Who was smarter about controller batteries?

The fact they are called play and charge is just clever wording.....they should be called charge so you can play kits....far less convenient.

Recharagable batteries dont seem like a next gen feature, but it does mean you can game continuously alternating between two sets of rechargables which is far more convenient than any other form.

Make no mistake, the proprietary batteries in the DS3 and DS4 have a relatively limited lifespan and don't hold a charge very long (especially the DS4). With the 360 controller you can use AAs or a variety of rechargeable packs and alkaline AAs last longer.

The big tradeoff is size and weight. Microsoft's solution is fundamentally heavier and adds considerable bulk (some of the rechargeable packs are smaller than 2 AAs).

I'm personally willing to spend more to get the weight down, but I greatly prefer the layout of the 360 controller to the DS3. The biggest problem with the DS3 is the "PS3 must be turned on to charge controller" problem and the DS3 rejects generic USB chargers.

On the DS4 AA batteries are not an option, it needs too much power.

Pot meet kettle? Cows have been doing that very same thing for the past decade. Don't act like it's only lemmings you hypocrite

And that would be YOUR opinion and as we know YOUR opinion =/= fact hypocritical cows always acting like their opinion == fact. NEWS FLASH!!!!!!!!! It doesn't

No, they said BR wasn't needed and it wasn't. Get your facts straight before spouting shit out of your mouth

No one said any such thing cow. HDMI wasn't the standard at that time and I believe wasn't finalized. Once again cows mixing up the facts

Liar liar pants on fire. Nobody said MS HDD was better than having the choice to swap it out for something bigger and cheaper. Facts and cows don't go together

Are you seriously that stupid? PSN games aren't free since ,you know, you have to pay a fee for the service. Wow and you call lem logic dumb

Umm no they said the web browser was slow and clunky.

Kind of like charging for online is bad and rumble in controllers is so last gen? How about touting features to sell a console then slowly taking all said features away by the end of the gen? Rational people would call that PS-goggles. Suckers for Sonys Lies ( SSL)

AA is just a package. The reason there aren't lithium ion AAs is due to voltage and amperage issues (LI requires regulation). If your device draws tons of power (like a laptop or smartphone) you need LI to cover that draw. Most controllers (except the DS4 and wiiU controller) are basically remote controls, and don't draw enough to require LI.

This is why your brand new 2013 TV remote uses AA or AAA batteries. Your remote doesn't need that expensive LI battery pack when AA batteries will do just fine.

lems excusing no rechargeable batteries in 2013, oh god.

This may come as a shock to you but there are rechargeable AA batteries, in fact some are of higher mAh as the Lion in the DS4 and give juice much longer .

I've had the same Dualshock 3 for over 3 years now. The only reason I don't have my original DS3 is because I was robbed and had to replace my all of my electronics. The DS3 I have holds a charge for several days of non stop usage.

Hopefully the DS4 proves to be equally reliable.

That's a good point.

I usually have more than one controller anyways, so one loses charge and the other one comes out to play.

With the DS4 I just use my phone charger to charge the controller as I'm using it when it gets low.

I feel similar. It feels so odd to have to use AAs.

I think MS has the better strategy. Make low scoring games no one wants to play = never have to change batteries.

For those bitching about the cord, here:

http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=103&cp_id=10303&cs_id=1030307&p_id=8643&seq=1&format=2

Not sure who plays games for more than 8 hours at a time anyways.

@mrxboxone: That makes no sense, why would I un-charge my controller for a year?