Nintendo's Satoru Iwata: no 'immediate need to replace the Wii'

[ricechen]

Sheesh... will you folks ever learn? There will never, ever be a Wii replacement. It's the console that keeps on giving, and also the one that'll never perish. It's the end-all answer to the world's gaming needs, and even though greater than 50 percent of the US has an HDTV, Nintendo won't ever have to support that unwanted "1080i" format. All sarcasm, angst and bitterness aside, Nintendo's president Satoru Iwata recently affirmed that there's no Wii successor on the near-term roadmap. Specifically, he stated that he "doesn't think that there is an immediate need to replace the Wii console; but of course, at some point in the future, the need will arise." To cap things off, he added: "We currently do not have an answer as to what point in the future that need will come." As much as we'd love to point out just how far behind the game Nintendo is in terms of graphics, we can't argue with the sales figures, and until the collective consumer wallet deems true HD support a necessity, we suppose the Wii can just keep on keepin' on. Much to our chagrin.

[DarkFlameWolf]

your entire argument seems to stem from the need to have the Wii or Nintendo consoles in general to have better graphics, better graphical format and HD compatibility. What ever happened to playing games just being fun to play, regardless of graphics? That worked well for the Nintendo, Super Nintendo, Gameboy, Gameboy Advance and I dare say Nintendo 64, which had low-poly graphics but still managed to deliver an awesome experience regardless of limitations. I agree that the Wii console is behind the times a bit, but if quality games like Metroid: Other M, Super Mario Galaxy 2 and other games being made that are as awesome to play as they are to look at. Why ask for more? Its fun, it passes the time and I'm enjoying myself. Why get worked up over, "OMGZ, it doesn't have HD and doesn't look as awesome as Gears of War 5! This system sucks!!!"? Just be glad you have fun games to play!

[rock_nog]

I dunno, maybe you can attack me for being a mindless Nintendo fanboy or whatever, but I really haven't felt much of a need for a new system to replace the Wii. I'm fine with it. I have to say, these days, I hardly even care about graphics. Like, I care in terms of, "Okay, can my hardware run that game?" but certainly, graphics don't really influence my interest in games.

[AtmaWeapon]

It's a spam advertiser you tools. Copy/pasting his advertisements for whatever ROM forum and jean brand all across the internet. (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22There+will+never%2C+ever+be+a+Wii+repl acement.+It%27s+the+console+that+keeps+on+giving%2 2&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a).

[gdorf]

Well at least it was a semi-interesting spam bot. :shrug:

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=%22Sheesh...+will+you+folks+ever+learn%3F+There+ will+never%2C+ever+be+a+Wii+replacement.%22&aq=f&aqi=m1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=CN_uTpfwcTOCdKouezATO38H1DQAAAKoEBU_Qg-FJ&fp=64f719c8669fe4b7

[MottZilla]

I decided to just remove the signature since people were discussing this topic.

[Orion]

May as well. I'm sure Nintendo has plenty of ideas, and near-finished hardware for the Wii 2, or HD, or whatever, sitting around. They just have no reason to release a new console yet. It would be financially stupid. It's still selling reasonably well and they're still making profits on it, there are no new consoles coming out from their competitors, and most people, because of the recession, don't want to buy a new system, anyway. Myself included. The Wii suits them just fine right now, and it would be foolish of them to leave their new "expanded audience" in the dust by asking them to buy a new console.

[AtmaWeapon]

Mottzilla and I talk about this semi-frequently. Here's my take.

Nintendo could really benefit from having an HD-capable console with a little bit more muscle. Like it or not, the "I can't believe it's not Wii" library for Kinect looks a lot sharper than the Wii versions. I caught some aliasing here and there in the Other M trailer, and Goldeneye looks somewhat like a PS2-era shooter so far. (I have some separate opinions of Goldeneye I'd like to talk about later.) Epic Mickey looked visually bland and uninteresting, though knowing the plotline that may be intentional. It'd be nice if there were a chance that some popular games could be cross-platform without the Wii being the least common denominator. (Read: the other games look sub-standard on PS3 and 360 due to cuts made for the Wii.) Note that when games do go cross-platform from PS3/360 to the Wii, the tendency is to either cut the quality or make an entirely different game (Ghostbusters).

