X360 or PS3: Which console has the better designed controller?

This question can't possibly be answered objectively by most of the people on this board. They will choose which ever console they prefer period. It'll just be another fanboy flamebait thread as usual.

I use to be a PS3 controller purist, but honestly, for FPS games, the 360 is hands down better. I really don't like the mushy analog sticks on the PS3, makes aiming harder than it should be.

Both have serious flaws.

360 controller d-pad is broken, buttons are too stiff. Has a nice ergonomic design and deep trigger for shooters. Playing some hack and slash games with repetative button mashing results in bursitis and finger joint pain. Battery pack removable is a plus.

Dualshock 3 nice d-pad and buttons, but not ergonomic or nice to hold for long periods, I have no idea what they were thinking with the triggers, it fast forwards movies when you put it down on a flat surface. Sixaxis is a waste of resources. Non-removable battery pack.

Overall it's a tie

DS3 deficiencies can be overcome with aftermarket triggers, it does a fine job with any type of game.

360 controller takes the edge in shooters, but poor for every other category.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"]PS3, the 360 one feels bulky and uncomfortablemems_1224

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="kuraimen"]PS3, the 360 one feels bulky and uncomfortablekuraimen

DS3 is actually bigger for "man hands."

Measure if you don't believe me.

It is also provably more precise, with smaller deadzone.

The reason for "mushy" sticks is this

You aim with the thumb, so if the stick is too tight, you have to exert the thumb and it makes your aim more wobbly, with mushy stick you don't have to exert the thumb, for precise headshots.

Takes some practice but you will see if you use it alot, you will take better shots with it.

I'd say the 360 controller. It's not that I don't like the Dualshock, its just that there are a few things that bug me about it. 1. I have fairly large MANS hands (not like arkephonic with his 5 year old girl hands) and the Dualshock simply feels cramped in my hands. 2. The thumbsticks are placed too close together and have a convex curve, which I find incredibly weird. Concave sticks conform to the curves on my thumb tips, why would want it against it? The Dpad, however, is amazing on the Dualshock.Plagueless

Yeah, I doubt you can palm an NBA sized basketball with 1 hand like I can.

DS3 is actually bigger for "man hands."

Measure if you don't believe me.

It is also provably more precise, with smaller deadzone.

The reason for "mushy" sticks is this

You aim with the thumb, so if the stick is too tight, you have to exert the thumb and it makes your aim more wobbly, with mushy stick you don't have to exert the thumb, for precise headshots.

Takes some practice but you will see if you use it alot, you will take better shots with it.

ZombieKiller7

Yeah, I've used both the PS3 and 360 controllers extensively, and the PS3 analog sticks are much, much better. 10-bit analog precision as opposed to 8-bit in the 360 controllers, the same as last generation controllers.

It is literally a fact that the DualShock 3 has less deadzone and more precise analog sticks, you can't debate it, it's not an opinion.

Both

[QUOTE="meetroid8"]PS3, just for the rechargeable battery. mems_1224

Personally I like having an option for using my own batteries..AND having the PS1 from launch and xbox from its launch and 360 from its launch..I would say the xbox Scontroller and 360 controller are 100x better than Sony's...I like SOny controller for ssx and old twisted metal games.

[QUOTE="Plagueless"]I'd say the 360 controller. It's not that I don't like the Dualshock, its just that there are a few things that bug me about it. 1. I have fairly large MANS hands (not like arkephonic with his 5 year old girl hands) and the Dualshock simply feels cramped in my hands. 2. The thumbsticks are placed too close together and have a convex curve, which I find incredibly weird. Concave sticks conform to the curves on my thumb tips, why would want it against it? The Dpad, however, is amazing on the Dualshock.arkephonic

Yeah, I doubt you can palm an NBA sized basketball with 1 hand like I can.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="Plagueless"]I'd say the 360 controller. It's not that I don't like the Dualshock, its just that there are a few things that bug me about it. 1. I have fairly large MANS hands (not like arkephonic with his 5 year old girl hands) and the Dualshock simply feels cramped in my hands. 2. The thumbsticks are placed too close together and have a convex curve, which I find incredibly weird. Concave sticks conform to the curves on my thumb tips, why would want it against it? The Dpad, however, is amazing on the Dualshock.Plagueless

Yeah, I doubt you can palm an NBA sized basketball with 1 hand like I can.

