>>280681
>never made any sense
It depends on what game you're playing, hence why I have one symmetrical and one asymmetrical
>>280703
>asymmetrical
>for FPS
this nigger here has it ass-backwards. XBawks putting the left analog even with the buttons is for the purposes of 3D action games, where you'll primarily be moving about the 3D space with an analog stick, and interacting with the world through button presses. That said, for games that use Soulslike controls (shoulder buttons and triggers for primary actions), it's back to symmetrical. For 2D games, it's symmetrical, because you'll be using dpad movement and buttons. For FPS it's symmetrical, since both thumbs will primarily reside on the sticks. It's just about keeping your thumbs even with each other where they will be most frequently. With XBox, this was a conscious design decision (and their controller was a straight-up ripoff of the Dreamcast controller). I think Playstation just keeps it symmetrical due to them using the same controller design for three generations after bolting sticks onto the bottom of the original PS1 controller and it just became their "identity" more than anything else, but I'm thankful for it, because symmetrical controllers sure have their purpose, even if most controllers seems to have the asymmetrical design now. "tank controls", 2D games, menu-heavy games, FPS if you're a literal nigger and use a controller for that. Really, despite "xbwaks style" being dominant, there's only one genre that benefits from the design - 3D action/adventure, and maybe racing.