On the other hand, Nintendo would be foolish to introduce a new console within the next few years. From the viewpoint of a zero-ownership consumer, a 360 with Kinect is going to take $450 of investment. The PS3 with a 1-player Move setup is similar. The Wii is $150 and $60/person; for 4 people it's still far cheaper than the 360 with Kinect. Odds are the Wii's installed base isn't going to buy one of the other consoles because it's doubtful casual gamers would consider a $400+ investment in video games. PS3 owners considering casual games could still see the Wii as valuable, seeing as a 4-player Move setup will likely cost as much as a Wii setup and there's already a decent stable of casual games on the Wii.

If Nintendo releases a new console with more power, it's doubtful they could keep their price point. That price point is probably the primary reason the Wii has sold at all, let alone seen great success. Nintendo knows what they're doing, and they don't need a new console to accomplish it. Like it or not, the hardcore Nintendo fan is little more than a crutch for N to fall back on when times get tough. All they have to do is poop out 3 or 4 new franchise games and we quickly forget about years of neglect. Whether the new console would be good for us is of little consequence.

*very late edit*
I'd also like to add that neither Microsoft nor Sony seems to have a successor for their console lined up. In fact, both have invested in a smaller, cheaper model of the current console. A new console with more power would cost more money. What would it bring to the table? Going from PS2 to PS3 is a huge leap in visual quality and complexity. What would be equally compelling for a PS4 to have? Same with XBox to 360, the increase in quality was rather clear. PCs can't even pull of the visual fidelity that would make the kind of leap that would make a new $400 console investment feasible.

Computer hardware has hit a brick wall. We don't know how to make chips faster without relying on exotic cooling solutions. We can put more chips in the computer, but this only increases speed in specific circumstances and can decrease speed in many more. Thus, it's harder to write games with high performance for machines that have more cores. This makes it more expensive to develop the games. The high-end games are already approaching dangerous budgets that can make one commercial failure the end of a development house. We don't need new consoles. We don't need 3D. We don't need new controllers. We need more fun games. If making the game fun somehow requires a new console, we'll bite, but I think we forget that people play video games to have fun.

[MottZilla]

May as well. I'm sure Nintendo has plenty of ideas, and near-finished hardware for the Wii 2, or HD, or whatever, sitting around.

It is true that the GBA was delayed as the GBC was still going strong, despite the GBA being ready. However I doubt they have a completed console waiting now. They may have their ideas but a finished product I doubt. They'll want a new Wii eventually, but they'll be waiting atleast until sales numbers indicate it's time. That's why the GameBoy Color stuck around even though the GBA was ready to take over. But Nintendo would have just lost money by letting GBC go when it had the power to stay relavent awhile longer.

Another issue with a new Wii is the controllers. They may want to make more advanced controllers and that will increase cost and maybe create confusion in the upgrade. I have noticed alot of mention of the cost of 4 players on all the consoles. But I think that's a shitty argument atleast for me I don't see that as an issue. Maybe for kids that have to beg, but any group of adults (or really 17+) should be able to collectively afford all the needed controllers if they want that. Seems to me just to be a talking point for MS.

[Orion]

Goldeneye looks somewhat like a PS2-era shooter so far. (I have some separate opinions of Goldeneye I'd like to talk about later.) Epic Mickey looked visually bland and uninteresting, though knowing the plotline that may be intentional.

Ugh, Goldeneye looked like ass in the demo. I never really got into it on the N64, so I can't speak to how the gameplay looks in comparison, but FPS seems to be one of the genres where it actually NEEDS to look somewhat polished, and the video did not.


We don't need 3D.

I would agree. Who has the money to actually invest in a 3D TV? It seems to be a very small segment of the market at this point, and I'm surprised they're still trying to push it right now, with most people being too broke to pay for their own house. Though, the 3DS seems like a smart place to try it, since all it requires is the handheld, and no additional hardware. Granted, I have a bum eye, so it doesn't work for me, anyway.

If it were the only selling point of the 3DS, I doubt I'd bother with it, but the bump in graphics seems pretty decent, too.

