Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
But you can play it wired (which doesn't require batteries), and they made it use batteries because it would be way to expensive to implement internal battery that the controller can recharge.
Bear in mind that, the technology in this controller is way more advanced than any other on the market and it's very new (trackpads and haptic feedback), so putting in another thing wouldn't be good because the price would be too high and the controller couldn't be competitive in the market.
Also, batteries are easily recharge-able and replaceable. If the internal battery looses charge or is faulty, your whole controller is dead and if it happens outside the warranty you're pretty much screwed and need to buy another one. On the other hand, if batteries die, you just need to buy new ones or hook it up to the USB and play wired.
So that's the reasoning behind having batteries. Mainly that the controller would be too expensive. Because, if you're putting in the internal battery, you can't put a bad crappy one, you need to put top of the line dependable batteries, and also implement recharging capabilities in the controller and that costs a lot of money, and the product ends up being more expensive.
I personally like that it uses batteries. Yeah it's a little inconvenience here and there, but not a dealbreaker for me. I already have a house full of rechargeable batteries, so when the batteries die, i'll just replace them with the charged one and put the empty ones in the recharger. That's like, 10 seconds work at most. But if it's a deal breaker for you then don't buy it. Keep in mind that you won't find any controller like it though, especially if you mean to play games that normally don't support controllers.
Also, like vepar said, you CAN use this controller wired and not need batteries.
2. Standard batteries = You can take the batteries out of a broken Controller for further usage.
3. Internal battery = Your Controller breaks > good battery remains locked inside.
4. Internal battery = Battery fades out dead > Your Controller it's fuc*ed. Buy another one!
5. Standard batteries die = It takes you 30 seconds to switch to new ones.
6. Internal battery dies = It takes you the same amount of time to plug your Controller...
7. You can do the same with standard batteries Controller > Plug the cable and play...
8. The design doesn't cripple your physical experience like the wireless 360 Controller did...
So I see no good reason for this topic... other than OP being technically illiterate.
All this "internal rechargeable batteries" I call bull****. It's a gimmick... A stupid one...
Sorry, but it is...
If anything, standard batteries gives you only more flexibility/accessibility.
Also, this. I forgot to mention this. I hated the big blob of battery casing on the wireless Xbox360 controller so much! I mean, who the hell thought this was a good idea??? Other Xbox controllers from other manufacturers had batteries inside the controller somewhere without having to resort to that, so it actually was possible to make a better design from the start. Why they thought that thing in the back was a good idea is beyond me.
Personally, I wasn't even bothered all that much about that battery pack on the back... and my hands are... I would say above medium size... (the XBOne Controller feels small and I need to cringe my hands to hold it. It's rather uncomfortable... ) I've just brought that to discussion because I know people that are genuinely hating the thing.
No, i wasn't saying that you hated it, but it needed to be pointed out in the argument, that back piece was really dumb as opposed to the elegant solution the Steam Controller has.
I certainly hated it. I have big hands, so it was constantly in the way and after a while it was really uncomfortable. Now, i know the steam controller isn't going to be perfect for my hands, but it is a little bit wider than the Xbox controller so i'm ok with that.
Also, the ergonomics seem way better, especially where your thumbs rest on it. I'll know for sure when i have it in my hands of course, but i've never been a fan of the Xbox360 controller. Even less so for the Playstation controller. That thing is tiny lol! :D
I've switched my wireless controller for another wired one because I always game 4" away from my monitor and I didn't had any use or advantage for a wireless one. Moreover, I hate how the wireless Controllers have such a weak Rumble... Subtle effects aren't even registering any movement/vibration from the motors. I can clearly hear the motors trying to spin if I put my ear on the Controller, but there is simply not enough voltage to drive them properly. Also there are various revisions of the Controllers that are using cheaper motors that require even higher voltage to even start spinning... And all of this it's just because the power drain would be too much for 2 AA batteries.
So for me it's wired Controller FTW. No more battery pack on the back and correct, defined/strong rumble effects. Plus, I don't even need wireless for a 4" distance...