appropriate.

BlackOmnimon posted...

For Nintendo it's fine since for example in Mario Kart you accel with A, in Metroid Prime you shoot with A, etc. but most other developers have settled for the right trigger for those actions.

Using shoulder buttons only makes sense if the right stick is used more often than the face buttons (like in shooters) or if you need the pressure sensitivity of a trigger (which racing games will sometimes use). Otherwise, that's a much more involved motion than pressing a button with your thumb, using a weaker digit. That's just not good ergonomics.

It more depends what region of games you play (assuming of course they are not regionalized to a different region).

A is always the "primary" button, so since Nintendo is a Japanese company, they put it on the right since that is what Japanese gamers tend to prefer. Western gamers prefer it on the bottom, so Xbox being a Western company, puts it on the bottom. It is also why run/shoot and jump where swapped on certain NES platformers, it all came down to which region the game was primarily made for, and most developers didn't want to swap them when translating for the other regions.

adjl posted...

The Nintendo layout was first used for the SNES in 1990. The Xbox layout was first used on the original Xbox in 2001.

Though it's also worth remembering that the original Xbox controller was directly influenced by the Sega Genesis controller:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sega-Genesis-6But-Cont.jpg

Though arguably the biggest reason for the difference in button layout is probably because the Japanese read "backwards" - they read from top-to-bottom, right-to-left (see also why manga is laid out the way it is). Whereas English is left-to-right, top-to-bottom. So "alphabetical order" is the opposite for each.

Or to put it another way, if you're an English speaker the Xbox layout is more logical, if you're native Japanese the Nintendo layout is more logical.



adjl posted...

Spelling it out, I'm reminded that the original Xbox is now more than twice as old as the SNES was when the Xbox came out. If you'll excuse me, I've got to go find a corner in which to crumble to dust.

If you think that's bad, try the chilling realization that your first console (that you bought off the shelf new) was discontinued 42 years ago.



adjl posted...

Also this. The most neutral position for the thumb is in the middle of the face button array, not on any one of the four buttons.

I can honestly say that I have never put my thumb in the middle of the button array as a neutral position, ever. If anything, my "neutral" is usually whatever the main action button is for whatever game I'm playing. I don't think I've ever played a game where the rate of usage was so identical for all four buttons that the most efficient and comfortable way to play was to center on them.

Conversely, I've definitely posted up on the center of a D-pad from time to time, depending on the game.

Also, I absolutely loathed the GC controller. But not as much as I loathed the N64 one. Both of those were very significant reasons why I stopped buying Nintendo consoles entirely. As I've said in the past, I honestly hate both of those controllers more than the Intellivision one that would literally slice into your thumbs until you bled.

Xbox because that's what I'm used to using since the OG xbox. But I could easily adjust to a different layout I'm sure.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Though arguably the biggest reason for the difference in button layout is probably because the Japanese read "backwards" - they read from top-to-bottom, right-to-left (see also why manga is laid out the way it is). Whereas English is left-to-right, top-to-bottom. So "alphabetical order" is the opposite for each.

This is only true for vertical text, normally Japanese is read left to right.

Also the Gamecube controller is especially good with RE4. That game was clearly designed to be used with the GC controller arguably more than any game ever

Nintendo, although I play with a 360 controller.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I don't think I've ever played a game where the rate of usage was so identical for all four buttons that the most efficient and comfortable way to play was to center on them.

That's the point: In terms of button usage, you virtually never need to default to holding your thumb in the centre The problem with that, however, is that the centre is the most neutral position for the thumb, meaning that if you instead hold it over whichever face button is used most often, you're constantly holding it out of neutral and placing a continuous strain on it. Obviously, this isn't a massive amount of effort, but ergonomics is often a matter of reducing micro-movements and -strains to improve overall comfort and reduce RSIs, and playing games is absolutely a case where you're performing the same actions thousands or millions of times and therefore need to consider that.

The GC controller addresses this by putting a button in the ergonomic neutral position and scattering the rest around it. That potentially means more total travel for games where you do use a near-even mix of face buttons, but for games where there's a clear most-used button, that can be assigned to A to let players park their thumbs there, reducing total travel.

Now, in practice, these days it's pretty common in any 3D game for your thumb to spend a roughly as much time controlling the camera with the right stick as on the face buttons, so there's an argument to be made that the right stick belongs in the thumb's neutral position and the face buttons in a secondary location. In that case, a symmetrical diamond layout makes the most sense because none of the buttons are going to be in the neutral position either way. It's really only the WiiU that's ever done that, though, and it didn't catch on either.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Also, I absolutely loathed the GC controller. But not as much as I loathed the N64 one. Both of those were very significant reasons why I stopped buying Nintendo consoles entirely. As I've said in the past, I honestly hate both of those controllers more than the Intellivision one that would literally slice into your thumbs until you bled.