[MottZilla]

I agree with you about 3D on both counts. 3D TVs, 3D Blurays, 3D Console games... All are a horribly small niche that it may as well not exist. I really hope there are some honest reviews put out that help to shut down the hype. While it might be neat on the 3DS since it'll be an affordable platform for it, I too am much more interested in the hardware upgrade than the 3D. Just like how I was more interested in the hardware upgrade from GBA to DS than the dual screens and touch screen. Not to say that the 3D will go to waste but I'm just glad Nintendo's portable hardware will be closer to the PSP in capability but actually be a more relevant platform since it's from Nintendo. Plus I love the clam shell design. That's a big issue with the PSP. Give it a clam shell design and you could make it alot nicer.

[King Link]

Ugh, Goldeneye looked like ass in the demo. I never really got into it on the N64, so I can't speak to how the gameplay looks in comparison, but FPS seems to be one of the genres where it actually NEEDS to look somewhat polished, and the video did not.

I understand you are pointing out that you never got into the N64 version of Goldeneye, but you are pointing out what it looked like visually. Though I do agree with you, visually, it was nothing overly great. And in regards to what Atma said about the game looking like a PS2-era game, I agree with that as well. Remember Black? That's what this looked like to me, at first.

Though "having fun" often seems to be everyone's apparent focus, we all know having nice visuals will obviously increase interest in some games. That's not to say, like many of us have already pointed out, that a game needs excellent visuals to be fun, but it is a nice bonus. I am looking forward to Goldeneye, though, because it seems they are still keeping a lot of the really good, core gameplay intact that made the original so great.

3D? Not interested, except with the 3DS. Smaller and affordable, and, if it can be pulled off, then I am excited.

[AtmaWeapon]

Goldeneye N64 had a piss-poor framerate (especially in multiplayer) and suffered from poor textures. Character models were pretty low poly, and animations were pretty jerky. Still, by the standards of console shooters in its era it was a fairly solid game. It didn't hold a candle to a good PC rig running Quake II, but with the right amount of cash PCs had a lot more muscle than the N64 so it's like comparing apples to dump trucks. It was good enough that I probably spent at least 3 months of cumulative playtime on it with my friends.

If this were a port of the N64 version or an "enhanced" remake like the Perfect Dark one, I'd be perfectly satisfied. I don't whine about the numerous OoT ports having identical graphics and no new features because they are faithful ports (possibly even emulators running ROMs!) I give projects like the recent Perfect Dark enhanced remake and Serious Sam HD plenty of leeway because they intend to be the same game with higher quality textures and some bug fixes. When the developer's intent is to make a different game, I feel it is appropriate to compare it to other games in its genre in the time period of its release.

By that measure, new Goldeneye should be competing with at least MW2, though by its release date Fallout: New Vegas or Bulletstorm might be a better comparison. It looks like a last-gen game because face it: the Wii can't compete with the 360 or the PS3 in power. Maybe the mechanics will be interesting? What are the controls going to be like? Goldeneye was well-received because it used the N64's controller really well and hammered home that an analog stick is a really good input device for a shooter (so long as hitboxes are kind of lenient.) I've never been pleased with the Wiimote for "standard" games. On the N64, I used the C-buttons for movement and the analog stick for aiming, mostly because my stick was worn out and if I used it for movement I moved at half speed. This worked out really well even on new controllers. Someone else must have thought so, because modern shooters use dual analog sticks to allow a similar setup. The Wii's got one analog stick. Odds are it will be forward/backward/left/right. How's strafing going to work then? Maybe you hold a button, but that means no turning and strafing at the same time; what's a shooter without circle strafing? Maybe you'll point with the Wiimote to aim? Metroid Prime 3 had me using the pointer to turn when aiming; it was laggy and unreliable in tense situations. The game designed around it by putting you in corridors so enemies couldn't surround you or otherwise making enemies slow. So is the new Goldeneye going to have to dumb down its AI, or will it have some revolutionary control scheme that no one else has thought of?

I hope in my heart of hearts that I'm wrong and this entry is as influential as the last, but I'm very skeptical. Goldeneye 64 looked amazing when it came out, and it set the bar for console shooters. Goldeneye Wii looks like it's showing up to the party about 8-10 years late to do anything of the sort. Will it be fun? Probably. Will there be things that remind you of the N64 version? Without a doubt. Will gamers 13 years from now be excited when its sequel is announced? That's what I doubt.

I hate to be snooty, but if you want to release an influential shooter it has to be PC-quality these days. It's a flooded genre that redefines its 5-star qualities annually. It's not an arena where nostalgia makes a winner.

