New Nintendo Trademarks

[jvd]

Right sonic , I'm not arugeing which is better. As clearly inovation is not allways part of being sucessfully . Often times its those that come after the inovation that perfect it and make it into a success.

I don't think that some can seperate the two . I don't believe sony has done many inovative things in the console or handheld world . Surely they added onto inovative ideas , but they haven't had many of thier own .

As for sega I think they were just ahead of the times at the end . Many of the things they brought to the table will be standard next gen

 

[Ty]

There is a way , the market was growing from the moment nintendo steped into the market. If it wasn't for nintendo the market would be dead. So its nintendo who is responsable for the size and profitability as if they never entered the market sony never would have .

Earlier someone made the argument that Sony entered the market because of Nintendo (the work on the CDRom project) and therefore Nintendo should be given credit for this. Yet if this argument is to be believed, then Atari deserves the credit for pushing Nintendo into the market because Atari turned down the NES.

Becarefull on who your talking about , might make a fool of yourself

I think it's patently obvious who is anti-sony, pro-sony, anti-nintendo, pro-nintendo, etc.

 

[jvd]

Earlier someone made the argument that Sony entered the market because of Nintendo (the work on the CDRom project) and therefore Nintendo should be given credit for this. Yet if this argument is to be believed, then Atari deserves the credit for pushing Nintendo into the market because Atari turned down the NES.

Depends on how you look at it . Considering that atari and the others failed and nintendo took a chance on failed market you can call that inovative. Its not very inovative to jump into market that is growing at record pace. It is though to jump into a dead market and start its gorwing

think it's patently obvious who is anti-sony, pro-sony, anti-nintendo, pro-nintendo, etc.

All depends . Some aren't pro nintendo at all . And some might not be anti sony but warey of sony

 

[Ty]

Depends on how you look at it .

You mean, "depends on trumping up Nintendo any way possible".

Considering that atari and the others failed and nintendo took a chance on failed market you can call that inovative.

I call that taking a risk in a marketplace - which is fine. Innovation means bringing NEW ideas to the table. Look at the DS. Two screens. That IS innovative. Even the touchscreen is a bonus and also innovative. Coming out with another console is not.

Its not very inovative to jump into market that is growing at record pace. It is though to jump into a dead market and start its gorwing

So of course entering a market and taking it over in a single generation against Nintendo, which was the UNDISPUTED King doesn't earn respect from you?

All depends . Some aren't pro nintendo at all . And some might not be anti sony but warey of sony

I find it very telling that you, A> Excuse Nintendo Fanboys and B> Anti-Sony fanboys in the very same sentence. Basically, any pro-Nintendo statements are gospel because the person is NOT a fan boy and any anti-Sony message is not because of bias against Sony - they're just wary. Uh ok.

Imagine if someone you believed to be a rabid pro-Sony guy said:

"All depends . Some aren't pro sony at all . And some might not be anti nintendo but warey of nintendo."

 

[jvd]

You mean, "depends on trumping up Nintendo any way possible".

If thats what you want . You will notice i don't really claim many things they have done since the nes inovative.

So of course entering a market and taking it over in a single generation against Nintendo, which was the UNDISPUTED King doesn't earn respect from you?

What are you talking about . Sega almost had half of the market.

They came in and were lucky that sega made a mistake and didn't put better 3d hardware in and that nintendo launched so late.

If you don't call jumping into a dead market inovative i don't call being in the right place at the right time inovative .

I find it very telling that you, A> Excuse Nintendo Fanboys and B> Anti-Sony fanboys in the very same sentence.

I dunno . I've been called a fan boy of everything including sony in my life time . So I really don't think i'm dimising anything

Basically, any pro-Nintendo statements are gospel because the person is NOT a fan boy and any anti-Sony message is not because of bias against Sony - they're just wary. Uh ok

Actually its been the other way for a very long time on this forum. It gets very tireing where its alright to bash nintendo and microsoft at every turn but if you dare speak out against sony you get bashed on .

I see it happening more and more as the time goes by on this forum and it only looks like the bias will only become more in favor of sony on this forum .

 

[London Geezer]

Jvd, your argument os so flawed it's not even funny.
So now we need to thank Edison for making electricity what it is today. Without him, no TV no consoles no nothing!!!

Sure, if Nintendo hadn't entered the marked those 20 years ago, there probably wouldn't be a console market (arguable).

We're talking about the shape of the market today. Nintendo still does things the way they did in the 90s. If Sony hadn't entered the market, we'd still be playing Mario, only in 3D with better graphics.. Oh wait...

The market exists mainly because of the hard work of Nintendo in the early days.