I hold the PS3 controller a certain way where it doesn't bother me, it's actually really comfortable. If you know how to properly grip a golf club, that's how I hold the PS3 controller with the 2 grips being the golf club grips. It's a compensation for having large hands, and it works great. I can play for hours, in fact, I've never once gotten a hand cramp or hand soreness using a PS1, 2 or 3 controller.

It's kinda hard to explain, like rather than resting the 2 grips in my palms like most other people most likely do, I set them on the part of my hand where finger meets palm, not holding them with just my palm or my fingers, but a combination of both, like a golf club.

Like this, lol.

There are arguments that are subjective, and arguments that are objective, based on facts.

The only arguments I ever hear concerning the supposed advantages of the 360 controller are subjective, take for example the notion that the controller is more comfortable than the DualShock 3. That's in the eye of the beholder, no facts to back it up.

Take me for example, I think the DualShock 3 controller is more comfortable to hold than the 360 controller. There's a common misconception that the DualShock 3 is designed for small hands. I have larger than average hands. I can grip an NBA sized basketball without issue using one hand, and the average male can't do that based on what I've seen at the gym. Despite having larger than average hands, I find the DualShock 3 to be the more comfortable controller to hold, but I realize that is a subjective argument, and it holds absolutely no weight. It's merely an opinion takingplace within the mind which is modified by individual bias.

Now that we have that factual part of the argument out of the way, lets focus on the objective differences between the controller, taking every component into consideration. These are the real differences that matter, the differences based on actual facts, undistorted by emotion or personal bias.

Battery:

The DualShock 3 comes standard with a Lithium Ion battery, which provides up to 30 hours of continuous gaming on a full charge. The charging cable is a standard universal USB cable, not proprietary.

The 360 controller does not come standard with a rechargable battery. You can purchase a nickel metal hydride Rechargable Battery Pack, which provides up to 25 hours of continuous gaming for the wireless controller. The charging cable is proprietary.

Sixaxis:

A major feature of the Sixaxis controller, and from where its name is derived, is the ability to sense both rotational orientation and translational acceleration along all three dimensional axes, providing six degrees of freedom.

This feature is absent in the 360 controller, and it doesn't offer any alternative.

Face Buttons:

There are 8 pressure sensitive buttons on the DualShock 3. Triangle, Circle, X, Square, L1, R1, Select and Start.

The Xbox 360 controller does not have pressure sensitive buttons.

Analog Sticks:

The DualShock 3 features finer analog sensitivity than the DualShock 2, increased to 10-bit precision from the 8-bit precision of the DualShock 2. The controller also uses both analog and digital signals simultaneously at all times during gameplay.

The Xbox 360 controller uses 8-bit precision, the same used in last generation controllers, such as the DualShock 2, Gamecube and original Xbox controllers.

Wireless Connectivity:

DualShock 3 uses Bluetooth connectivity.

The 360 controller uses a proprietary wireless 2.4GHz protocol for connectivity, which is of less quality than Bluetooth. The differences are minor, but I have about a 10 to 1 ratio in use of my PS3 over my 360, and I have experienced many more controller syncing problems on the 360 in a fraction of the time.

D-Pad:

I don't think this one really needs an explanation. The DualShock 3 has a fully functional D-Pad while the 360 controller doesn't.

Triggers:

The PS3 has 2 convex analog triggers, while the 360 has 2 concave analog triggers. They both have identical functionality, while preference of shape is purely subjective and comes down to personal bias.

