A company trying to sell an accessory to their new console by making the previous accessory not work with the new console? I don't think that can be considered conspiracy, but just plain, regular business.

Yet no conspiracy surrounds the controllers for the Microsoft consoles, ain't that right, fresh hire of social marketing agency who mistakingly posted this from his private GB account rather than a months-old made up acted up one

Alright, a lot of this isn't working for me.

1. "When I think about it, they're basically forced to innovate." -- You're still making the assumption that these companies have zero interest in the business that they're in, and that their only aim is to sell people more controllers. I'd like to think that there's some actual passion happening here, but maybe that's just me.
2. "Because think about their position if they didn't. People would make fun of Sony for using the exact same controller." -- Up until the DS4 reveal, I'd long been making fun of Sony for using the exact same controller. Even with the DS4 it's not too different, and that's kinda dumb. But as long as the triggers are functional, I can live with it.
3. "Even though their controller is already the best." -- Completely subjective, and I would wholeheartedly disagree.
4. "people would start wondering why Sony doesn't have controller slots for the previous Playstation controller seeing as it's the same." -- Controller slots? What are we even talking about here? The last consoles to have controller slots are now two generations old.

At the end of the day, I think people (such as yourself) are always going to be wanting to call companies out for perceived greedy practices. I'd just like to believe that these companies aren't doing these things purely out of greed, but more out of a true passion for the evolution of gaming.

Sony introduced Dual Shock midway through the PS1's lifespan. It wasn't "in no way a good thing" that they did something which "segregates an audience".

Not to mention that Sony did it again with PS2 by allowing PS1 controllers to be used.

Sony did again with PS3 by introducing Playstation Move.

All because PS4 has a touchpad, PS3 controller is off limits? Yea right. Sorry but I'm not convinced that's entirely the reason, especially considering that MS does the same thing and unlike Sony, they lack the fringe reason (touchpad) to justify it.

"There's A LOT less different between 360 and One controllers and yet you have no problem with that?"

Of course I have a problem with it, because obviously we should be able to use our Xbox 360 controllers.

No.

1. There is more to this new controller. For example the lightpad actually can be used for showing your health. So you do not even need a HUd there. Also there are speakers in it and Killzone already confirmed that they will use this speaker feature as well. Then you have the share button. Better triggers, better D-pad, not latency and so on. All beside the touch-pad.

2. Again NOTHING is usable with the X-box. Not your PC headset, not your 360 controller nor anything else. The people who actually want to make money is Microsoft. Just look how they only allowed their HD for replacement while Sony allowed every HDD. Sony are really the last who wants to make money because of this stuff.

3. Funny how you complained now about Sony allowing PS1 controllers for the PS2 but you also complain about Sony not allowing the same with the Ps4. So in with your logic they can not win.

PS: Are you the Alex Guy from the Bonus Round?^^

1. Already several users argued that Sony needs to be able to make that money from selling everyone a 2nd controller. You'd like to think there is some actual passion happening at Sony? Well so would I like to think this.

2. You proved my point. There's an artificial perceived need to make the controller different with each new gen.

3. Wouldn't you like to be able to use your favorite controller? Wouldn't you consider that a much higher priority to your gaming experience than making sure everyone has the exact same controller in the vain hope that devs utilize the touchpad better? (a feature which nobody has asked for)

4. Exactly. At least PS3 had the excuse of not supporting PS2 controllers since those needed controller slots. But PS4 doesn't have this excuse. People need to wake the fuck up. "Oh yay, touchpad. I can't wait to see how that innovates gaming. Or not!" "So what if I have to buy yet another version of the same controller. That's how it's always been!"

Whoops! *couldn't

You must have misinterpreted my post because I would never complain about it. It is obviously a good thing PS2 allowed PS1 controllers, and Sony should have been praised for it.

I don't even know who "the Alex Guy" is so no.

