Support NeoGAF

[ManaByte]

Also, N64 did not introduce the analog controller first. I've said this multiple times, so please stop giving misinformation. The XE-1 AP controller came out 8 years before the N64, and it had an analog controller. It was also one of the first "universal" controllers (in quotes because some PCs required an adaptor to plug it it).

Ask anyone with half a brain which controller introduced analog control to consoles and they won't pick this one:

 

[IFireflyl]

Ask anyone with half a brain which controller introduced analog control to consoles and they won't pick this one:

This controller was the basis for the 3D Control Pad (Sega), which was the basis for the Dreamcast controller (Nintendo), which was the basis for the OG Xbox controller. This controller has a place in the annals of gaming history, whether you knew about it (or liked it) or not. "I heard about X first," doesn't mean that "X" was more innovative. You people have such an erection for Nintendo that you're dismissing any evidence that goes against your views of Nintendo. Why you guys are arguing against evidence is beyond me. You're entitled to your opinions, but when your opinions are opposed to actual proof then you should be willing to admit that your opinion is wrong. Drop the pride, man.

Compare your picture with the Dreamcast controller:

You're going to tell me that the XE-1 AP wasn't innovative when it was released 9 years before the Dreamcast?

 

[ManaByte]

This controller was the basis for the 3D Control Pad (Sega)

You're absolutely wrong on that. Sonic Team said they were inspired by Mario 64 and the N64 controller to do the Saturn analog controller with NiGHTS.

Nights into Dreams - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sonic Team noted the successful twinning of the Nintendo 64 controller with Super Mario 64 (1996), and realised that the default Saturn controller was better suited to arcade games than Nights into Dreams.[26]

 

[IFireflyl]

You're absolutely wrong on that. Sonic Team said they were inspired by Mario 64 and the N64 controller to do the Saturn analog controller with NiGHTS.

Nights into Dreams - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You do understand that the XE-1 AP was a controller made for Sega consoles... right? It doesn't matter that the Sonic Team said they were inspired by the N64 controller. That could be true, especially with the Z-trigger, but the entire design of the 3D Control Pad copies the XE-1 AP which was another controller that could be used "universally" with three different Sega consoles as well as some PCs almost a decade prior. The Sonic Team didn't say they took no inspiration from anything else. If I say I'm inspired by X person, does that mean nobody else can inspire me? No. Also, compare the XE-1 AP with the Sega 3D Control Pad controller, and then the Nintendo Dreamcast controller, and the the OG Xbox controller. You cannot possibly claim that the XE-1 AP didn't inspire the designs since it is the original design.

XE-1 AP

Sega 3D Control Pad

Nintendo Dreamcast

OG Xbox

Heck, the N64 controller even has a similar look to the XE-1 AP!

They just added a middle prong.

But sure: "Nintendo did it first!" *eye-roll*

 

[ManaByte]

But sure: "Nintendo did it first!" *eye-roll*

Show us on the doll where Nintendo hurt you.

This whole thread you've been on a crusade to discredit any innovation Nintendo came up with. Next you'll try to mental gymnastics an explanation how Sony came up with the PlayStation without Nintendo screwing them over.

 

[IFireflyl]

This whole thread you've been on a crusade to discredit any innovation Nintendo came up with. Next you'll try to mental gymnastics an explanation how Sony came up with the PlayStation without Nintendo screwing them over.

Except that it hasn't. Fanboyism from you Nintendo people just makes you think that's been my purpose. Nintendo IS innovative. I never said that they weren't. I only argued against two points:

• The Nintendo 64 did not release rumble/vibration first.
• The Nintendo 64 was not the first analog controller.

You people are taking my opposition to these two points (I haven't opposed anything else, including the Z-trigger) and you're pretending that I'm anti-Nintendo. I have provided evidence for why I reject these two claims. I never said that Nintendo isn't innovative. The first video game I lost myself to was Super Mario World on the SNES. Nintendo will ALWAYS have a place in my heart for that, and I absolutely agree that they have been one of the most innovative companies for video games. My only issue was with the N64 specifically, and even then, I only took issue on the two points listed. I didn't just say, "Nah, u rong!" I provided evidence that supported my statements, and you people keep trying to move the goal post so that Nintendo always wins. Your bias is extremely apparent.

 

[ManaByte]

• The Nintendo 64 did not release rumble/vibration first.
• The Nintendo 64 was not the first analog controller.

Super Mario 64 wasn't the first 3D platformer, but no one credits Bug on the Sega Saturn for innovating and inspiring the genre.

You're conflating "first" and "innovative". There were PDAs and smartphones before the iPhone and iPad, but how Apple innovated with those devices inspired every smartphone and tablet released since.

 

[IFireflyl]

Super Mario 64 wasn't the first 3D platformer, but no one credits Bug on the Sega Saturn for innovating and inspiring the genre.