So there you have it. Look, I know that Lemmings latch on to the controller debate with a sense of urgency like flies on horse ****. The Xbox 360 doesn't have a single hardware advantage over the PS3, so they grasp onto the controller debate in an attempt to try and 1 up the PS3 in some way, shape or form, regardless of how insignificant it may be. Well, the only argument I've ever heard from a Lemming concerning the 360 controller has been about comfort, which is subjective and in the eye of the beholder. That is influenced by personal bias, and there is nothing factual to back it up.

When it comes down to facts and funtionality, the PS3 DualShock 3 wipes the floor with the 360 controller in every department. How could a controller be considered so great when it lacks something as significant as a D-Pad? All things considered, the 360 controller is basically a last generation controller. Last generation analog stick precision, last generation digital face buttons that lack analog pressure sensitivity, disfunctional D-Pad which is the same design from last generation, old wireless technology, no Sixaxis support or anything even similar, AA batteries as the standard which is what the Wavebird used last generation....

You can argue comfort and go around in circles all day about it. It's an argument you can't win, because it's purely subjective. These things I just listed however, aren't subjective, they're objective, they're facts.

arkephonic

I much prefer the 360's controller over the PS3's. The PS3's controller feels so loose, flimsy, and light. I also don't care for the two analog sticks placed so close together. I think the 360's controller is perfect. Best controller since the Dreamcasts.

I might piss arkephonic off with his controller statement, but I'd find more comfort with the 360 controller so far. Better triggers with RT and LT and the analog placement.

360, with the exception of the d pad.

Bigboi500

There are arguments that are subjective, and arguments that are objective, based on facts.

The only arguments I ever hear concerning the supposed advantages of the 360 controller are subjective, take for example the notion that the controller is more comfortable than the DualShock 3. That's in the eye of the beholder, no facts to back it up.

Take me for example, I think the DualShock 3 controller is more comfortable to hold than the 360 controller. There's a common misconception that the DualShock 3 is designed for small hands. I have larger than average hands. I can grip an NBA sized basketball without issue using one hand, and the average male can't do that based on what I've seen at the gym. Despite having larger than average hands, I find the DualShock 3 to be the more comfortable controller to hold, but I realize that is a subjective argument, and it holds absolutely no weight. It's merely an opinion takingplace within the mind which is modified by individual bias.

Now that we have that factual part of the argument out of the way, lets focus on the objective differences between the controller, taking every component into consideration. These are the real differences that matter, the differences based on actual facts, undistorted by emotion or personal bias.

Battery:

The DualShock 3 comes standard with a Lithium Ion battery, which provides up to 30 hours of continuous gaming on a full charge. The charging cable is a standard universal USB cable, not proprietary.

The 360 controller does not come standard with a rechargable battery. You can purchase a nickel metal hydride Rechargable Battery Pack, which provides up to 25 hours of continuous gaming for the wireless controller. The charging cable is proprietary.

Sixaxis:

A major feature of the Sixaxis controller, and from where its name is derived, is the ability to sense both rotational orientation and translational acceleration along all three dimensional axes, providing six degrees of freedom.

This feature is absent in the 360 controller, and it doesn't offer any alternative.

Face Buttons:

There are 8 pressure sensitive buttons on the DualShock 3. Triangle, Circle, X, Square, L1, R1, Select and Start.

The Xbox 360 controller does not have pressure sensitive buttons.

Analog Sticks:

The DualShock 3 features finer analog sensitivity than the DualShock 2, increased to 10-bit precision from the 8-bit precision of the DualShock 2. The controller also uses both analog and digital signals simultaneously at all times during gameplay.

The Xbox 360 controller uses 8-bit precision, the same used in last generation controllers, such as the DualShock 2, Gamecube and original Xbox controllers.

Wireless Connectivity:

DualShock 3 uses Bluetooth connectivity.

The 360 controller uses a proprietary wireless 2.4GHz protocol for connectivity, which is of less quality than Bluetooth. The differences are minor, but I have about a 10 to 1 ratio in use of my PS3 over my 360, and I have experienced many more controller syncing problems on the 360 in a fraction of the time.

