As you’d expect with a form of interactive entertainment more than 70 years old, video games have evolved extensively over time.

This evolution applies to all facets of the gaming experience, from computational hardware to game design philosophies, forms of multiplayer access, and much more.

One of the more interesting components of this design, which we feel is constantly underrepresented in media, is found in the different methods of input. Taking a look at some of the standout examples in interactive entertainment, we want to investigate how control design influences gaming’s trajectory, to see where it succeeds and where it fails to take hold.

Setting a Baseline

When looking at how modern interactive experiences handle, it’s necessary to first define the three primary input categories. These are computers with their keyboards and mice, consoles with their controllers, and, more recently, mobile phones with their touch displays. Each of these presents vastly different methods of input, and each represents different levels of evolution over time.

In mobile phones, input is basically the same now as it has been since the popularisation of the smartphone circa 2007. While multi-touch support, increased response time, and greater accuracy now play an important part, mobiles still operate on the same touch-screen premise. In PC gaming, similar consistency has stayed true. Users still turn to standard keyboards and mice in many cases, though specialised gaming peripherals can increase accuracy and efficiency while not abandoning traditional usability

Controllers, on the other hand, have evolved massively over the years. Originating with single joysticks and single buttons, modern controllers are almost unrecognizable when compared to their ancestors. For example, the Dual-Sense controller for the PS5 has 13 buttons for commands, two sticks and a d-pad for movement, a touchpad, speaker, analogue input, vibration, and haptic feedback for the triggers. This is an enormous step up, but not all advancements are all that they’re cracked up to be.

Finding the Right Balance

For controllers, there needs to be a balance between complexity and usability. This can be a major concern for mobiles especially, where touch input can be problematic with complex games. However, some games understand and work within the bounds of mobile control limitations, balancing usability to an effective degree.

Perhaps the biggest contemporary example of this concept can be found in online casino gaming. Every game on these services, from roulette to poker, live games, and more is streamlined enough that control is never an issue. The same applies to the websites themselves, where design around mobiles means overcomplexity isn’t the same threat that it can be on other systems.

What Constitutes Failure?

Quantifying input failure in video games can be difficult, with different people having different ideas about where the line lies. The most profound example of this could be found in the Nintendo Wii, and its library of games. As Nintendo is often wont to do, they did something strange with the Wii, making motion control a cornerstone of how the system worked.

it’s difficult to say exactly what is poor input design and what isn’t, with the answer depending widely on subjective appreciation.

For hardcore gamers, the motion controls were largely awful. Slow, inaccurate, and unresponsive, people who grew up with gaming that demanded precision saw the Wii’s motion controls as a gimmick that held the system back. Of course, not everyone is a hardcore gamer.

In the mass market, the concept of motion controls seemed too good to be true. They presented a new world of opportunities, fascinating even those without much interest in video gaming as a hobby. As it just so happened, these people would lead the Wii to become the sixth best-selling console of all time, and the best-selling system of its generation.

For these reasons, it’s difficult to say exactly what is poor input design and what isn’t, with the answer depending widely on subjective appreciation. Sure, things like motion control might turn us off a system, but the benefits of these systems introducing more people to gaming can also be profound. Ultimately, the best way to think of controllers is as containers for experiences. Sometimes these can fail, sometimes they succeed, but in the end, experimentation is important, and the benefits of exploration and evolution can be far greater than they first appear.