What you're saying is who did it first isn't as important as who did it best. Let's follow that to it's natural conclusion.

• Nintendo had the first mainstream controller design (the Family Computer controller). Sony improved on this with their PSX controller. Almost all other non-specialized controllers (joysticks, arcade pads, joycons, et cetera) since then have been based on the PSX controller design.
• Nintendo had the first "great" thumb stick controller design. Sony improved on this with their Dual Analog Controller. Almost all other non-specialized controllers (joysticks, arcade pads, joycons, et cetera) since then have been based on the PSX controller design.
• Nintendo first stated the idea for a rumble feature in the controller. Sony beat them to this and improved on Nintendo's version of rumble with their Dual Analog Controller, and subsequently their DualShock controllers. Almost all other non-specialized controllers (joysticks, arcade pads, joycons, et cetera) since then have been based on this PSX controller design.

The "who did it best" in these two categories goes to Sony. I have stated from the beginning that who did it first isn't as important as who did it best. Nintendo did not implement the rumble feature the best with the N64 controller, and they also did not implement it first. Nintendo did not implement the analog controllers the best with the N64 controller, and they also did not implement it first. Technically, Nintendo didn't use an analog controller at all with the N64. Thumb stick =/= analog. The N64 controller had a thumb stick, but it wasn't analog (meaning it did not use potentiometers to measure the position of the stick). That's why the N64 controller had to be calibrated every time you turned on the N64, and that's why the Dual Analog Controller did not have to be calibrated each time.

Either way you look at it (first or best) Nintendo lost. They didn't implement the features first in both rumble and analog functionality, and they didn't implement them better than Sony did with the PSX.

 

[Damigos]

Playstation
N64 had better graphics but Playstation was the one that blew my mind back then. MGS, FF, Gran Turismo, RE, Tekken, Pandemonium (yes) and so many others left me with open mount

 

[ManaByte]

They didn't implement the features first in both rumble and analog functionality, and they didn't implement them better than Sony did with the PSX.

People didn't implement analog controls due to some obscure Sega controller. They did it because SM64 showed how analog controls can enhance gameplay. Likewise people didn't start using rumble because Sony released the Dual Analog in one territory with rumble and Tobal No. 1 buzzed when you got hit, they did it due to Star Fox 64 showing how rumble could enhance gameplay.

 

[Spukc]

some of you better stop talking shit about Nintendo

 

[FStubbs]

Ask anyone with half a brain which controller introduced analog control to consoles and they won't pick this one:

It's not that the N64 introduced an analog controller. Those were around forever. It was that the N64 showed how one could be used for navigating 3D games.

 

[Lognor]

The Zune was released about five years after the iPod. Sony's vibration was released two days before Nintendo's. Your comparison is garbage.



It doesn't matter that Nintendo released it worldwide first. That has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is innovation. If I cured cancer and released the cure only in the United States, and then someone else released another cure that wasn't as good in the rest of the world, do I not get credit for curing cancer? You're fanboying super hard, man. I'm giving you facts and you're dumping on them (and me) because of opinions. You can't refute the facts I presented. Do what another guy did and simply disagree with me, but stop arguing because your opinions are weak and they aren't going to sway me.

Also, N64 did not introduce the analog controller first. I've said this multiple times, so please stop giving misinformation. The XE-1 AP controller came out 8 years before the N64, and it had an analog controller. It was also one of the first "universal" controllers (in quotes because some PCs required an adaptor to plug it it).

Look at manabyte's post. And think again. Nintendo was much more innovative than Sony. Rumble is associated with Nintendo for a reason. The introduction of analog controllers are associated with Nintendo for a reason. You cannot give Sony credit for rumble when they released it in ONE REGION as an add-on and not included in the box. It was clearly a response to Nintendo's rumble.

And you're bringing up a controller NO ONE had heard of. You are the one fanboying super hard in an attempt to not credit Nintendo with all the innovation they've brought to the table. It's actually laughable.

Based on your weak arguments we should credit Nintendo with the invocation of vr since they released the virtual boy decades ago. Forget oculus. Forget the vive. Forget psvr. No, it was Nintendo! But based on your fanboyism, you're going to give credit to Sony.

 

[IFireflyl]

Look at manabyte's post. And think again. Nintendo was much more innovative than Sony. Rumble is associated with Nintendo for a reason. The introduction of analog controllers are associated with Nintendo for a reason. You cannot give Sony credit for rumble when they released it in ONE REGION as an add-on and not included in the box. It was clearly a response to Nintendo's rumble.

And you're bringing up a controller NO ONE had heard of. You are the one fanboying super hard in an attempt to not credit Nintendo with all the innovation they've brought to the table. It's actually laughable.