D-Pad:

I don't think this one really needs an explanation. The DualShock 3 has a fully functional D-Pad while the 360 controller doesn't.

Triggers:

The PS3 has 2 convex analog triggers, while the 360 has 2 concave analog triggers. They both have identical functionality, while preference of shape is purely subjective and comes down to personal bias.

So there you have it. Look, I know that Lemmings latch on to the controller debate with a sense of urgency like flies on horse ****. The Xbox 360 doesn't have a single hardware advantage over the PS3, so they grasp onto the controller debate in an attempt to try and 1 up the PS3 in some way, shape or form, regardless of how insignificant it may be. Well, the only argument I've ever heard from a Lemming concerning the 360 controller has been about comfort, which is subjective and in the eye of the beholder. That is influenced by personal bias, and there is nothing factual to back it up.

When it comes down to facts and funtionality, the PS3 DualShock 3 wipes the floor with the 360 controller in every department. How could a controller be considered so great when it lacks something as significant as a D-Pad? All things considered, the 360 controller is basically a last generation controller. Last generation analog stick precision, last generation digital face buttons that lack analog pressure sensitivity, disfunctional D-Pad which is the same design from last generation, old wireless technology, no Sixaxis support or anything even similar, AA batteries as the standard which is what the Wavebird used last generation....

You can argue comfort and go around in circles all day about it. It's an argument you can't win, because it's purely subjective. These things I just listed however, aren't subjective, they're objective, they're facts.

arkephonic

100% xbox 360 controller, and its even one of the best PC controllers also.

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

There are arguments that are subjective, and arguments that are objective, based on facts.

The only arguments I ever hear concerning the supposed advantages of the 360 controller are subjective, take for example the notion that the controller is more comfortable than the DualShock 3. That's in the eye of the beholder, no facts to back it up.

Take me for example, I think the DualShock 3 controller is more comfortable to hold than the 360 controller. There's a common misconception that the DualShock 3 is designed for small hands. I have larger than average hands. I can grip an NBA sized basketball without issue using one hand, and the average male can't do that based on what I've seen at the gym. Despite having larger than average hands, I find the DualShock 3 to be the more comfortable controller to hold, but I realize that is a subjective argument, and it holds absolutely no weight. It's merely an opinion takingplace within the mind which is modified by individual bias.

Now that we have that factual part of the argument out of the way, lets focus on the objective differences between the controller, taking every component into consideration. These are the real differences that matter, the differences based on actual facts, undistorted by emotion or personal bias.

Battery:

The DualShock 3 comes standard with a Lithium Ion battery, which provides up to 30 hours of continuous gaming on a full charge. The charging cable is a standard universal USB cable, not proprietary.

The 360 controller does not come standard with a rechargable battery. You can purchase a nickel metal hydride Rechargable Battery Pack, which provides up to 25 hours of continuous gaming for the wireless controller. The charging cable is proprietary.

Sixaxis:

A major feature of the Sixaxis controller, and from where its name is derived, is the ability to sense both rotational orientation and translational acceleration along all three dimensional axes, providing six degrees of freedom.

This feature is absent in the 360 controller, and it doesn't offer any alternative.

Face Buttons:

There are 8 pressure sensitive buttons on the DualShock 3. Triangle, Circle, X, Square, L1, R1, Select and Start.

The Xbox 360 controller does not have pressure sensitive buttons.

Analog Sticks:

The DualShock 3 features finer analog sensitivity than the DualShock 2, increased to 10-bit precision from the 8-bit precision of the DualShock 2. The controller also uses both analog and digital signals simultaneously at all times during gameplay.

The Xbox 360 controller uses 8-bit precision, the same used in last generation controllers, such as the DualShock 2, Gamecube and original Xbox controllers.

Wireless Connectivity:

DualShock 3 uses Bluetooth connectivity.

The 360 controller uses a proprietary wireless 2.4GHz protocol for connectivity, which is of less quality than Bluetooth. The differences are minor, but I have about a 10 to 1 ratio in use of my PS3 over my 360, and I have experienced many more controller syncing problems on the 360 in a fraction of the time.