[Orion]

I certainly don't make any assumptions about how Goldeneye stacks up gameplay-wise. I just couldn't help but note that in-motion, the game didn't even come close to the visual quality of the Wii shooters that have been out for nearly 3 years. That's something that most Wii developers have had a grasp on - using the game's style to downplay the system's shortcomings.

One thing that could prolong the life of all of the consoles is the trend toward downloadable content. Games like Sonic 4 and Mega Man 10 seem to be pretty popular, and can be done pretty cheaply. There's no reason games like NSMB Wii or that new Kirby came shouldn't be on that service. And hardcore gamers would gobble up classic-style games for years.

[Anthus]

Mottzilla and I talk about this semi-frequently. Here's my take.
Computer hardware has hit a brick wall. We don't know how to make chips faster without relying on exotic cooling solutions. We can put more chips in the computer, but this only increases speed in specific circumstances and can decrease speed in many more. Thus, it's harder to write games with high performance for machines that have more cores. This makes it more expensive to develop the games. The high-end games are already approaching dangerous budgets that can make one commercial failure the end of a development house. We don't need new consoles. We don't need 3D. We don't need new controllers. We need more fun games. If making the game fun somehow requires a new console, we'll bite, but I think we forget that people play video games to have fun.

This.

My sentiment is this: I don't really care how it looks, as long as it is playable. What I care about is content. Take Mario Galaxy 2 for example. It looks amazing. That is a bonus. If it looked like SM64, I would not care.

I also think it is slightly ironic how a bot started a decent topic.

But seriously, I also hope that this 3D niche dies out. Computers have hit a brick wall as you've said, and I think this generation of consoles will last longer. Think about it: Five years into the last generation, we would have been in 2005, when the next line was already on the horizon. Now, here we are in 2010, using tech from 2006, with not even a whisper of the next generation, and using it to carry us onward. As long as the industry finds a balance between presentation, and price, I don't see much need for change. However, I have a feeling in the next five years, we will see some crack in the wall, which gives way to the next flood of farther draw distances, better fluid physics, and textures/ screen resolutions, then we'll hit another wall. Will the quality of games endure? Well, I think it can, but only as long as some devs hold onto substance over style. MG2 is a good example of the direction games could take. FFXIII is a bad one.

[Orion]

The other ironic thing is that it doesn't take a huge production budget to make a truly fun game. Look at New Super Mario Bros. Wii, or World of Goo. I'm sure they cost pennies next to FFXIII. If Square had spent a fraction of the budget they had for visual development on testing and balancing the game play, it may have been better off.

And look at some of the top-selling games of this generation. Sure, you have a handful of God of Wars and GTAs, but you also have Wii Fit and Wii Sports Resort. How much do you think those cost to make, and look at the return they got.

[Radium]

If you guys want to see the next Nintendo console currently deep in development go get a job at Nintendo of Japan. Otherwise wait 2-3 years for the release. I call November, 2012 - right after the world has ended.

[MottZilla]

Anthus, I really don't care for the 3D fad either. While it make work and be neat on the 3DS portable, I don't think it's really a mainstay. The only problem is the 3DS will not fail, which if it distributes 3D movies it will lend support to the 3D trend which I don't want. Luckily Nintendo had atleast implied that the 3D effect is totally optional on their games.

Also about technology and this generation of consoles. Since technology has hit such a wall you can't really significantly improve apon the consoles we have out now, other than Wii. You'd be hard pressed to make a new Xbox or Playstation that is significantly better without costing quite alot which probably consumers wouldn't find justifiable. One thing that the systems probably could easily benefit from would be more RAM. More RAM is always nice.

[Thunderbird]

I'd be surprised if Nintendo starts distributing 3D movies on the 3DS (via Netflix or some other means). While it would be an easy platform to do so on, Nintendo has yet to actually offer this on any of the other DSes (which would theoretically be as simple as distributing a game card with Netflix access like they do with the Wii discs).

[AtmaWeapon]

There's no real push to do it on the other DS systems.

The handheld landscape right now consists of the PSP, DS, DSi, iPhone 3GS, and iPhone 4.