About the only reason I can imagine for an opinion like that is that you looked at each controller once, couldn't immediately intuit where every button was, and that made you so angry that you refused to ever try learning. Yes, there's a learning curve for remembering which is X and which is Y on the GC controller. Yes, it's not immediately clear how the N64 controller should even be held. Neither of these, though, constitutes enough of a genuine challenge to warrant "loathing" them more than a controller that literally injured people (putting aside Mario Party blisters for the moment). If anything, the more non-standard layout makes it easier to avoid mistakes because you won't have muscle memory from similar layouts confusing you (as happens now when everyone has a diamond layout but X is in a different position every time), and the classic "how do you even hold this?" confusion around the N64 controller is answered by literally every single game's instruction manual telling you which grip to use (plus there were only like two games that ever used anything other than centre+right). It's not exactly rocket surgery.

Neither controller is without flaws (not being able to access the D-pad at all during regular N64 play wasn't great and the stick wasn't very comfortable, and the GC could have used a better C-stick and a second Z button), but getting that upset about either is just being a drama queen.

adjl posted...

About the only reason I can imagine for an opinion like that is that you looked at each controller once, couldn't immediately intuit where every button was, and that made you so angry that you refused to ever try learning.

Nah, I played with both of them multiple times in multiple games. But they never really felt comfortable, intuitive, or desirable to me in any way. It felt like trying to reinvent the wheel, but doing it by making it a square instead. I definitely never found them very ergonomic (something not helped by the fact that Nintendo tends to design controllers for smaller hands, and I am a 6'3" slab of meat with giant man hands).

It's entirely possible to make the argument that I was just used to the SNES/PS1 controller design at that point and my brain didn't want to adapt, but I've never really had that issue either before or since. I jumped from the ColecoVision controller to the Nintendo gamepad fairly easily, and I never had the same problems with the Xbox Duke controller that everyone else seemed to have (though I admittedly preferred the S-controller... which might actually be my favorite controller ever, at least in the 360 iteration).

I've played games with joysticks, flight sticks, rollerballs, paddles, and this thing ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Super_Action_Controller_Coleco_DSCF0353.JPG ), and I was fine with all of them. But the N64 controller just pushed every wrong button (no pun intended) for me. The GC controller was much better than the N64, but still just wasn't for me.

My assumption has always been that for people who like the N64 controller, a large part of it is probably because it was their first controller, or at least the one they grew up with. So nostalgia is doing a lot of heavy lifting.



adjl posted...

Now, in practice, these days it's pretty common in any 3D game for your thumb to spend a roughly as much time controlling the camera with the right stick as on the face buttons, so there's an argument to be made that the right stick belongs in the thumb's neutral position and the face buttons in a secondary location.

I think I'd tend to default to this. A lot of modern games (certainly many of the ones I play) are more focused on both sticks and the triggers, with the four-button array, D-pad, and bumpers being more secondary controls that you only occasionally use. Or as I mentioned earlier, when one of those buttons is the primary input, it tends to be the main input so you're not switching back and forth to the others that often anyway.

But to be fair, I'm also the person who has admitted in the past that I don't see a huge difference between symmetrical and asymmetric thumb sticks in terms of ease of use or comfort level when playing. It's simply not a significant enough difference to matter to me. So my brain almost certainly isn't really hardlocking on micro-movements or mathematically ideal ergonomic design to decide which controllers are good and which are terrible. Which is part of why I can generally jump back and forth between the Xbox and the PS4/5 fairly easily (with only a minor adjustment time to remember which one I'm on so I'm not hitting the wrong "X" button when prompted).

You people use your thumbs on a controller? I use it with my fingers, similar to a keyboard, I can hit more buttons at once that way

a current generation nintendo controller is the same layout as an xbox controller

anyways, xbox has the best layout out of every single controller that has ever existed.

Nade_Duck posted...

nintendo
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/22bce434.jpg

This, the best controller ever made.

What hasn't been said yet, is not only are the face buttons in a superior position, the fact that they all have different shapes and sizes is extremely underrated in terms of how ergonomically useful this is. Never have I adapted so quickly to a controller than the GCN, and this is precisely because it needs very little time to "study", and allows you to use tactile sense to adapt to the layout. The A (the most used button) is center and the biggest button. B is smaller, protrudes more sharply, and at an angle below A. You need to recall which is X and which is Y, but the X and Y buttons being placed above and off-kilter makes them fairly easy to remember as well. The octagon slits around the joystick also help guide more precise directional input.

It's easily the most ergonomic design of face buttons of any controller, and why it's preferred for high-twitch games like Smash Bros. It makes the muscle memory needed very easy compared to other layouts.

Nowadays, it'd keep the same face layout, but add modern advancements, like trigger sticks and buttons.

XBox.

in reality, the gamecube controller was an ergonomic nightmare like the n64 controller

NES and SNES style controllers.