D-Pad:

I don't think this one really needs an explanation. The DualShock 3 has a fully functional D-Pad while the 360 controller doesn't.

Triggers:

The PS3 has 2 convex analog triggers, while the 360 has 2 concave analog triggers. They both have identical functionality, while preference of shape is purely subjective and comes down to personal bias.

So there you have it. Look, I know that Lemmings latch on to the controller debate with a sense of urgency like flies on horse ****. The Xbox 360 doesn't have a single hardware advantage over the PS3, so they grasp onto the controller debate in an attempt to try and 1 up the PS3 in some way, shape or form, regardless of how insignificant it may be. Well, the only argument I've ever heard from a Lemming concerning the 360 controller has been about comfort, which is subjective and in the eye of the beholder. That is influenced by personal bias, and there is nothing factual to back it up.

When it comes down to facts and funtionality, the PS3 DualShock 3 wipes the floor with the 360 controller in every department. How could a controller be considered so great when it lacks something as significant as a D-Pad? All things considered, the 360 controller is basically a last generation controller. Last generation analog stick precision, last generation digital face buttons that lack analog pressure sensitivity, disfunctional D-Pad which is the same design from last generation, old wireless technology, no Sixaxis support or anything even similar, AA batteries as the standard which is what the Wavebird used last generation....

You can argue comfort and go around in circles all day about it. It's an argument you can't win, because it's purely subjective. These things I just listed however, aren't subjective, they're objective, they're facts.

-Renegade

There are arguments that are subjective, and arguments that are objective, based on facts.

The only arguments I ever hear concerning the supposed advantages of the 360 controller are subjective, take for example the notion that the controller is more comfortable than the DualShock 3. That's in the eye of the beholder, no facts to back it up.

Take me for example, I think the DualShock 3 controller is more comfortable to hold than the 360 controller. There's a common misconception that the DualShock 3 is designed for small hands. I have larger than average hands. I can grip an NBA sized basketball without issue using one hand, and the average male can't do that based on what I've seen at the gym. Despite having larger than average hands, I find the DualShock 3 to be the more comfortable controller to hold, but I realize that is a subjective argument, and it holds absolutely no weight. It's merely an opinion takingplace within the mind which is modified by individual bias.

Now that we have that factual part of the argument out of the way, lets focus on the objective differences between the controller, taking every component into consideration. These are the real differences that matter, the differences based on actual facts, undistorted by emotion or personal bias.

Battery:

The DualShock 3 comes standard with a Lithium Ion battery, which provides up to 30 hours of continuous gaming on a full charge. The charging cable is a standard universal USB cable, not proprietary.

The 360 controller does not come standard with a rechargable battery. You can purchase a nickel metal hydride Rechargable Battery Pack, which provides up to 25 hours of continuous gaming for the wireless controller. The charging cable is proprietary.

Sixaxis:

A major feature of the Sixaxis controller, and from where its name is derived, is the ability to sense both rotational orientation and translational acceleration along all three dimensional axes, providing six degrees of freedom.

This feature is absent in the 360 controller, and it doesn't offer any alternative.

Face Buttons:

There are 8 pressure sensitive buttons on the DualShock 3. Triangle, Circle, X, Square, L1, R1, Select and Start.

The Xbox 360 controller does not have pressure sensitive buttons.

Analog Sticks:

The DualShock 3 features finer analog sensitivity than the DualShock 2, increased to 10-bit precision from the 8-bit precision of the DualShock 2. The controller also uses both analog and digital signals simultaneously at all times during gameplay.

The Xbox 360 controller uses 8-bit precision, the same used in last generation controllers, such as the DualShock 2, Gamecube and original Xbox controllers.

Wireless Connectivity:

DualShock 3 uses Bluetooth connectivity.

The 360 controller uses a proprietary wireless 2.4GHz protocol for connectivity, which is of less quality than Bluetooth. The differences are minor, but I have about a 10 to 1 ratio in use of my PS3 over my 360, and I have experienced many more controller syncing problems on the 360 in a fraction of the time.