PSP is the underdog for some reason. I don't own one so I can't speak, but it was a UMD vehicle so I know it's got to have a good resolution and screen for viewing movies. There's no motion sensors at all and as far as I know no cameras, so it's lagging a bit on weirdo features.

DS is the lowest common denominator since it can't load DSiWare. It's got a decent screen, but wasn't really designed for showing movies so I doubt it could do anything impressive. The hardware might not be able to push enough frames, but I dunno. Either way, it'd take a Netflix cart and odds are if you're craving Netflix on a portable that bad you're already doing it from something else. Again, no camera or tilt sensors unless maybe someone adds something that plugs into the GBA cart.

DSi was to address the app store that was helping the iPhone into the handheld market and extend Wii's store onto the DS. It can download content and play that content. I don't think it has tilt sensors, but I've seen a game that uses the cameras to hack it and it's pretty neat. The cameras buy it some points against the iPhone's swiss army knife approach, but again I don't think it has the screen or the hardware to push a reasonable movie. (This is not an expert opinion, just a guess.)

iPhone 3GS packs some serious heat. It's got a nice screen resolution, good touchscreen, and accelerometers to introduce tilt to help with the lack of buttons. Tons of fun casual games, and I've played a few that are being ported to DS. It's a nice device, but not a serious threat to handheld gaming.

iPhone 4 is a step above that. A 300 DPI display is no joke; it makes your computer monitor and HDTV look like you have beer goggles on. Netflix is coming. It has six-axis motion detection. Who knows what neat stuff will be done with it?

3DS looks groomed to blow the iPhone 4 out of the water. The display isn't quite as impressive, but iPhone can't boast 3D. 3DS will support something like DSiWare, and will be the only device on the market touting 3D support from Netflix (assuming they're working on it.) It has the same kinds of motion sensors as the iPhone. Word is the graphics chip is either on par or slightly inferior to the iPhone's, but no one will really know for a while. It is definitely going to be on par with PSP and probably obsolete the poor beast. Oh, and it has 3D cameras for sending pictures of your cock to people; what's not to like?

Anyway, my point is out of this stable there's only 3 devices that could likely support Netflix. One supports 3D and has a better gaming pedigree. One can theoretically work in places with no WiFi connection and does a zillion things the 3DS won't do because apparently no one at Nintendo has used the internet since 1992. Nintendo sells DS hardware like it's candy. Apple doesn't have the same iPhone numbers, but they sucker most of their customers into a full hardware upgrade every year and the rest of them every 2 years. It'll be interesting to see what happens in 2 years when the iPhone has glasses-less 3D; if the 3DS does very well it's a shoe-in next feature.

*very late edit*
I took some things for granted in the discussion I'd rather spell out; it looks like I have more faith in the iPhone than I do. It's easier to develop on the iPhone, but that's where its advantages end (along with the other things I mentioned.) It's got the capacity for larger games (Final Fantasy Tactics is coming out!) but it has to share that space with your other apps, mp3s, videos, photos, and anything else you keep on your phone. Other phones use SD or Micro SD for capacity expansion; Apple takes a page from Sony and says "buy another phone". Downloading a full game takes a while, too.

Battery life is where Nintendo's handhelds trump the iPhone, and this will continue forever unless some new battery technology is introduced. The iPhone has a bad reputation for short battery life, and from what I have heard any kind of serious gaming will drop you to 2 hours. My DS can last 6-9 hours; I'm not sure exactly how long it is because it's long enough I don't ever drain it in one day (I also play less than I used to.) If my DS runs out of batteries, I'm through playing games. If my phone runs out of batteries, I've lost my most important field communication tool. That's a pretty big deal.

Anyway, that has little to do with Netflix, but I wanted to correct my post. I felt like it had a little too much of an "iPhone's a great device for gaming" slant. My real opinion is more like "iPhone is a cruddy device for gaming, but lots of people have one and for casual gaming it makes no sense to have an iPhone *and* a DS unless you had the DS when you bought the iPhone."

[Orion]

I always get a little wary of comparing the iOS platform to the DS. Sure, they both compete in the "games" market, but really in two different sectors. One is a dedicated gaming machine that you play for hours at a time. One is something you download simple little casual games on while you wait in line at the bank. There are many games that work well on the iPhone, but many that don't. And console games tend to port horribly to the iPhone (*cough* Lumines, Katamari, Sonic... please don't screw up FFTactics), whereas the fun iPhone games like Rolando, etc, would work just fine on the DS.

