It almost always becomes a huge mess when the topic of "who did what first" is brought up. For this specific case though? Sony improved on the original Nintendo concept to such a degree that it's DS1 analog stick setup has been industry standard for over 20 years, while nobody aside the overpaid R&D dummies at Sega, ( who managed to double-down on it, with the Saturn and then somehow, almost beyond belief, again with the DC ) has aped the N64 single stick setup. It was a huge upgrade. Referring to it as a mere ripoff is not accurate.

No other well known brand uses the DS analog stick layout. Only playstation. To make matters worse the DS1 is basically a SNES controller and later added 2 N64 analog sticks and the N64 Rumble Pack. I think you see the trend here.

BUT NO OTHER BRAND USES TWO ANALOGS IN CONJUNCTION WITH ONE ANOTHER, RIGHT? NO ONE ELSE THOUGHT TO USE TWO ANALOGS AFTER SONY DID. EVERY OTHER CONSOLE STILL PLAYS SOUTHPAW, RIGHT?

Sorry for the caps, but I'm going to capitalize points you refuse to read. Just because other companies use asymmetrical stick positioning doesn't mean it wasn't inspired by Sony's original use of two sticks at the same time.

The configuration was fairly new at the time. But it's a little redundant defending Sony because they added a second analog. It's was a unique configuration, but calling the Dual Shock revolutionary, is a bit of a stretch...I hope you can see that..

Are you serious? Are you actually serious?

Everyone uses a dual stick configuration now. Saying it isn't revolutionary is like calling secondary shoulder buttons unrevolutionary. It's the standard.

Do you think adding a second stick was more revolutionary than adding the first mainstream one?