D-Pad:

I don't think this one really needs an explanation. The DualShock 3 has a fully functional D-Pad while the 360 controller doesn't.

Triggers:

The PS3 has 2 convex analog triggers, while the 360 has 2 concave analog triggers. They both have identical functionality, while preference of shape is purely subjective and comes down to personal bias.

So there you have it. Look, I know that Lemmings latch on to the controller debate with a sense of urgency like flies on horse ****. The Xbox 360 doesn't have a single hardware advantage over the PS3, so they grasp onto the controller debate in an attempt to try and 1 up the PS3 in some way, shape or form, regardless of how insignificant it may be. Well, the only argument I've ever heard from a Lemming concerning the 360 controller has been about comfort, which is subjective and in the eye of the beholder. That is influenced by personal bias, and there is nothing factual to back it up.

When it comes down to facts and funtionality, the PS3 DualShock 3 wipes the floor with the 360 controller in every department. How could a controller be considered so great when it lacks something as significant as a D-Pad? All things considered, the 360 controller is basically a last generation controller. Last generation analog stick precision, last generation digital face buttons that lack analog pressure sensitivity, disfunctional D-Pad which is the same design from last generation, old wireless technology, no Sixaxis support or anything even similar, AA batteries as the standard which is what the Wavebird used last generation....

You can argue comfort and go around in circles all day about it. It's an argument you can't win, because it's purely subjective. These things I just listed however, aren't subjective, they're objective, they're facts.

arkephonic

A little old, but very appropriate for this thread and some of its posters.

There are arguments that are subjective, and arguments that are objective, based on facts.

The only arguments I ever hear concerning the supposed advantages of the 360 controller are subjective, take for example the notion that the controller is more comfortable than the DualShock 3. That's in the eye of the beholder, no facts to back it up.

Take me for example, I think the DualShock 3 controller is more comfortable to hold than the 360 controller. There's a common misconception that the DualShock 3 is designed for small hands. I have larger than average hands. I can grip an NBA sized basketball without issue using one hand, and the average male can't do that based on what I've seen at the gym. Despite having larger than average hands, I find the DualShock 3 to be the more comfortable controller to hold, but I realize that is a subjective argument, and it holds absolutely no weight. It's merely an opinion takingplace within the mind which is modified by individual bias.

Now that we have that factual part of the argument out of the way, lets focus on the objective differences between the controller, taking every component into consideration. These are the real differences that matter, the differences based on actual facts, undistorted by emotion or personal bias.

Battery:

The DualShock 3 comes standard with a Lithium Ion battery, which provides up to 30 hours of continuous gaming on a full charge. The charging cable is a standard universal USB cable, not proprietary.

The 360 controller does not come standard with a rechargable battery. You can purchase a nickel metal hydride Rechargable Battery Pack, which provides up to 25 hours of continuous gaming for the wireless controller. The charging cable is proprietary.

Sixaxis:

A major feature of the Sixaxis controller, and from where its name is derived, is the ability to sense both rotational orientation and translational acceleration along all three dimensional axes, providing six degrees of freedom.

This feature is absent in the 360 controller, and it doesn't offer any alternative.

Face Buttons:

There are 8 pressure sensitive buttons on the DualShock 3. Triangle, Circle, X, Square, L1, R1, Select and Start.

The Xbox 360 controller does not have pressure sensitive buttons.

Analog Sticks:

The DualShock 3 features finer analog sensitivity than the DualShock 2, increased to 10-bit precision from the 8-bit precision of the DualShock 2. The controller also uses both analog and digital signals simultaneously at all times during gameplay.

The Xbox 360 controller uses 8-bit precision, the same used in last generation controllers, such as the DualShock 2, Gamecube and original Xbox controllers.

Wireless Connectivity:

DualShock 3 uses Bluetooth connectivity.