So what about Xbox one not allowing anything. Also I listed quite a few differences that justify a new controller unlike the Xbone one^^

Kaz Hirai is a Reptilian.

@egg: Do you believe that the hardware engineers at Sony are robots, or is it more likely that they're people who's job it is to put their heart and soul into advancing their passion? I don't want you to answer, as I'm not going to argue with you, but just think about it.

I think your arguments have become so laser-focused that you're not seeing the other sides of things. Maybe take a step back and try to realize why literally everyone in this thread disagrees with your theory.

Microsoft requires you to buy and switch on a fucking kinect and you're rambling on about a touchpad on a controller?

Imagine me rolling my eyes and making a jerking off motion all over this original post.

@jimbo: Good god no!

You'd go to click one and find yourself adjusting or changing something as the wheel rotated. Ether that of they'd make the rotation extra stiff to combat that and hey-ho it's soon blister time.

The dualshock is the one thing that has kept me away from buying a PS3. I really don't like it and was hoping that they would change it for the PS4.

@crusader8463 said:

I'm waiting for the inevitable point when EA teams up with Microsoft to make the ultimate microtransaction. A controller that runs on coins and requires you to pay per use. I'm sure they would market it as bringing the old school arcade experience into the home or some such thing too.

I love this so much.

Yea, it's business. But it does sort of put the PS3 and PS2 controllers in a shocking new light. For all I know, pressure sensitive buttons were added just to make people want to replace their PS1 controllers.

@jimmy_p

Yes. Sony is the lesser evil.

The PS3 controller not be able to work probably has more to do with it not having the share button, or the fact there is currently no backwards compatibility. Plus honestly the new controller looks like its such an improvement on the DS3 why would you go back? Bigger footprint for people's hands who are not twelve year olds, concave analog sticks, and real triggers. Short of offsetting the sticks (really Sony why not?) they overhauled everything on it.

This is stupid.

/thread

Share button, seriously? Select button is share button. I don't need to pay $50 plus tax just so my button has a different name.

I am staggeringly befuddled by your desire to have a PS3 controller work with PS4. Why do you need it? For all the PS3 games you won't be playing on the PS4? For this deluge of split screen games that are suddenly going to exist? There is barely a reason to own more than one controller now. Fighting games are the only things me and my friends ever use an extra controller for. Injustice was the first time I used my extra PS3 controller in probably six months and I've probably not needed my extra 360 controller in a year. The waste of money was just thinking I needed them in the first place. And needing more than two controllers I can't even think of a game that would need it.

Even then once a good fighting game comes out next gen or something happens to my packed in controller I'll gladly buy a new Dualshock 4 because that controller as I said before looks like such a vast improvement over the DS3 that I would want to throw down fifty bucks and get another one rather than use an old PS3 controller. By the time I need another one it will be far enough from the purchase of the PS4 that I won't care if I drop the cash on a controller. It will be roughly the cost or just short of a new game. Buy one less game.

I also never meant the share button to be the takeaway from my post, my point was it looks like we are getting such a better controller it seems crazy to want to go back. I want to use the PS4 controller with my PS3 if I was going to demand anything from them.

The Dual Shock 3 is total garbage... why would anyone want to continue using them, if there was a better alternative with working L2 and R2 buttons... I think I have 5 DS3's and only 2 of them have properly working triggers.. that where garbage to begin with...

You're arguing in favor of PS3 controller compatibility. The more fringe the need to own a 2nd controller, the less it can be justified (from the standpoint of the average PS4 owner) to spend $50 just so they can maybe use with that one game.

If what you say is true then Sony doesn't even stand to lose a lot of money from allowing PS3 controllers.

@egg: Controller compatibility is incredibly rare. I can only think of the PS1/2 and GameCube/Wii even doing it. Its the way the industry operates.