Based on your weak arguments we should credit Nintendo with the invocation of vr since they released the virtual boy decades ago. Forget oculus. Forget the vive. Forget psvr. No, it was Nintendo! But based on your fanboyism, you're going to give credit to Sony.

I certainly can give credit to Sony for introducing something first, and implementing it better. Sony introduced rumble before Nintendo, and they implemented it better. Sony introduced dual analog controllers first, and it implemented the thumb stick better than Nintendo since Nintendo's thumb sticks were not analog. Nintendo did not introduce the thumb stick first. I haven't fanboy'd once. I can give Nintendo credit where it is due. Z-targeting goes to Nintendo. But rumble innovation goes to Sony since their implementation was superior (and first!). And analog control innovation goes to Sony since Nintendo didn't even have an actual analog stick. I'm the only person of the three of us (me, you, and ManaByte ) who is actually giving credit to both parties. But you two just want Nintendo to get all of the credit, and Sony to get none of it. THAT is fanboyism. Me giving credit to both parties (where it is actually due) isn't fanboyism.

 

[ManaByte]

Sony introduced rumble before Nintendo, and they implemented it better. Sony introduced dual analog controllers first, and it implemented the thumb stick better than Nintendo since Nintendo's thumb sticks were not analog.

 

[polybius80]

People didn't implement analog controls due to some obscure Sega controller. They did it because SM64 showed how analog controls can enhance gameplay. Likewise people didn't start using rumble because Sony released the Dual Analog in one territory with rumble and Tobal No. 1 buzzed when you got hit, they did it due to Star Fox 64 showing how rumble could enhance gameplay.

sorry but you are jumping to conclusions with very questionable arguments and you are talking as if n64 was an 80's console and as if mario64 was the first 3d game to use an analog/pseudo analog controller, analog was natural to 3d its not accident it was used for many years in 3d and pseudo 3d games specially simulators for personal computers and consoles, the analog was implemented many years ago in fact it was there at the beginning of games with pong, even the first game in history was played with potentiometers the innovation was who used digitial controllers first

lot of people here are mixing and interchanging things like "who did it first" and "who make it famous" careful with that, you can have an innovation and not become a trend and you can have something that becomes a trend and is not using something new, if we are going to talk about "technology" the innovation is "who did it first" not who make a product that used it better and was famous because we are talking the tech itself, most of the the innovative things the 90 consoles did were used in past consoles like atari 2600, 5200, colecovision, etc, and that is considering bringing the tech to consoles as an inovation itself wich is questionable as haptics and analog existed on PC and arcade, it was a matter of time to bring them to a closed system

 

[ManaByte]

sorry but you are jumping to conclusions with very questionable arguments and you are talking as if n64 was an 80's console and as if mario64 was the first 3d game to use an analog/pseudo analog controller, analog was natural to 3d its not accident it was used for many years in 3d and pseudo 3d games specially simulators for personal computers and consoles, the analog was implemented many years ago even in consoles

I’m not jumping to conclusions. Were you even around in 1996 when all of this was happening?

 

[polybius80]

I’m not jumping to conclusions. Were you even around in 1996 when all of this was happening?

I have been playing games since atari 2600 in the 80's

 

[ManaByte]

yes you are jumping to conclusion and not just that you are equating the success of a product to the release of such technology wich is the innovation

I have been playing games since atari 2600 in the 80's

Super Mario 64 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Though not the first 3D platformer or 3D Nintendo game, PC Magazine's K. Thor Jensen considers Super Mario 64 to be the first truly realized 3D platformer, by these criteria: innovations in player-character personality; intuitive, perfectible gameplay; and integration of camera control into core gameplay, which he called the medium's true evolutionary leap.[110]

Super Mario 64 set many precedents for 3D platformers[85][89][111] as one of the most influential video games. GameDaily wrote that it "defined the 3-D platform experience".[112]

To increase freedom of exploration and fluid control in a 3D world, Super Mario 64 designers created a dynamic virtual video camera that turns and accelerates according to the character's actions,[118]operated by the in-game character Lakitu.[6] This camera system became the standard for 3D platform games.[7]

Edge said Super Mario 64 changed "gamers' expectations of 3D movement forever".[105] The Nintendo 64's analog stick affords more precise and wide-ranging character movements than the digital D-pads of other consoles, and Super Mario 64's use of this was novel. At the time, 3D games generally allow the player to either control the character in relation to a fixed camera angle or in relation to the character's perspective. Super Mario 64's innovative controls are fully analog and interpret a 360-degree range of motion into navigation through a 3D space relative to the camera. The analog stick allows for precise control over subtleties such as running speed.[121] Electronic Gaming Monthly in 2005 ranked Super Mario 64 the most important game since they began publication in 1989, stating that, while there were 3D games before it, "Nintendo's was the first to get the control scheme right."[122]

The innovation and influence of both the 3D camera and use of analog in Super Mario 64 is well documented.

