>>314778626Here is a lot of nothing for your consideration.
Naming scheme: Symbols are easier (starting out) to remember than letters, but both get fucked by inconsistency from console to console. Overall, I don't think this matters in-game so much nowadays, because of color and shape coding.
Color coding: Obviously should be done and is helpful. These can be shown in-game along with shape so the player doesn't really need to keep relearning names each time they get a new system.
Button shape scheme: Having uniquely shaped buttons makes for a more memorable controller. That being said, it has to be carefully done - some of the Gamecube's buttons sucked horribly because they were too small or hard to press. They also need to be ergonomic - some games can be very demanding to be played well.
Layout scheme: The buttons need to be far apart enough not to accidentally press but close enough to intentionally press two of with one finger (particularly thumb). This is the easier part. However, the shape itself is a bigger problem. I am not sure that the 4 button diamond shape is the ideal, if you do shit like speedrunning you end up doing weird things like rotating the controller or using making weird grip shapes, but I also don't know what would be a better alternative. Combined with shape and color, unique geometry can make it easier to learn to a new player. I would like to note at this point that I have no idea whether a unique geometry is worthwhile for a player in the longrun as opposed to pure efficiency; I have typically found that in Gamecube games I more immediately learn controls on new games.
Actuation: Pressure sensitive can be a plus (Games like MGS2 have shown good use of this). However, digital input is often important as well. It is a hard decision to make. In keyboards, people have jumped on the mechanical switches train, but controllers have been made using rubber pads. There is also actuation distance for those that don't use potentiometers (axes).