The 360 controller uses a proprietary wireless 2.4GHz protocol for connectivity, which is of less quality than Bluetooth. The differences are minor, but I have about a 10 to 1 ratio in use of my PS3 over my 360, and I have experienced many more controller syncing problems on the 360 in a fraction of the time.

D-Pad:

I don't think this one really needs an explanation. The DualShock 3 has a fully functional D-Pad while the 360 controller doesn't.

Triggers:

The PS3 has 2 convex analog triggers, while the 360 has 2 concave analog triggers. They both have identical functionality, while preference of shape is purely subjective and comes down to personal bias.

So there you have it. Look, I know that Lemmings latch on to the controller debate with a sense of urgency like flies on horse ****. The Xbox 360 doesn't have a single hardware advantage over the PS3, so they grasp onto the controller debate in an attempt to try and 1 up the PS3 in some way, shape or form, regardless of how insignificant it may be. Well, the only argument I've ever heard from a Lemming concerning the 360 controller has been about comfort, which is subjective and in the eye of the beholder. That is influenced by personal bias, and there is nothing factual to back it up.

When it comes down to facts and funtionality, the PS3 DualShock 3 wipes the floor with the 360 controller in every department. How could a controller be considered so great when it lacks something as significant as a D-Pad? All things considered, the 360 controller is basically a last generation controller. Last generation analog stick precision, last generation digital face buttons that lack analog pressure sensitivity, disfunctional D-Pad which is the same design from last generation, old wireless technology, no Sixaxis support or anything even similar, AA batteries as the standard which is what the Wavebird used last generation....

You can argue comfort and go around in circles all day about it. It's an argument you can't win, because it's purely subjective. These things I just listed however, aren't subjective, they're objective, they're facts.

arkephonic

Its funny, people are asked which controller is better designed, which is really up to each individual, but some folks get up here and try to state facts on why one is better suited than the other! Some people just like the 360 controller better, while some like the PS3's better. Let's not try to tell the people who prefer the 360's controller that it's inferior, like that's gonna change their mind. lol

Not a cow makes you a lemming? Anyway, 360 controller, it is a lot like the Gamecube controller, right down to the, unfortunately, bad D-pad. I love how comfortable the Gamecube and 360 (and SNES) controllers are. Actually Dual Shock isn't the best D-pad either, for me, the buttons seem too far outwardly spread, DS/SNES have my favorite D-pads.

Funny thing is, I always thought Dual Shock was the best, until I got my PS2 last year and realised how nostalgia-ed up I was.

Both are fine, but I've always preferred the Dual Shock.

Not a cow makes you a lemming? Anyway, 360 controller, it is a lot like the Gamecube controller, right down to the, unfortunately, bad D-pad. I love how comfortable the Gamecube and 360 (and SNES) controllers are. Actually Dual Shock isn't the best D-pad either, for me, the buttons seem too far outwardly spread, DS/SNES have my favorite D-pads.

Funny thing is, I always thought Dual Shock was the best, until I got my PS2 last year and realised how nostalgia-ed up I was.

TilxWLOC

The PS3, the dpad on 360 is sh*t.

iirc, Nintendo has a patent for a plus sign shaped DPad. What Sony has is the closest they could get without breaking the patent laws. MS was kind of limited with options since they were last one to the console party.

More info on Nintendo's DPad patent for those interested Link

BPoole96

Oh, cool, I had no idea. Yeah, luckily they are going with a DS-like D-pad on the Wii U rather than the pretty crummy D-pad on the Gamecube.

Ps3ispeakfact

A 18 year old design controller is about to beat one of the most confortable controllers in gaming history! Go go system wars :D

360, with the exception of the d pad.

Bigboi500

This and also the analog stick placement. Its uneven, and I prefer the evenly aligned analog sticks of the PS3.

The triggers, more outward shape and concave analog sticks are definitely a bonus that edge it out barely over the Dualshock. If they can align the sticks and put in a working D-pad of the 360 controller, or concave the sticks and improve the triggers of the dualshock, then we could easily have the best gamepad possible right now.

360, though to be honest, it just depends on what you're acustomed to.