Same thing with the rumble use in Star Fox, which was the first major console release to use the feature in such a way globally and not just in one territory.

Star Fox 64 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Critics also applauded the precise analog control,[27][4][7][35] boss designs,[27][7][32] rumble pak implementation,[27][4][7][32][35] and cinematic cutscenes.[4][7][32] GamePro, which gave the game a perfect 5 out of 5 in all four categories, elaborated, "The analog joystick seriously kicks it here with its best performance to date, demonstrating impressively crisp response that enables you to pull the tight, white-knuckle moves you need to survive. The Rumble Pak teams up with the solid controls and scores as an all-time great add-on."[35]

 

[TGO]

If you mean poorly executed features that the competition fixed and refined and became the standard going forward, then yeah N64 was the most innovative.
Then again Nintendo also refines and have success with other companies innovations.

 

[polybius80]

Fuck off with that “jumping to conclusions” bullshit. The innovation and influence of both the 3D camera and use of analog in Super Mario 64 is well documented.

you are talking about a game and the good critics(well deserved) not the tech, mario 64 is an innovative game but not an innovative console which is what the thread is about, you are not only jumping to conclusion about the tech available in the industry but also jumping between topics

 

[ManaByte]

you are talking about a game and the good critics(well deserved) not the tech, mario 64 is an innovative game but not an innovative console which is what the thread is about, you are not only jumping to conclusion about the tech available in the industry but also jumping betwen topics

You didn't even read the OP that brings up analog and rumble. Because I used examples of games that made those features innovative they don't apply? What the fuck is wrong with people now?

 

[polybius80]

You didn't even read the OP that brings up analog and rumble. Because I used examples of games that made those features innovative they don't apply?

the word you should be using is "popular" o "famous"

an idea can be innovative and not become popular until later take for example motion controllers they became popular with the wii but the original idea and the tech were the innovation and they were in the past I think an atari 2600 controller is considered the first

What the fuck is wrong with people now?

 

[polybius80]

Super Mario 64 wasn't the first 3D platformer, but no one credits Bug on the Sega Saturn for innovating and inspiring the genre.

You're conflating "first" and "innovative". There were PDAs and smartphones before the iPhone and iPad, but how Apple innovated with those devices inspired every smartphone and tablet released since.

the word is "popular" not "innovative"

the invention of something is what makes it innovative because you are introducing a new idea or method, not the popularization of an implementation of the innovative tech, mario 64 can be innovative by its own merit in certain aspects but that doesnt mean that the first 3d platformer wasn't innovative because "nobody gives credit" because subsequent games use the same genre then they obviously based themselves on it


it also should be treated careful not to equate to invention which can be different from innovation even if they are interchangeable most of the time

 

[Lognor]

I certainly can give credit to Sony for introducing something first, and implementing it better. Sony introduced rumble before Nintendo, and they implemented it better. Sony introduced dual analog controllers first, and it implemented the thumb stick better than Nintendo since Nintendo's thumb sticks were not analog. Nintendo did not introduce the thumb stick first. I haven't fanboy'd once. I can give Nintendo credit where it is due. Z-targeting goes to Nintendo. But rumble innovation goes to Sony since their implementation was superior (and first!). And analog control innovation goes to Sony since Nintendo didn't even have an actual analog stick. I'm the only person of the three of us (me, you, and ManaByte ) who is actually giving credit to both parties. But you two just want Nintendo to get all of the credit, and Sony to get none of it. THAT is fanboyism. Me giving credit to both parties (where it is actually due) isn't fanboyism.

It's not fanboyism. It's fact. Nintendo introduced analog controls first. And in order to discredit Nintendo you came up with some obscure controller that had it first that no one has ever heard of. And in the same breath you give credit to Sony, and not Nintendo, for analog controls. You are spitting pure fanboyism nonsense. Just to give Sony credit that it does not deserve.

Nintendo had rumble first. Nintendo had analog controls first. Nintendo had a VR headset first. Facts.

 

[ManaByte]

Nintendo had a VR headset first.

Actually SEGA did a 3D headset first.

 

[Lognor]

Actually SEGA did a 3D headset first.

I had no idea this thing existed! I was just piling on though... I'm not actually giving Nintendo credit for vr. That Wario game was neat but still a horrible device

 

[GametimeUK]

innovate
/ˈɪnəveɪt/

verb
verb: innovate; 3rd person present: innovates; past tense: innovated; past participle: innovated; gerund or present participle: innovating

1. make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas, or products.
   "the company's failure to diversify and innovate competitively"
   • introduce (something new, especially a product).
     "we continue to innovate new products"

 

[ManaByte]

I had no idea this thing existed! I was just piling on though... I'm not actually giving Nintendo credit for vr. That Wario game was neat but still a horrible device

The Virtual Boy had like 3 decent games.

