AA vs Rechargeable Controllers: Batteries Galore!
Hey everyone,
You've probably had a moment in your life where you finally sit down to play your favorite game, you pick up your controller and press it to connect to your system, just to find out that it won't even blink. Great, it ran out of battery. Now, you either doom scroll while your controller charges for an hour or you panic around your house finding a pair of double As that actually have charge left.
But that then raises the question: which one is the better solution? Unfortunately, the answer isn't that simple.
To understand where the architecture of a modern video game controller comes from, we need to look into the history of them.
It all starts with the Magnavox Odyssey. Released in 1972, it serves as the first commercially sold video game console. It was revolutionary because it was the first system that allowed users to play video games on a television with a wired controller configuration separate from the console itself.
The controller, much like the console itself did not have a microprocessor or CPU but instead used analogue circuitry. Through resistors and potentiometers the controller would function basically akin to what a modern volume knob is. Moving the controller would physically change electrical resistance which would alter the position of the dots on the screen by changing the signal sent to the TV.
Soon, within this revolution interestingly came the birth of arcades and arcade consoles which completely rejected the established concept of a controller by not having any traditional detachable controllers. This was so because the cabinet itself served as the controller, where the input was bolted directly on the machine to be powered directly. It also made repairability easier and modular, and simply having detachable portable controllers was irrelevant to the context of arcades. And it just made sense, too. Cabinets were designed to be flashy with popping art on the side and having a controller embedded would also mean you would be pretty close to the screen, eyes glued to the visuals.
In the home console space while everything continued to remain the same, the Atari 2600 brought a significant change. It introduced a DE-9 connector on its joystick controller, which soon was standardized and widespread across multiple different consoles and controllers, including Commodore 64, Amiga and most famously the Sega Genesis/Mega Drive. However, the controllers remained wired and still drew no power on their own.
When Nintendo hit the console space, the brought the influential and recognizable button layout with the NES controller, which is still followed to this day. Further iterated with the SNES, the controller became more ergonomic and introduced shoulder buttons. The genesis followed, with its iteration with the button count and connector, and even the original PS1 non analog controller shared a lot of similarities albeit with better ergonomics with it's iconic two prong grips and unique button icons.
However, the most interesting controller in the late 90s had to be the Nintendo 64 controller. It's often called the "Alien" controller because of its three-prong design, it's certainly... unique from it's competition. It did re-introduce the joystick again as the analogue stick, but like the rest, it's still passive and powered directly through the console itself. However, the most unique development in power capacity comes from the Rumble Pak introduced for the Nintendo 64, which basically provides controller vibration capabilities. Which is significant, because not only was this an accessory for the controller, but it utilized batteries on the accessory itself rather than the controller! Sony followed soon enough introducing the Dual Shock with two analog sticks and rumble capabilities, all integrated within the controller itself, which again drew power from the console itself.
As we move into the 2000s controllers continue to remain primarily passive. Wireless is still a dream, but is slowly becoming a reality.
The Nintendo GameCube introduced the first major first party wireless controller as an alternative a year after the consoles release, calling it the "Wave bird". It used a small wireless receiver connected to the controller port and used double A batteries, however the controller lacked vibration functionality as a trade off to preserve battery life, but this became the first instance of a controller managing it's power independently from its console.
But the Wave bird was still an "accessory". It was expensive, and was merely an alternative to wired controllers rather than having a universal adoption.
That was brought in 2005, with the Xbox 360 controller. Wireless out of the box, it connected using a built in wireless receiver within the console and used two double As while retaining rumble capabilities. It went on to become the standard for controller connectivity for not just the future of Xbox, but controllers as a whole.
And in 2006, with the Nintendo Wii we were introduced to the Wii remotes that connected using Bluetooth and utilized double As, meanwhile the modern dilemma came with the release of the PlayStation 3, which with it's Six Axis controller introduced wireless functionality at the cost of no replaceable battery and relied on being recharged via a mini USB.
So far, every controller complexity brought a new power problem which the following generation solved differently. However, the PS3 and Xbox 360 split solutions into two distinct philosophies that still are being followed today. Sony doubling down on the sealed rechargeable approach with the Dual Shock 4 and mostly recently with the Dual Sense, which features a significantly larger battery to accommodate power hungry features such as the adaptive triggers and haptic system. Microsoft on the other hand continued championing the double A approach through the Xbox One and Series X controllers, though the addition of trigger rumble motors significantly increased power draw, straining the very philosophy they were committed to. Nintendo took their own path with the Switch's Joy-Cons, featuring sealed internal batteries in a modular detachable form factor, becoming another approach that introduced its own compromises.
Of course, both sides have a cost. Sealed batteries degrade over time, losing their original capacity, turning otherwise perfect controllers into junk once the cells cannot hold charge. The double A approach assumes the user has a steady supply and access to quality batteries, an assumption that works in some economies while falls apart everywhere else.
Both of these approaches exist at a level to justify planned obsolescence of your controllers. Both Sony and Microsoft sell replacement controllers. A potential battery degradation is a potential new sale. The Double A approach might seem user friendly at a glance but it traps users into dependency on the consumables market. Especially with Microsoft, they have a co marketing agreement with Duracell where each controller ships with a pair of Duracell batteries which benefits both companies.
I believe perhaps a hybrid approach could be a solution for this problem. If every controller is shipped with a compartment for double As, instead of double As you receive a battery pack. This would give users the freedom to switch to double As temporarily if battery degrades and replace it easily with a new battery pack if they wish so. This is something that's already being partly implemented, with the USB C port on the Series X controller with the battery pack that is sold separately. However, considering the cost of bundling a battery pack is significantly more expensive and is an unlikely outcome. This idea itself stems from my own experience with my Series X controller, where I ran through multiple Toshiba double As every week, until I found a battery pack that effectively saved me. I could have gone for more reliable heavy duty batteries, however even in markets where Duracell and Energizer exist there is a significant price premium, running through them weekly becomes financially unsustainable.
Some companies on the other hand are trying to contest this by making controllers themselves generally more repairable. The new Valve Steam Controller has exceptionally high repairability score, and replacing the lithium ion battery is as simple as removing back plate screws, and pulling out the battery from its compartment similar to a PSP, 3DS or Wii U gamepad from back in the day. Even though the compartment isn't tool free, it's still a step in the right direction for the future of battery powered controllers.
Picking up a dead controller shouldn't have a binary choice between hunting for double As or waiting for it to charge. Even though the idea of a removable battery compartment in a controller shipped with a battery pack is an optimistic future, even following the Valve approach of making rechargeable controllers easier to repair is a sustainable goal that can soon overthrow the looming planned obsolescence that has impacted the video game industry as much as other electronics.