By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Xbox One will include TWO AA batteries!

theprof00 on 12 August 2013
DarthVolod said:

Wow the trolls are having a field day. Seriously guys, it is just batteries, and we all knew it was coming with a set anyways. This has never been a problem with 360 controllers, and, as someone else mentioned, it can actually be a nice thing in the event the controller battery goes. I have had 4 PS3 controllers since launch. Three have worked fine, but one had an issue with charging ... thankfully it was still within 30 days to return.

I figured most people in 2013 have rechargeable AA's since most TV remotes still use them ... if not you can buy an offbrand charge kit for the controller for like 10-15 dollars ... oh the humanity.

Also, has anyone confirmed whether or not 360 rechargeable packs can fit into Xbox One contollers?

Just ask yourself something, "What would make MS more money".

You can seriously ask yourself this for virtually any question available. I'm still stunned they included a headset.



Around the Network
anthony64641 on 12 August 2013

why not rechargeable batteries?




'Video games are bad for you? That's what they said about rock-n-roll.'
-Shigeru Miyamoto

theprof00 on 12 August 2013
walsufnir said:
78 million 360 users seem to have no problem with batteries, same goes to uncounted pc-gamers who bought the controller. But it's a legit argument in wars, of course. I will keep on using my eneloops.

And a percentage of those 360 gamers who are tired of being on the nickle and dime train could help explain the preorder numbers.



superchunk on 12 August 2013

I understand why they cut out a real rechargeable battery, but c'mon... its almost 2014. Any high-end electronics device comes with li-ion battery at this point. Even cheap ass Nintendo stepped up to the plate. Hell, they're even retroactively finally adding something for Wiimotes... yet MS is forcing you to buy that part separately?

Well, at least they are offering a 1st party solution day one.



S.T.A.G.E. on 12 August 2013
Mr Puggsly said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
KylieDog said:
I hate controller that take batteries. Especially when you don't use them for ages, go to play something and find the batteries have died.


Especially seeing that we're in 2013 its sad they still have batteries instead of a stock battery pack. 

Well the advantage of using AA batteries is you don't have to use a wire when your battery dies.

Simply replace the batters and voila, keep playing with no wires. Obviously you'd ignore that given you're "A proud member of the loyalty free gaming movement."


My loyalty remains, to the majority of gamers....its seems yours is only to the minority.



Around the Network
superchunk on 12 August 2013
Zekkyou said:
Being someone who has the ability to lose a bolder in a washing basket, i'm glad they are sticking with batteries. I can't even count the number of hours I've spent looking for a cable to charge my PS3 controller every time i lose it (fucker has legs).

Cost for new set of batteries... $3-$5. Recurring charge for life of system.

Cost for new usb cord... $3. May need to replace... once or twice if ever?

Plus, you're a minority in this. I'm willing to bet a very low % (like 1-3%) of people ever lose these cords.



HipHopGodd on 12 August 2013

No matter what the issue fans of either console will make it bait in the fanboy wars. The fact MS fans are going to defend this is pretty bad because (even though it's not a big deal) it's clear that built in batteries are much better. The fact that Sony fans are doing to use this as an example of an MS cash grab just makes them look all the more petty. I'll admit, I'm a PS3 fan but I've never been involved in fanboy bickering because the financial success of the consoles don't directly benefit me. What exactly is being accomplished by bashing or defending the use of AA batteries in a game controller?



S.T.A.G.E. on 12 August 2013
JayWood2010 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


At least at $599 in 2006 it came with a Blu Ray player and rechargable controller that had slight motion capabilities with six axis.

Good morning, pug, pug. 

TTYL

Do you really always have to argue about Sony and MSFT every chance you get?  Don't you ever get tired of it?  


No, I am saying that its ridiculous that they can force the Kinect on us but cannot give people a battery pack in 2013? So Microsoft is the only brand going into the next gen without rechargable batteries and you're going to come up with some excuse for them? Come on Jay Wood...you're better than this. What people could've paid to buy another game, you're going to have to buy two battery packs. Im not saying agree with me but I am thinking about the majority of gamers here, not the minority.



walsufnir on 12 August 2013
theprof00 said:
walsufnir said:
78 million 360 users seem to have no problem with batteries, same goes to uncounted pc-gamers who bought the controller. But it's a legit argument in wars, of course. I will keep on using my eneloops.

And a percentage of those 360 gamers who are tired of being on the nickle and dime train could help explain the preorder numbers.


Right, that's why still ~80k units get bought every week - because nobody wants to use batteries! Man, all the exclusive-talk, better games, better online, ps+, all arguments are crap. It's them batteries that pushed Sony to 2nd place.



S.T.A.G.E. on 12 August 2013
HipHopGodd said:
No matter what the issue fans of either console will make it bait in the fanboy wars. The fact MS fans are going to defend this is pretty bad because (even though it's not a big deal) it's clear that built in batteries are much better. The fact that Sony fans are doing to use this as an example of an MS cash grab just makes them look all the more petty. I'll admit, I'm a PS3 fan but I've never been involved in fanboy bickering because the financial success of the consoles don't directly benefit me. What exactly is being accomplished by bashing or defending the use of AA batteries in a game controller?


When Microsoft sees that Sony gives their fans a headset instead of making them buy it as yet another tacked on purchase, they decide to give them a very nice looking headset for free. A much better headset than Sony, I might add. Without the influence of Sony do you know how many tacked on purchases MS would've forced upon their gamers?