 

[IFireflyl]

It's not fanboyism. It's fact. Nintendo introduced analog controls first. And in order to discredit Nintendo you came up with some obscure controller that had it first that no one has ever heard of. And in the same breath you give credit to Sony, and not Nintendo, for analog controls. You are spitting pure fanboyism nonsense. Just to give Sony credit that it does not deserve.

Nintendo had rumble first. Nintendo had analog controls first. Nintendo had a VR headset first. Facts.

I gave you the actual facts and you're rejecting them. Nintendo did not introduce analog controls first. Nintendo did not implement analog controls best. Nintendo did not introduce rumble first. Nintendo did not implement rumble best. Those are the facts. Dismissing things that disprove your stance doesn't make me wrong. It means you're the fanboy.

 

[Lognor]

I gave you the actual facts and you're rejecting them. Nintendo did not introduce analog controls first. Nintendo did not implement analog controls best. Nintendo did not introduce rumble first. Nintendo did not implement rumble best. Those are the facts. Dismissing things that disprove your stance doesn't make me wrong. It means you're the fanboy.

Here are facts. Nintendo implemented a successful product with analog controls first. Nintendo introduced rumble on a worldwide basis first. Nintendo introduced VR before Sony. Tons of innovation coming out of Nintendo! And not including VR, Nintendo was much more innovative with the N64 than Sony was with the PS1. Just talking innovation here. Not games catalog or sales success. Don't confuse that. Nintendo won in the innovation department that gen.

 

[polybius80]

It's not fanboyism. It's fact. Nintendo introduced analog controls first. And in order to discredit Nintendo you came up with some obscure controller that had it first that no one has ever heard of. And in the same breath you give credit to Sony, and not Nintendo, for analog controls. You are spitting pure fanboyism nonsense. Just to give Sony credit that it does not deserve.

Nintendo had rumble first. Nintendo had analog controls first. Nintendo had a VR headset first. Facts.

the rumble is debatable specially with discussions about "innovation", "who did it first", "who made it famous" all fo them dancing around interpretations of the definition, but when it comes to the analog there were analog controls in atari consoles way before n64, it was already explained in this thread

the Virtual boy is not even a headset to begin with, you put that on a table or the floor and you see trough it not in your head or unless you try to use duct tape like the angry videogame nerd to put that in your head , its more comparable in its mechanics to toys like "viewmaster", video cameras and similar in concept to 3d glasses like ManaByte mentioned the sega 3d glasses, and those are not VR either

 

[cinnamonandgravy]

• The Nintendo 64 did not release rumble/vibration first.
• The Nintendo 64 was not the first analog controller.

first ones that mattered though (just to blow on the fire a bit).

 

[IFireflyl]

first ones that mattered though (just to blow on the fire a bit).

If Sony implemented rumble first, and their rumble is better, then N64 isn't the first rumble that mattered.

Regardless, my entire point is that the people arguing Nintendo was more innovative than Sony with the N64 vs the PSX (in terms of rumble and analog sticks only) are making these claims without having a clear definition of what constitutes "innovative". These people originally said N64 implemented these two features first. I disproved that, and then they said, "But....!" They shift the goal post when I disprove them.

I said that Sega had a controller that implemented analog first, and it was released almost a decade prior to the N64. Then they said nobody knows about that controller so it doesn't count. So if who did it first doesn't matter then the criteria must be who did it best, right? Well the N64's versions of analog (which is actually just thumb stick because it wasn't a true analog controller) was inferior to Sony's version of analog (which is used in all modern non-specialized controllers today). So Sony beats N64 if we're talking about who did it best.

I said that Sony implemented rumble first and better and then they say, "N64 was going to implement it first but it was delayed!" Well then how is that innovative? Is the mere idea where innovation comes from? Again, if the idea is what matters then it still contradicts their claim that N64's analog controller was innovative because that idea was introduced prior to the N64. These contradictions are what annoy me, and these people are stuck in fanboy mode.

 

[TaylorSwiftFan]

PlayStation also introduced dual analog sticks - something still used today.

 

[Lognor]

If Sony implemented rumble first, and their rumble is better, then N64 isn't the first rumble that mattered.

Regardless, my entire point is that the people arguing Nintendo was more innovative than Sony with the N64 vs the PSX (in terms of rumble and analog sticks only) are making these claims without having a clear definition of what constitutes "innovative". These people originally said N64 implemented these two features first. I disproved that, and then they said, "But....!" They shift the goal post when I disprove them.

