Would console manufacturers be in violation of U.S. law by fixing stick drift?

2 points by mouse_ ↗ HN
Including hall sensors in every controller would be a relatively cheap and easy way to mitigate stick drift. However, as publicly traded organizations are under legal obligation to maximize return on investment for shareholders, eliminating stick drift would certainly reduce some number of repeat customers, leaving money on the table. I know it sounds like a ridiculous question, but couldn't this argument feasibly hold water?

7 comments

[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 28.9 ms ] thread
> eliminating stick drift would certainly reduce some number of repeat customers

Someone experiencing stick drift - there is no guarantee they will come back to the original company for a fix. In fact they may well go elsewhere.

Eliminating stick drift, and as importantly eliminating reports of it happening, can only enhance your brand. Better build reputation = more sales?

What we don't know is (1) the cost of a Hall Effect sensor and (2) the replacement cost to the company. That would seem to be the maths that matters.

I know I put off buying a Switch in part because of drift reports.

> the cost of a Hall Effect sensor

They start off at a few pence each as an electronic component but can be much more expensive, often to be more rugged unit.

They are not under legal obligation to maximize return for shareholders. And they can pursue whatever quality/cost/market segments they want.
I see, you are right. I believed I had read this from multiple sources in the past, but in fact, it appears to be a well-propagated myth! Thank you!
(comment deleted)
(comment deleted)
>Would console manufacturers be in violation of U.S. law by fixing stick drift?

LOL, no.