Tbf, the Xbox controller can trace its root back to the Sega Genesis, so they aren't actually that far off from one another.
Sega helped develop the Xbox, and so they used the same layout as the Dreamcast, which had the same A B (C) under X Y (Z) layout they had since the Genesis.
FWIW I prefer the Sega/Xbox layout, but Nintendo’s isn’t arbitrary. It goes back to the NES, when there were only two buttons.
A is essentially the forward or “accept” button and B is essentially the back “cancel” button.
So their placement makes logical sense. Right = forward. Left = back. It’s the same as the forward and back arrows on an internet browser, for example.
Moving to the SNES era, there were four buttons in their current placement, but they were paired up in the design. A and B together with a border around them. X and Y together mimicking the other two buttons’ order, with a border around them. So the A and B were still forward and cancel buttons.
In Japan, PS1 games almost all followed this same logic. ‘O’ was accept and on the right. ‘X’ was cancel. If you played Final Fantasy VII on PS1, you’ll remember this was a thing. I want to say MGS was the same.
And it was arbitrarily changed for the west, if anything. The cross symbol meaning yes rather than no is actually way more illogical when you think about it. And the right button meaning forward makes logical sense. Although I can definitely see the argument that the bottom button being the most used button feels logical too. Obviously this is what most of us have defaulted to nowadays.
The Nintendo order also mimics the pedals on a car. A for accelerate on the right. B for brake. Which is probably why Mario Kart continues to use those buttons rather than the triggers.
Is it only pragmatic because that's what we're used to, though? If you and I grew up with the Japanese style I'm sure that's what we'd say feels more natural.
No, you are currently using the same argument americans use to justify the MM/DD/YY system.
The system used in the west is just completely random and follows no logic, and anyone defending it is only defending it because that's the "standard" for them, not because it makes sense. Same with the imperial system and fahrenheit, they are inaccurate, not accepted by the technical fields, and do not follow a standardized logic like the other systems. Yet those who use them (literally just americans) still defend them with their only argument being "this system is pragmatic, the other system is dumb and stupid"
Japanese is traditionally a top-to-bottom right-to-left language, that's why the NES controller goes B A not A B. If that isn't following tradition I don't know what is.
And despite all that, Sega got it right. I II on the master system and ABC(XYZ) on the mega drive.
The original NES controller had two buttons, the primary A button on the right and the secondary B button on the left, these formed a pair.
During the SNES days they upgraded the controller by adding two additional buttons, they did this by taking the original pair of two and copying them above the original two. They kept the hierarchical naming convention of the one on the right "coming first", same as the original AB pair.
Look up a picture of a SNES controller and you'll see the AB and XY button being grouped together.
I owned a nes and a snes, I know this. Japan does things backwards though, that is why it doesnt make sense for many people. This isnt an insult btw, just an observation, like manga being read back to front, on PS in japan it used to be circle to confirm X to cancel (until they changed it with ps5).
Also not trying to be insulting or anything; phrasing it as being "backwards" could get read as being an insult, I'd just call it "different". Different country, different culture, different history, different customs and all that.
It's the SNES layout, yes, but they kinda gave up on it from N64 through the Wii as their main control scheme (well, sans Wii Classic Controller and the DS line). And that's exactly the era where the standard controller layout got cemented on other consoles.
Playstation and Xbox have been consistent since their first consoles came out. But, Nintendo has been experimenting with it and that lead to meaningful additions on all modern controllers like camera buttons (now the right stick), triggers buttons and the inclusion of both d-pad and analog stick
Nintendo used multiple different layouts with their early consoles.
NES: B left of A
SNES and GameCube: B down-left of A
N64: B up-left of A
The N64 layout is the most ergonomic for using both A and B, since your right thumb naturally settles into an up-leftward position when holding a controller. Due to this, many SNES games abandoned the "A to jump, B to run/attack" paradigm and went with "B to jump, Y to run/attack" instead.
In fairness Nintendo has rarely been able to make good controllers.
The SNES is about the only one I can think of that was at least as good as its competition, the rest have either sub optimal or in the case of the N64 and GameCube actually garbage.
It’s almost enough to make me convinced the SNES was a fluke.
The bottom button being yes/confirm is that way on 2/3 major consoles (PlayStation and Xbox). And while the SNES did introduce their layout back in the early 90s, Xbox traces their controller layout back to the Dreamcast in 98, and PlayStation did so in 95 so it’s not like they are that far apart from the release of the SNES. And both were made well before gaming became the major mainstream pastime that it is today.
Considering almost every major AAA gaming title has mostly released on PlayStation/Xbox/PC for the last 20+ years, while Nintendo didn’t have a console that could realistically play those games (the Wii/Wii U being especially limited in its era), I think most people would be familiar with the bottom button being the confirm button. Nintendo has been limited to their own games for a long time, and it’s not a bad thing because they make good games. But, I would argue most people who play games on a regular basis pick up games that are not Nintendo games/Nintendo console games. Nintendo releases a new title, and a lot of people pick it up and play it. But since most of these titles are single player experiences, most people pick them up, beat them, and then play something else. At least in the United States and Europe*
They only started using a consistent layout since Wii/WiiU, whereas Playstation and Xbox had (mostly) the same layout since their first interation. If anything's OG about Nintendo, is that they'll design a controller with whatever layout they like.
The first controller Nintendo made with ABXY was the SNES, and that had X on top, Y on left. Then on N64 they removed those for C-pad directional buttons, followed by bringing X and Y back on gamecube, but they put Y on top and X on the right (regardless of that, gamecube's is my fav nintendo controller).
Then on Wii (mote) they put B on the back and the X & Y are gone again, for then to release a classic controller pro with their "modern" layout (but with fricking lowercase button letters!?!) and have it be useless in quite some games due to forcing motion controls.
Then they finally release a good controller for the Wii U and finally settle on the button position, the SNES layout. After that, in contrary to their track record, they finally stayed consistent to their button layout after that for switch 1 & 2.
Edit:
Why am I being downvoted when I ask a question and state that their layout keeps changing?
Handhelds being consoles or not is debatable, but I'm not gonna have a semantic discussion with you about that when you're asking a question in such a provocative way. It's uncessary.
I specifically stated consoles. IMO handhelds are a different category which sadly sorta died out with PS Vita and 3DS, and Switch is the oddball of being both/hybrid, but is considered the successor of the WiiU.
151
u/BochocK 3h ago
Nintendo is the og one, but I'm too used to xbox now