I said that Sega had a controller that implemented analog first, and it was released almost a decade prior to the N64. Then they said nobody knows about that controller so it doesn't count. So if who did it first doesn't matter then the criteria must be who did it best, right? Well the N64's versions of analog (which is actually just thumb stick because it wasn't a true analog controller) was inferior to Sony's version of analog (which is used in all modern non-specialized controllers today). So Sony beats N64 if we're talking about who did it best.

I said that Sony implemented rumble first and better and then they say, "N64 was going to implement it first but it was delayed!" Well then how is that innovative? Is the mere idea where innovation comes from? Again, if the idea is what matters then it still contradicts their claim that N64's analog controller was innovative because that idea was introduced prior to the N64. These contradictions are what annoy me, and these people are stuck in fanboy mode.

Sony didn't implement rumble first. Nintendo did. So you're wrong there. Who did it best is debatable. That's subjective. You might think Sony did it better. Others might think Nintendo did it better.

And again, you are doing everything you can to credit Sony and in the same breath discredit Nintendo. Oh Nintendo released rumble first worldwide. Well it doesn't matter because Sony released it in one region a short time earlier. Oh Nintendo had analog controls first. Oh it doesn't matter because to me that's not really analog controls and also there is some obscure controller that did it first. Oh and Sony did it too and I think they did it better so they win there too. Dude, take a breath from the console warring.

And I did actually look up rumble and Sony removed rumble from their controller because it allegedly was not functioning properly. So if Sony was able to release rumble in one region first but it was a broken feature, how can you say they did it better? They had to go back to the drawing board to make it work correctly.

 

[IFireflyl]

Sony didn't implement rumble first. Nintendo did. So you're wrong there. Who did it best is debatable. That's subjective. You might think Sony did it better. Others might think Nintendo did it better.

And again, you are doing everything you can to credit Sony and in the same breath discredit Nintendo. Oh Nintendo released rumble first worldwide. Well it doesn't matter because Sony released it in one region a short time earlier. Oh Nintendo had analog controls first. Oh it doesn't matter because to me that's not really analog controls and also there is some obscure controller that did it first. Oh and Sony did it too and I think they did it better so they win there too. Dude, take a breath from the console warring.

And I did actually look up rumble and Sony removed rumble from their controller because it allegedly was not functioning properly. So if Sony was able to release rumble in one region first but it was a broken feature, how can you say they did it better? They had to go back to the drawing board to make it work correctly.

I already proved that Sony implemented rumble first. By two whole days. And who did it best is not subjective. Nobody ever used rumble the way Nintendo implemented it after the N64. Nobody. But Sony's implementation of rumble is still used today, including in Nintendo's own Switch Pro controller. Also, there are only rumors of why rumble was removed from non-Japanese versions of the Dual Analog Controller. There are several rumors, none of which were ever corroborated or confirmed (which is why you had to use the word "allegedly"). I could allege that you are a serial rapist. That doesn't make it true. Reeee harder.

I'm not fanboying and saying Sony is better than Nintendo. You're hearing that because you're the one who is stuck in fanboy mode. I'm laying out the facts, and that's it. I'm sorry you can't handle Nintendo not being first/best at everything. Grow up.

 

[marquimvfs]

Nobody ever used rumble the way Nintendo implemented it after the N64. Nobody.

You've said some things that are true, but some are plain wrong. Dreamcast used the same scheme, not that it matters on the subject, but they did.

But Sony's implementation of rumble is still used today

Not really. Get yourself a DualShock and try to make it rumble with the two games I said that were launched with dual analog (Bushido Blade and Tobal no 2). It won't work. Why? Because the implementation is just not the same. The only thing that is equal between DualShock and DualAnalog rumble implementation is the motor placement. So, you keep repeating yourself saying that Sony's implementation is first, better and used to this day, but no.
They launched DualAnalog two days before Rumble Pack and then abandoned they very own implementation just to launch DualShock years later, and using an technology created by Logitech.

Edit:
Oh, you also said that Switch Pro Controller uses the same Sony implementation. It may vibrate, but it's an entire different haptic solution that uses solenoids instead of motors (marketed as HD Rumble, that produces different effects), so, wrong again.

 

[IFireflyl]

You've said some things that are true, but some are plain wrong. Dreamcast used the same scheme, not that it matters on the subject, but they did.

Interesting. I wasn't aware of that. As you said, it doesn't truly matter since it's still far from the widespread built-in implementation that everything else uses today. But it's still good to know, and I concede that I was incorrect on this point.

Not really. Get yourself a DualShock and try to make it rumble with the two games I said that were launched with dual analog (Bushido Blade and Tobal no 2). It won't work. Why? Because the implementation is just not the same. The only thing that is equal between DualShock and DualAnalog rumble implementation is the motor placement. So, you keep repeating yourself saying that Sony's implementation is first, better and used to this day, but no.
They launched DualAnalog two days before Rumble Pack and then abandoned they very own implementation just to launch DualShock years later, and using an technology created by Logitech.