Making improvements is a way of justification but I think your angry without reason. The DualShock from my perspective needed a redesign. Not new features I for one think the share functionality is dumb as hell, but a tactile difference in the controller itself. The traditional size and shape of the controller was too cramped and the analog sticks were terrible. Its just not comfortable. Making changes to the button responsiveness and the analog resistance also have gameplay ramifications. A shooter designed around the latency of the DS4 would be totally thrown off by a DS3. The DS3 had a huge dead zone on the analog sticks making it noticeably different from the 360 controller for shooters. A PS4 shooter now designed for the DS4 wouldn't function properly

The biggest most visible example of why games designed for specific controllers is important is Halo CE. Its the inverse of the DS3/DS4 but the same logic applies. The game was coded for the input latency of the buttons on the old wired duke Xbox controller. Playing the game with a 360 controller introduced an input lag that was severe enough to become a hindrance playing while playing. The Xbox controller was more responsive than the 360 because it was wired. Your reaction time was handicapped by the speed of the controller while the game was balanced for another controller.

Its much more than just charging you money for a new controller to get your money. There are technical reasons why you can't. Or at least shouldn't.

To be honest, I'm more concerned with whether I'll be able to use an Xbox One controller with my PC.

I can understand why Sony would want you to use their new controller. If it has better latency and ergonomics, than people who use the new controller would presumably have a better time. It is in Sony's best interest to get people to play games in as near ideal circumstances as possible, so that they enjoy themselves more. It also keeps people on an even playing field, although if they still have games that support M+K maybe that's not really relevant. Still, it's about maintaining the quality of experience with your product. And money, obviously. There are multiple factors here.

I thought online play wasn't added to Halo series until Halo 2. Why would the controller such a big difference in an offline game? It's not rocket science it's a button ffs. Using a different keyboard on a computer isn't supposed to introduce input lag. I'm not convinced.

If the devs of Halo 1 arbitrarily programmed a delay into the buttons, then they are at fault, not the controller. Same goes for the devs of the emulation software that provided the Xbox 360 with BC.

And I could argue that your Halo example proves that Xbox 1 controller should have been compatible. Either that or you're saying consoles shouldn't have BC at all. You could only really be saying one of those two things.

You completely misunderstood that. The original Xbox controller had a faster response time for button inputs. Wired controllers by default are more responsive to input than wireless. This is why snobbish MLG types only use wired controllers. The system has to do more work to interpret the action on the controller as opposed to a direct 1 to 1 communication over a cord. The controller has to check what buttons are being pressed than broadcast that to the console which has to receive the information and then tell the game what to do. This happens almost imperceptibly fast but the delay is there. Modern games are just designed around this limitation of wireless technology.

Bungie did not program a delay into the game nor does this have absolutely anything to do with backwards compatibility how did you read it as that? This was true with all original Xbox games when played on 360 but its just most noticeable in Halo because Bungie actually programmed Halo to have virtually no delay and be more responsive and changing the controller was detrimental to this.

But this is pure controller talk. The reason why this is a problem is because it made the game arbitrarily difficult. Your actions are slower because the game is designed for a different input device.

The DualShock 4 controller is using a newer version of blue tooth. The buttons are now digital inputs as opposed to analog on the Dualshock 3 so they are more responsive. Analog buttons are pressure sensitive. They have multiple inputs for how hard you press them. They complicate the controller. With digital buttons the game only has to check for an on/off state. The button doesn't need to be fully depressed now to count as an action its either performing an action or it is not.

And the analog sticks have a much tighter dead zone than the DS3. This is important, it determines how much the stick needs to move to be read as movement. If you used a DualShock 3 the button inputs would be read by the machine much slower and the game would be expecting more precise control with the sticks. This will lead to either your actions being off sync with whats going on screen enough to mess you up or it could totally break the game. It will vary wildly from game to game. Why introduce this wildcard into development. Everyone having the exact same controller with the same capabilities and performance is important.