But the market is what it is today mainly because of the hard work Sony did in the PS1 days.

Very easy differentiation of concepts. Denying that means being in denial completely.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I can't say I've seen much innovation from any of the console companies in quite a while. The Nintendo DS is probably the only thing that really caught my interest as something that's a good idea. I'd say consoles have been slowly evolving, building on the same premise since the ATARI came out. They just ramp up the hardware a bit, and throw in a bigger storage media, and that's about it. Online was not really innovative, because it's something that was done in the PC world quite a while before.

Sony was able to jump into the console market so easily because they were/are an outrageously rich company. They caught the competition (SEGA, Nintendo) off guard and beat them out in a pricing war. From what I understand, Nintendo basically killed themselves with the N64 with huge developing fees. I think Microsoft probably stepped in because they saw how easy it was for Sony.

In terms of titles, I think the only reason Nintendo has been somewhat of a kids system for a while is because they lost a lot of developers to other systems because of that pricing issue.

Really, all of these systems are not outrageously different, so I'm not sure how you could really argue points for or against one being innovative, without it applying to all of the others.

The Nintendo DS is a pretty good idea, that's really well suited to handhelds. I think I'd rather have one of those than the PSP.

 

[Ty]

If you don't call jumping into a dead market inovative i don't call being in the right place at the right time inovative .

Dude, I call NEITHER particularly innovative. I only question your view how you can view the Nintendo move innovative and NOT the Sony one.

Both companies faced tremendous hurdles and overcame them to dominate the market. That's fabulous. But to say one was innovative and to dimiss the other as luck or nothing IS biased.

Actually its been the other way for a very long time on this forum. It gets very tireing where its alright to bash nintendo and microsoft at every turn but if you dare speak out against sony you get bashed on .


I see it happening more and more as the time goes by on this forum and it only looks like the bias will only become more in favor of sony on this forum .

IMO, there is only one person that actively bashes Nintendo (but I could totally be forgetting others). But there are a few that bash Sony. I guess it's pointless to count or name names though.

Frankly, I don't know why anyone would love Sony, Nintendo, etc. They're just faceless corporations that are only interested in your money. They don't owe you anything and they certainly aren't your friend.

 

[Scott_Arm]

...
Frankly, I don't know why anyone would love Sony, Nintendo, etc. They're just faceless corporations that are only interested in your money. They don't owe you anything and they certainly aren't your friend.

Something that applies to pretty much everything computer related. Somehow this is a concept that's ignored far too often.

 

[mercury]

mercury silently watches the arguments unfold,clutching his Atari 5200 to his chest he mourns the loss of his RF switch..........

 

[Kolgar]

Becarefull on who your talking about , might make a fool of yourself

Not to put too fine a point to it, jvd, but you're one of the ones I'm talking about. :?

Your entire post reeks of the same stubborness and ill-conceived arguments I mentioned. It's a perfect case in point, which is why I won't even bother responding to it point by point.

Perhaps you should take your own advice?

 

[Kolgar]

Depends on how you look at it . Considering that atari and the others failed and nintendo took a chance on failed market you can call that inovative. Its not very inovative to jump into market that is growing at record pace. It is though to jump into a dead market and start its gorwing

No, Nintendo entering the market was not "innovative." It may have been courageous. And it's just as courageous - if not much more so - to jump into a competitive market, as Sony did when they took on established industry players Sega and Nintendo.

 

[Cryect]

I find this thread is funny how its supposedly about Nintendo trademarks and sure can't tell it now anymore.

Anyways just feel the urge to point out some minor errors

Memory cards

Saturn did this first though they were more like memory carts as they went into the system like a superness type game but held data .

Heh Sega CD did that first

Hard drive

Yes the ps2 had it announced but the saturn had a solid state type of hardrive built in , which you could use to save games or roms .

Heh and the Sega CD again

 

[PC-Engine]

GCN controller doesn't really copy anybody except from their own controller design.

Well it has two analog sticks (Dual Shock) and triggers (Dreamcast).

I wouldn't call them triggers, they're just an evolution of the shoulder buttons which they introduced on the SNES pad.

The Dual Shock copied the analog thumbpad of the N64. They just added a second one which was a great idea since you can move and look at the same time. Looking at all the features of the SONY controller as a whole though, it's obvious who copied who...it's as clear as day and night.

Regarding the claim that SONY has made the market the way it is today and should deserve all the credit..... Riiiiiight.

If SONY didn't enter the market, we'd be playing awesome games on Saturn and DC and whatever Nintendo would've come up with to compete with DC.

 

[London Geezer]

Regarding the claim that SONY has made the market the way it is today and should deserve all the credit..... Riiiiiight.