Tobal 2 and Bushido Blade work with rumble using the original DualShock controllers. You just have to enable the analog mode option which was a button on the original DualShock controllers. I never said that the technology is 1:1. I said it is the same implementation, and it is. The way the rumble worked was by having the motors in the "arms" of the controller, one being a different speed from the other. That doesn't mean they didn't change the technology that powers those motors.

Oh, you also said that Switch Pro Controller uses the same Sony implementation. It may vibrate, but it's an entire different haptic solution that uses solenoids instead of motors (marketed as HD Rumble, that produces different effects), so, wrong again.

See above. They are using different technology with the same implementation method being used to achieve the exact same result that Sony achieved with the Japanese release of the original Dual Analog Controller. The solenoids function the same way the motors did for the Dual Analog Controller, and they are placed in the same locations as the Dual Analog Controller. This implementation is still used in current gen Xbox and Playstation controllers, as well as the Switch Pro controller. That's because this implementation of rumble is far superior to rumble packs, and for the last two decades there has been no change to this. Nintendo didn't start that trend. Sony did.

 

[marquimvfs]

IFireflyl now you just lost yourself. DualAnalog has nothing to do with DualShock, except by the fact that both use motors, and the motor place. HD Rumble is miles different and is not even doing the same thing. And I didn't knew that rumble feature would work o Tobal 2 and Bushido Blade just by enabling analog feature. Will try by myself.

Edit:
Just found some info online regardind the matter. DualAnalog's vibration effect doesn't work with newer games that are compatible with DualShock. That only makes my point stronger. They doesn't use the same implementation, just have some similarities.

Jusy tried the games on my console and got mixed results, Bushido Blade didn't worked with DS, but Tobal 2 did.

 

[IFireflyl]

IFireflyl now you just lost yourself. DualAnalog has nothing to do with DualShock, except by the fact that both use motors, and the motor place. HD Rumble is miles different and is not even doing the same thing. And I didn't knew that rumble feature would work o Tobal 2 and Bushido Blade just by enabling analog feature. Will try by myself.

Edit:
Just found some info online regardind the matter. DualAnalog's vibration effect doesn't work with newer games that are compatible with DualShock. That only makes my point stronger. They doesn't use the same implementation, just have some similarities.

I didn't lose myself. I apparently lost you since you seem to be under the impression that I'm saying the technology in current-gen controllers is 100% the same as it was with the Dual Analog Controller. I never said that. Current rumble/vibration technology is not the exact same as it was with the Dual Analog controller. I never said that it's the exact same. I said the implementation is still the same. Meaning the positioning of the motors/solenoids in the controller "arms" to provide the vibration/rumble effect, and having variable strength instead of single-speed motors. This was the implementation of vibration/rumble that still exists today. The technology has advanced as technology always does, but how Sony implemented vibration/rumble is the process that we still see today. We're just seeing that with upgraded tech. All technology gets outdated and upgraded. I was never trying to say that current-gen controllers are still using 1990's technology. I thought that was implied, but obviously I was mistaken.

 

[marquimvfs]

I didn't lose myself. I apparently lost you since you seem to be under the impression that I'm saying the technology in current-gen controllers is 100% the same as it was with the Dual Analog Controller. I never said that. Current rumble/vibration technology is not the exact same as it was with the Dual Analog controller. I never said that it's the exact same. I said the implementation is still the same. Meaning the positioning of the motors/solenoids in the controller "arms" to provide the vibration/rumble effect, and having variable strength instead of single-speed motors. This was the implementation of vibration/rumble that still exists today. The technology has advanced as technology always does, but how Sony implemented vibration/rumble is the process that we still see today. We're just seeing that with upgraded tech. All technology gets outdated and upgraded. I was never trying to say that current-gen controllers are still using 1990's technology. I thought that was implied, but obviously I was mistaken.

Well, I get that and agree. To me, it looks like that I only disagree with you regarding the usage of the word implementation. Implementation to me, as an system analyst, means something totally different, like, the way of doing things. So, if you need to send different electronic signals to different controllers in order to make them work (even if the product (vibration, in this case) is similar) that means that the implementation is different. Like you just said, the technology need to be 100% the same to the implementation be the same, not just the motor position. I don't know if I made myself clear, sorry if that's not the case.

 

[JayK47]

Sorry I'm late. For me, the N64 for sure. Four player coop was amazing. Very costly to buy 4 controllers, but so fucking awesome and ahead of the curve. It came at the perfect time for me. My friends and I played the shit out of Goldeneye, Mario Kart and Star Fox. The Playstation had so many games and was a great start to a great series of consoles, but they did not invent 4 people playing split screen at the same time on the smallest fucking TV ever. What a blast and I can't imagine trying to play today on such a small screen.

