By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
kitler53 on 10 February 2012
Edit Thread
happydolphin said:
kitler53 said:
happydolphin said:
kitler53 said:
NintendoPie said:
I really hope not because we don't need more of these "___ is copying Nintendo!" arguments.


what arguement.  nintendo copied apple and that's a fact.

Right, and apple coppied palm...

sure, we can say they copied palm, or hell, even the dream cast. 

when elitest nintendo fans are throwing then nintendo is the only innovative company elitism my way they always start by saying "nintendo was first to market" and when that can be disproven they fall back on "first to market mass sucess".  ipad is a tablet controller that plays game and interacts with tvs in the exact same way as the wiiU, can to market sooner and is massively successful.  i don't care what the rules are but keep them consistent.  nintendo clearly copied apple.

They all copied monopoly, since it's a game you play with your hands, and it had mass success, so it satisfies both rules. You can also play it on your tv at the same time, or make believe if you use markers on your tv screen (cathode ray tube at the time). Ok, I won't satire more, but you get the point.

Look, device to tv interactivity has existed since forever, you mentioned the Sega VMU. The full interactivity was offered by Nintendo with the GBA way before the iPad did. Touch controls, it's not a novelty. Anyways, for the full design, Apple did not bring it to market, so in that sense Nintendo did not copy. If you're talking about the interactivity between two screened devices, Nintendo had it before Apple. If you're going with a tablet per se, Apple did it, Nintendo didn't. The thing is a controller and a tablet, hence the term tablet-controller. Apple never did that, because they never released a console, so they don't have a controller.

When will some of us learn to classify things in their different aspects, and judge overall with the full picture in mind? The way it is, it's an asynchronous mess where you use one argument, then another and there is no clear definition.

If you mean to say that Nintendo copied Apple for using a touch-enabled device to communicate with another screen, sure Nintendo copied. But that is so little as compared to the interactivity argument, which is the focal point of the dual-screen discussion.

EDIT: And even then, as happysquirrel said (lots of happy ppl around here), the DS beat the iPad to it.

i do, but more importantly you also get the point.  listen, i don't know why i'm picking on you.  most likely it's because i'm a dick.  i don't particulary ever remember you actually falling into the "elitest nintendo fan" category that i put out there.  but in life, a lot of time anger is misdirected.  but as your post so elegantly shows, there is an evolution of ideas around all companies in any market.  successful new ideas become industry standards. 

also, please forgive my typo about sq inches, i obviously meant in^3.