Backwards compatibility should actually be fine, we are long past the awkward wired to wiredless transition. So everything about the Xbox to 360 growing pains has zero bearing on a PS4 controller playing PS3 games. It was purely anecdotal. An old game on the new controller would probably be fine. It only knows the slower response time so it technically should perform better with the improvements or at least only interpret the actions the same because it was programmed that way.

But I don't know how much clearer I can be with this. Using old ass technology with new games designed for new technology will fuck shit up real bad in unpredictable ways. That is why.

"Using old ass technology with new games designed for new technology will fuck shit up real bad in unpredictable ways. That is why."

Wow. Talk about exaggeration.

You're pointing out problems that at worst are very minor, and even then they still only affect people using PS3 controller. People who use PS4 controller will be just as well off either way.

If a button is pressure sensitive, then I would have thought that obviously the PS4 can read that as a digital input instead. I might even have assumed that PS2 games did this since the beginning; those games which didn't use the analog feature of the buttons.

Has any console ever used the previous gen's controller? Even with the Wii U, the primary input is the gamepad.

Did anyone actually expect this to happen?

@hollitz: no, OP is in dreamland™

Yes and yes for both your questions. Examples have been brought up and discussed in this thread for the controller question and this thread itself is a discussion involving people with examples of expectations you are asking about.

It actually reads your fingerprints and sends it to the nearest Terrorist for them to sell your information to other people. Proven fact.

It has built in "move" functionalities. Not only can you use it at least to a certain extent as a move controller, but during a local multiplayer game the colors on each remote can be used to identify players, and stuff like that.

It's a great controller I think. Those analog sticks look really comfortable too, as does the whole build. You're crazy.

So what's Microsoft's excuse?

Plus, I've seen some AR videos of the controller touchpad stuff in use, and it is awesome.

Question still unanswered. If your PS4 includes a brand-new improved & updated controller, WHY are you so bent out of shape you can't use an old PS3 controller with it??

It's a catch 22. If it comes with PS4 controller then 100 percent of the install base would have one. Allowing PS3 controller would not do any harm. It's obviously strange and manipulative of Sony to block PS3 controller.

And actually this is seriously going to stifle couch multiplayer on PS4. This should matter more to Sony than selling a couple of extra controllers. It obviously doesn't benefit gaming. (This aimed at those of you saying PS4 controller's improvements are beneficial to gaming, and that Sony is "passionate" about said improvements.)

@egg: With one weird exception and I'll get on that later no console has let you use the previous consoles controller for that consoles new games. Never, ever. You couldn't use a NES controller with a SNES. You Couldn't use a SNES controller with N64. You couldn't use a PS1 controller with PS2 games, you could use it to play old pS1 games though and it was the exact controller with no improvements. You could only use a GameCube controller on Wii to play GameCube games. You couldn't use a wired Xbox controller on 360 nor can you use a 360 controller with the Xbox One. No major console lets you do this and it has never stifled couch multiplayer. Ever. The only thing that has stifled couch multiplayer is the prominence of online multiplayer making it virtually obsolete.

You buy a new console and you buy an extra controller. This has always been the way it works. No one expects this to not be the deal. I don't know were you're coming at with this because you're angry at an issue that doesn't even exist.

The only minor exception is the Wii U uses Wiimotes but not when your the primary player then you use your packed in controller. And only because the console isn't capable of supporting multiple game pads. Its a technological limitation. If they could have more controllers they would.

I'm going to use the touchpad to literally sign away all my money to PS Plus.

How often do games still include local multiplayer for more than 2 people? Given that the DS4 uses an internal battery they've basically made a second controller a must-have item for me (just like the DS3) so that I always have a fully-charged controller ready to go when the one I'm using craps out. I find that the vast majority of games don't offer local multi these days, and those that do tend to offer 2-player split-screen.

It also seems weird to imagine a scenario in which there is a 4-player co-op game or something and the four people who really want to play it can't come up with enough controllers between them.

