The Xbox One controller certainly feels better than the already very good Xbox360 controller, but I doubt there's really 100M of work needed to go from one to the other. In other words, it could have been done for cheaper.
Well sure, they could have handed the team a 360 controller and $10,000 and said "make it $10,000 better". But clearly they wanted to explore more options, many of which didn't pan out. Retrospectively calling that a bad idea simply because they didn't produce something dramatically different misses the "R" in "R&D".
Despite the firm's aversion to rocking the proverbial boat, it still wound up with more than a few unconventional prototypes -- some of which packed built-in displays and cameras. One of the strangest versions included a cartridge for emitting smells, and another featured a built-in projector that could throw out visuals reminiscent of illumiroom. Ultimately, the wackier iterations gave way to the traditional kit that's heading to stores, as the adventurous features drained battery life too quickly or the company's "core base didn't appreciate them," according to Alam. While we wouldn't have expected the Xbox One to usher in the age of smell-o-vision, we can't help but wonder what that future would have looked smelled like.
I.e. they did not use the 100M to make tiny improvements to the 360 controller; they engineered several completely different prototypes, which will only be relevant several generations ahead, and a tiny fraction of the money went into the improvements. Even if there is never any controller remotely like these prototypes, some of the engineering knowledge gained will pay out.
Comments
The Xbox One controller certainly feels better than the already very good Xbox360 controller, but I doubt there's really 100M of work needed to go from one to the other. In other words, it could have been done for cheaper.
it could have been done for cheaper
Well sure, they could have handed the team a 360 controller and $10,000 and said "make it $10,000 better". But clearly they wanted to explore more options, many of which didn't pan out. Retrospectively calling that a bad idea simply because they didn't produce something dramatically different misses the "R" in "R&D".
I.e. they did not use the 100M to make tiny improvements to the 360 controller; they engineered several completely different prototypes, which will only be relevant several generations ahead, and a tiny fraction of the money went into the improvements. Even if there is never any controller remotely like these prototypes, some of the engineering knowledge gained will pay out.