Next-Generation challenges Nintendo's Revolution controller theory with both positive and negative things to say. They analyze button placement, intuitiveness, and the thinking behind major controller releases over the past 20 years. From the article: "Reading about the Revolution, I have quickly become bored of the constant suggestions people offer, trying to justify Nintendo's bizarre new idea of a videogame system. If I see one more article about light saber battles, I... well. I'm just disappointed, is all. It's like everyone is going out of his way to think up the flashiest tech demo in town, when the actual benefit of the system and its controller comes not in the amazing new gimmicks it will facilitate, or in anything that will ever require the player to flail his arm around the room."

The article is a very insightful read about the history of interface thinking, and what's really important to game controls. Any others share the author's Revolution controller opinion?