Exactly. But if the PS4 *did* support the outdated controllers, I can TOTALLY imagine a scenario, where I go to egg's place to play a fighting game and he'd hand me a "supported" PS3 controller- complete with lower latency buttons, less grip, looser and less precise sticks and triggers etc, AND a totally different feel than the controller I'm used to.

Or imagine we're playing a 2-4 player rpg/real-time strategy/party/etc game but I can't use a spell/shortcut/taunt/etc because it uses a touchpad gesture and my old PS3 controller simply does not have that functionality! Are you expecting developers to limit their creativity and rein in what players can do with controllers simply to match what previous controllers were capable of?? The Wii U *supports* the Wii controllers but the two ARE NOT EQUAL, and neither are PS3's and PS4's. Because of the factual, DEMONSTRATED differences and improvements, I would not want to use a controller from a previous generation's system, even as a temporary fallback.

What you are asking for, and how offended you act that it's not happening is simply ridiculous.

PS2 could use the PS1 controllers. Granted, you didn't really want to do that, especially when playing MGS2.

This guy is a troll, he's basically ignored my points, which has already covered all the flimsy arguments that he's still spouting. Ignore him guys.

I was going to write a technical post covering every one of his arguments since, but figured that anyone with any real deductive reasoning ability could figure it out, instead of hand waving as conspiracies and anomalies that don't exist.

Chemtrails man...

The nightmarish triggers is enough reason to abandon the DS3.(Which is what happens with every generation.)

I'm going to miss pressure sensitive buttons the most. In games that took advantage of it (the Metal Gear Solid series) it made a difference. I understand that digital buttons reduce input lag, but it's not an issue I've had yet.

As for a conspiracy? Meh. I've never wanted to use an old controller on a new system, ever. It's a new controller with some new features. They might not be a necessity for most games but those differences might have deep ties to UI; we don't know yet. It's also important to encourage developers to use the new features, and having those old controllers in the mix could harm that.

PS4 won't have many. Same logic as to why N64 had more 4 player games than PS1. N64 came with 4 controller ports.

People in this thread, use the argument of touchpad vs no touchpad, to their advantage. Allowing PS3 controller support makes it difficult for the touchpad to shine. But the argument works both ways. Yes, supporting PS3 controller means the touchpad might not be as supported. But not supporting PS3 controller means couch multiplayer will not be as supported.

At least if PS3 controller was supported, there is at least some degree (if not a very high degree) of win-win. Many more PS4 owners would have a 2nd controller. 100 percent of PS4 owners would own the new touchpad either way.

@vertrucio

yea ignore egg guys... he is a troll... come on guys just ignore him... come on guys

@dpwnshift

If a situation existed where P2 (in this case you) was actually used to PS4 controller, that means he owns a PS4 and could bring his own freakin controller. Unless I own 2 PS4 controllers you'd have to do this anyway. At least PS3 controller support would introduce the novel concept of P2 not having to own the system (or pay $50) just to play.

@thrice_604

Consoles used to have valid reasons for not allowing previous controllers, but they don't anymore.

I see it as sort of a regressive thing. It's like if Sony put only 2 controller ports on PS2 even if adding 4 would have not raised production cost at all. JUST to sell more multi-taps.

And even this is only theoretically true. The PS1 controller's compatibility with the PS2 is extremely unreliable. Any game that utilizes the pressure-sensitive buttons of the DS2 probably won't work with a DS1. There are even games that don't use that technology that still don't work with DS1s. I don't recall what game it was I tried playing recently, but none of the shoulder buttons worked. I only had a working DS1, so I had to go and seek out a used DS2, which for the record is way harder than one might think.

So yeah, the PS1 controllers were compatible with the PS2 in the sense that they had the same connections and so on, but they were far from being replaceable with the PS2 controller.

Then really, the only good example of this was with the GCN and Wii, and even that you could argue only happened because Nintendo put all its efforts into making the motion controller, leaving the GCN ports only because they knew certain games would be more playable that way.