You obviously can't read:

The market exists mainly because of the hard work of Nintendo in the early days.

But the market is what it is today mainly because of the hard work Sony did in the PS1 days.

If SONY didn't enter the market, we'd be playing awesome games on Saturn
and DC and whatever Nintendo would've come up with to compete with DC.

Instead we're playing crappy Sonic games and other incredible games on GC PS2 and Xbox... what a shame huh.... I mean when was the last time Sega made an awesome Sonic game?! On SegaCD! When was the last time Sega made and awesome game period.

 

[rabidrabbit]

PC-Engine, will you please name one innovation from Sony and one from Microsoft that they've brought to the consoles, or console market?
There must be at least one, they can't ust all be copied, now try and find them

 

[Miksu]

PC-Engine, will you please name one innovation from Sony and one from Microsoft that they've brought to the consoles, or console market?
There must be at least one, they can't ust all be copied, now try and find them

I know I'm not PC-Engine but still, I would call XBox Live innovative.

 

[PC-Engine]

Instead we're playing crappy Sonic games and other incredible games on GC PS2 and Xbox... what a shame huh.... I mean when was the last time Sega made an awesome Sonic game?! On SegaCD! When was the last time Sega made and awesome game period.

No instead we're playing crappy games like GTA, The Getaway, Ghost Hunter, and EA Sports. Looks like you can't read either because without SONY SEGA would still be making consoles. How is that bad??? SEGA sold more DCs than Xbox or GCNs during the same period in their respective console lifetimes. Who was buying those DCs???

PC-Engine, will you please name one innovation from Sony and one from Microsoft that they've brought to the consoles, or console market?
There must be at least one, they can't ust all be copied, now try and find them

Eyetoy is innovative.

DICE for Xbox is innovative, but that's because of Dolby and Nvidia.

 

[see colon]

Eyetoy is innovative.

is it?

i wouldn't conside the eyetoy itself as innovative, but maybe the way it's used. at the heart of it the hardware is just a webcam, something the pc arena has had years before the eyetoy, and something similar to what ninteno made for the gbc. the way they use the eyetoy as an input device, turning your whole body into a controller is kinda slick. it's been done before with various accessories, but it never really worked until the eyetoy. so i guess it's inovative like the wavebird is innovative, not because it's first but because it actualy works like it should.

I would call XBox Live innovative.

sega offered a similar matchmaking service with the netlink, but it was free iirc. other than that most of the features in xbox live are "borrowed" from things like gamespy or steam. not saying it's bad, just not new.

one innovation from Sony and one from Microsoft that they've brought to the consoles

microsoft brought the concept that profit does not equal success. they didn't mind taking a rediculous hit on hardware to give the consumer a more powerfull system. they also brough mass internal storage to the console arena. sure other consoles (3do/scd/saturn/ect) had a bit of internal flash memory (or similar technology) but nothing to the scale of the xbox.

sony invented the disposable console. make it last at least 91 days and charge an 75% of the cost of a new system to fix it, bolstering sales of hardware for those people who want to still play all of the software they have purchased. (yes i am joking)

i would say the biggest thing sony brought was pretty much universal backwards and horizontal compatability. the ability of the ps2 to play other media (dvd, psx, ps2, cd) right out of the box was very fresh for it's time. even the xbox and gc (released after) didn't offer dvd move playback out of the box.

sony has also had a pretty innovative policy of including new/updated "add ons" with it's system hardware. when the (not innovative) dual shock was released new sony consoles came with it standard. the network adapter had a similar fate, and later was inigrated into a remodel. i can't think of another console company that did that (at least in house).

back when the psx was in full swing sony sold special dev-kit psx's directly to consumers. the psx's were black (or darker than the standard grey) and some of the homebrew games people made were included on playstation magazines disks or jampacks iirc. most of the stuff people made was terrible.

 

[Ty]

If SONY didn't enter the market, we'd be playing awesome games on Saturn and DC and whatever Nintendo would've come up with to compete with DC.

This is an interesting exercise in thought. What would we have if Sony never entered the market? We first need to identify what Sony brought to the market.

I'd say an openess towards more mature-oriented games, GTA, etc. We certainly would NOT have seen those on the GCN but perhaps DC. I'm not sure how the non-existance of Nintendo would have changed the gaming landscape though. Sega's presence surely would be dramatically different but I don't see how Nintendo's would be any different.

We could also go down another road and wonder how much Sony's impact in the market convinced MS to jump in.

In the end, I think Sony managed to open up gaming to a broader audience, much like the way Blizzard's WOW opened up MMORPGs to a new audience (jvd should like this analogy since he hates WOW too ).