Much silliness in this thread, I'm afraid. Saying the 360 and Wii aren't in competition with each other is nonsense: they are. Saying the 360 is a bastion of original ideas is nonsense: it isn't. Claiming Trophies have nothing to do with Achievements is nonsense: they're an almost direct copy. Saying Sony received no stick for implementing the Trophy system is nonsense: they did.

In fact, the more I think about this thread, the more it annoys me for the nonsense it espouses. Instead, let's see if we can tackle the central topic with a little less bias.

The 360 has Achievements. Achievements are a refinement of previous reward systems and High Score tables. Every 360 game has a number of challenges, called Acheivements, set by the game's developer. Completing an Achievement increases your Gamerscore -- basically your combined High Score for all the 360 games you have played. Most people see Achievements and Gamerscore as a new direction for old ideas, and a fairly awesome one as well.

Later, Sony, after many complaints from its userbase, and after losing multi-platform sales to the 360, implemented their Trophy system on the PS3. It was basically a blatant copy of the Achievement system with a bunch of new names and a couple of very minor innovations.

At the time Sony announced they were implementing Trophies it was blasted from many quarters for copying Microsoft. There was also much cheering from Sony fans that they were getting their own Achievement system, because, as already noted, many had been calling for it. Equally, there was much taunting from Microsoft fans because they Sony was late to the party and was unlikely to ever have a unified system as the developers could not be forced to update old games. At the time of the trophy implementation with Firmware 2.4, articles flooded the internet about Sony copying Microsoft. Some were nice. Some slammed Sony hard. Some simply said: 'about time, too'.

So, to answer the OP:

'...now I am not getting upset because of all this, my thing is where is the backlash that, Sony COPIED Microsoft?'

You were obviously paying attention at the time. For the months leading up to, and the months after it's implementation in the middle of last year, there was a significant backlash against Trophies. There was much crowing. 360 fans jeered. PS3 fans cheered. You get the idea. Just do an internet search and you'll find it all there in the past in all its ugliness. Just because you missed it does not mean it didn't happen.

Really, you are very late to the party.

'All I have to say to all you Playstation Fans is this, whenever you get the satisfaction of a trophy just remember who came up with the idea first.'

Why? I don't care where a particular feature was sourced from in the past, all I care about is whether I like what I have. I like Trophies. I like Achievements. I collect both. I care nothing for the companies behind them. I care about having fun playing games.

'Microsoft is innovativing in the videogame industry and not enough people is giving Microsoft credit with their mouth, just with their Wallets, Why is that?'

Because Microsoft have not innovated that much. All the have done is take a bunch of PC gaming staples, unified them in their console, added a funky achievement system, then charged for it. It's not all that innovative (well, perhaps the charging is; other platform holders are probably still kicking themselves). If Microsoft did something substantially new, and more often, then they would be complimented more, I'm sure.

Personally, I think Achievements and their copies are awesome. They may not be unique to Microsoft, but all games on the 360 have them, and that deserves a mention as a first, and a industry-defining first, as others are now playing catch-up. But that does not mean Microsoft should be lauded as the Innovation Kings, as that would be pretty laughable when you look at what they have, and how it got there.

Nice to see you have 377 trophies.

Yup. What's your point?

I will leave that to you to answer.

If I knew what your point was, I wouldn't have asked you, would I? I'll admit I have no idea what your issue is. I made my stance very clear in my post. You replied with a non sequitur.

What do you want me to say here? Do you want me to put words in your mouth and make you arguments for you? Are you unable to tackle my post? Do you feel your answer is witty and insightful and speaks for itself? If you want a reply from me that tackles your opinion, you'll have to state one.

Perhaps I'm alone in this, and everyone else understands what you are saying here? So with that in mind: Does anyone else want to step up and make Jeronimo66's argument for him, as he seems unable to get it through to me, no matter how 'experienced [a] forum poster' he claims to be?

Let me ask you this then, what do you think my point is?