 

[marquimvfs]

Sorry I'm late. For me, the N64 for sure. Four player coop was amazing. Very costly to buy 4 controllers, but so fucking awesome and ahead of the curve. It came at the perfect time for me. My friends and I played the shit out of Goldeneye, Mario Kart and Star Fox. The Playstation had so many games and was a great start to a great series of consoles, but they did not invent 4 people playing split screen at the same time on the smallest fucking TV ever. What a blast and I can't imagine trying to play today on such a small screen.

Nothing beats that Mario Kart's battle mode in 4 players splitscreen... (well, maybe goldeneye, but it's in the same system. It's a tough choice, hehe)

 

[Alexios]

Sorry I'm late. For me, the N64 for sure. Four player coop was amazing. Very costly to buy 4 controllers, but so fucking awesome and ahead of the curve. It came at the perfect time for me. My friends and I played the shit out of Goldeneye, Mario Kart and Star Fox. The Playstation had so many games and was a great start to a great series of consoles, but they did not invent 4 people playing split screen at the same time on the smallest fucking TV ever. What a blast and I can't imagine trying to play today on such a small screen.

But other consoles had 4 player (and Saturn the famous 10 player bomberman, released a month after the N64 in Japan) games too, you just needed a multitap thing on top of the controllers. It was more common on N64 but is that innovation, taking something and, eventually, doing more of it?

 

[6502]

But other consoles had 4 player (and Saturn the famous 10 player bomberman, released a month after the N64 in Japan) games too, you just needed a multitap thing on top of the controllers. It was more common on N64 but is that innovation, taking something and, eventually, doing more of it?

They took it mainstream. Multitaps are fine, but having it in the console meant huge software support and local multiplayer became far more social.

On psx it was still largely a case of "winner stays on" and boredom when more than two people wanted to play.

It was an innovation.

Nintendo had a modem in the 64 dd (i believe), but that doesn't take away credit from Microsofts innovation with xbox live.

This is the same thing imo. +1 for the N64

 

[Alexios]

They took it mainstream. Multitaps are fine, but having it in the console meant huge software support and local multiplayer became far more social.

It wasn't "in the console" since it didn't come with 3-4 controllers by default. They all required buying accessories, just one extra on the other systems.

Software support wasn't more common. Look at the multitap compatible PS1 games, there's a crazy amount (note that e.g. the 1-4 list doesn't repeat games from the 1-8 list), probably more than all N64 games put together. Saturn has a far more limited library overall but still had quite a few too.

Dreamcast does win over Xbox in terms of online play as an innovation. Xbox Live was Xbox's real innovation on that front.

Edit: JayK47 too

 

[JayK47]

But other consoles had 4 player (and Saturn the famous 10 player bomberman, released a month after the N64 in Japan) games too, you just needed a multitap thing on top of the controllers. It was more common on N64 but is that innovation, taking something and, eventually, doing more of it?

Well, if the console comes designed for 4 player, you will get more support for it. Surely you have noticed anytime a game requires an addon, like the light gun, it reduces the amount of games that support it. I purchased so many Nintendo addons, but there were less than a handful of games that supported it. With built in 4 player support, there were so many great games with 4 player.

Remember the Super Scope? I bought that and barely any games came out that worked with it. Great addon, no games.

 

[6502]

I think this thread demonstrates the N64 won the innovation stakes just by the reaches people are making. The PSX strength was as a disruptor and vast library. It won the generation.

However, instead of listing all PSX fabulous innovations, we seem to be desperately trying to rewrite history and discredit everything the N64 brought to the table.

Reading some of this thread, anyone not around at the time would think the N64 was akin to a clone machine 30 years late to market.

It was the best machine, with new ways to play that felt cutting edge - it was fantastic entertainment. Often, it's multiplatform games were far better than psx. It had experiances simply not possible or at least available on the competition. It just did not have enough support. But what it did get was some of the best games ever made.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

This has somehow turned into something worse than the Greedo Shot First debate.

Not wanting to prove anything here, but if we assume that Sony introduced rumble first, it’s just ironic that they wanted to get rid of it as “so last gen” with the PS3, only to backpedal on that.

Even if Nintendo didn’t introduce the first analog stick, it’s madness to debate that their implementation of it wasn’t revolutionary. Nintendo’s first foray into movement in a fully 3D space was a success that still resonates today, and it came out a full two years before PlayStation games were ready to truly experiment with movement in games that wasn’t based on a D-pad and tank controls. SM64 revolutionized the way we saw and did movement in 3D games. There is no way to deny its impact on the industry as a whole, and the game was a N64 exclusive. Arguing that the game was revolutionary and the console wasn’t is grasping at straws with needless semantics.