So, unless Nintendo capitalizes on the App Store idea (and they should), the markets don't really overlap that much.

I was also under the impression that the 3DS was sort of "The next DS," like the DS was to the GBA, and less just another rehash of the DS. I'm pretty sure the DS and DSi are going to get left in the dust.

[MottZilla]

Right, the DS, DSi, DSi XL are all old news. Just like we consider there is the GB, GBC, GBA, not the GB, GB Play It Loud, GB Pocket, GB Light, etc the DS will include the DS Lite, DSi, and DSi XL. 3DS is the new platform. It looks like it will be pretty powerful and finally be comparable to the PSP in terms of power.

[Nicholas Steel]

Nintendo have repeatedly proven with the Gamecube and Wii that you don't need a high resolution for good graphics, you just need good artists and management. The only advantage I see with HD Consoles is that current TV's will display them more sharply because there native resolution is HD, any other resolution has to be scaled/filtered introducing very miner focus problems like blur or distortion. Current generation of TV's (3 generations above mine) seemingly have massive improvements with regards to upscaling though.

The only thing I think that has truly benefited games in terms of graphics is Widescreen. It simply lets you peripheral vision serve a purpose D:

[MottZilla]

Nintendo have repeatedly proven with the Gamecube and Wii that you don't need a high resolution for good graphics, you just need good artists and management.

Say what? GameCube didn't show off any such trait. GameCube was a powerful system in its day and competitive. The main things that held it back hardware wise were Disc Space and I think also the weird controller that was very non standard.

Also I think you should understand that Xbox 360 & PS3 prove "you don't need a high resolution for good graphics" as they can certainly be displayed in standard definition, but all the geometry and effects are certainly still there. But you do lose alot of room for details.

I am not a fan of the Wii's hardware approach thanks to their policy approach that I think they messed up with by not including standard controller gaming into the mix. The PS2 was still an active system when the Wii came out and could have helped to fetch developers from PS2 for Wii.

[SUCCESSOR]

There is a possibility, not just a wet dream, but a possibility that the 3DS may support 3G.

[Nicholas Steel]

I wouldn't call the Gamecube controller weird, I would call it the Cream of the Crop.

[SUCCESSOR]

I wouldn't call the Gamecube controller weird, I would call it the Cream of the Crop.

I second that.

[MottZilla]

I wouldn't call the Gamecube controller weird, I would call it the Cream of the Crop.

It works ok for games designed with it in mind. It works poorly for multiplatform and other titles that need things like Analog Push buttons, extra shoulder buttons, etc. Also I was never a fan of the weird shaped buttons.

[AtmaWeapon]

I'm on Mottzilla's side here.

Somewhere during the N64's run the whole "your thumb rests on the context-sensitive action button" paradigm that modern games still follow was established. Think about OoT's control scheme; the most important buttons were A, B, and Z. A and Z had dedicated fingers, and B only required a tiny movement to get to from A. The rest of the buttons were secondary functions and harder to get to. GCN fit this perfect: A was huge and easy to find, with B right next to it. L and R were easy to hit. X, Y, and Z took some thought to hit (though X and Y were more like B). It was a nice setup for games with a primary action buttons and 3 secondary action buttons. Wii follows this up poorly with a distinct lack of secondary buttons. A is easy to hit, as is B; when a game tells me C or Z I never hit the right one. + and - are very impractical, and 1 and 2 are only useful if you're holding the controller in a special way. This leaves waggling either nunchuck or wiimote as secondary buttons, but there's lag and recognition can be poor.

If you imagine Zelda-like games, the GCN controller rules. I could totally play most 3rd person action games just fine on the GCN controller. But that's not the only kind of game in the world, and sometimes the SNES diamond layout is nice. Assassin's Creed maps the diamond to body parts and that scheme was so intuitive it surprised me no one else has done it. Some games (GTA, Batman AA) have relatively complicated tasks that require dedicated buttons; GCN runs out fast. Fighting games demand a six-button layout; the SNES controller is adequate but SEGA got this right with their six-button controller.

Honestly I'd argue if there were a way to fit a 2nd analog stick on the N64 controller that one's perfect. It's got a six-button layout and 3 triggers.