What's with the downvotes? This question is well written, to the point, uses pictures well to illustrate the point, and is a legitimate question prompted by current events. It's not asking a user-level question about a game controller, but design issues that make products suitable for different uses.

Olin Lathrop‭ This is not a great question, because its origin lies in the mainstream lay media. They wanted to sensationalize [scandalize]. They picked the only item of hardware which they recognized. Ultimately, they were barking up a wrong tree.

If approximately the same question were asked as "I need a joystick for a high reliability [medical, industrial, etc] application. Can I use a civilian game controller?" then it would be a real question. It would be an O.P.'s own application, and not something from TV news. The answer would be along the lines of "Maybe. Something like that has been done. Let's do some risk analysis."

So by the same logic something like electrical issues and system design with Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System that brought down Boeing737 MAX planes also cannot be discussed because it was covered by the media? I think the answers highlight the weak points in design choices and provide insight into how hardware should be designed to match the requirements of respective applications. It has nothing to do with media.

I don't see anything wrong with a question that was prompted by current events, as long as it asks about real EE issues like design tradeoffs. In my opinion, this question meets those criteria.

Nick Alexeev‭ I'm definitely with Olin here. This site is about education and the willingness to learn. The fact that a curiosity was prompted by the news is irrelevant. The question should be based on its own merit, and Olin has already stated those. There is no shame for a newbie or a non specialist to ask why some piece of hardware is not suitable for an application, if the question is framed in an electronics engineering context.

Lorenzo Donati‭ Hi Lorenzo, good to see you here. Answers can be biased by what TV is saying . I'm talking about layman TV news who sensationalize. I'm not talking about news in a trade journal. Elleanor was asking if questions about Boeing 737 MAX flaws are okay. The smoke had settled by now, so those might be okay. By the same token, the question about the Titan joystick might be okay when its respective smoke settles.

Nick Alexeev‭ Hi Nick! I understand your concerns, but again, the smoke that may cloud non-technical people vision in a general news forum should not affect us. We are not flooded with questions or answers, so we have no problems of dumb answers given by some random guy who just want to post some opinionated stuff. On the contrary, we do lack contributors, so enforcing still more policy filters to questions or answers may hurt us (we still have very strong guidelines in place, as they appear in the help center, and this question meets all of them). As I said, the question in itself is well motivated and the fact that it was prompted by an highly hyped news event is irrelevant IMO. Remove the first sentence (adjusting the following text) and the question is still decently written, with a reasonable doubt: "if a military UAV can be piloted with commercial joysticks, why a submarine can't". The OP even recognizes that the media hype could be a factor.

Nick Alexeev‭ BTW, sometimes commercial products can be incredibly sturdy, despite their price tag. I still use a Logitech wireless keyboard purchased more than at least 18 years ago! I use it daily and the silkscreen on the keys has not worn off a bit, despite the plastic having become a bit glossy from the wear. It wasn't even a top of the line device, but something a step above entry level. It even got better with time: since the beginning it had a shift key and the space bar that was very slightly prone to stick a bit when pressed, now with years of usage they became smoother! So it's not unreasonable to think that some commercial product might be used in some more professional setting.