No, I just don't think Nintendo....Innovated anything specifically within the industry when it comes to 'Motion Controls'. 

Remember Sony has had similar tech contained with it's Eye Toy years prior and also came out with the Sixaxis (Which while I am aware is not the same as the Wii-mote) has a very similar concept.  Sony, however was not willing to come into this generation (Fresh off a successful PS2 Gen) with a $600 dollar console AND a brand new control scheme. 

They deserve all the credit in the world for making a gutsy decision, one that went against the grain of the industry and apparently finding a market for it as well.  But I don't think they 'innovated' as people like to throw around here. 

I don't think they did anything or had something so innovative and ingenius that Sony / Microsoft couldn't have grabbed up and done themselves.  The difference is,  Sony and Microsoft didn't believe/realize there was nearly as large of a market for it as there has been, otherwise make no mistake about it they would have done it as well. 

This is what you're misunderstanding.  An innovator isn't always the first person to realize that something is possible, or the first one who is capable of doing it, or even the first person to be both. 

The innovator is the first person with the imagination AND the ability AND the daring and drive to strike out into an unproven market.  The innovator is the one who proves the market.  That is what Nintendo did, and Sony and Microsoft didn't.  They are only doing it now because Nintendo proved it can be done. 

That is why Nintendo was an innovator this gen. 

I disagree.   Sony innovated motion controls in the PS2 gen (And it was probably done even before that).   Innovation is simply doing something in a new way.  To that extent,  every console this generation has 'innovated'.  Sony innovated just as much as Nintendo did with their Sixaxis controller.  Nintendo just happened to be far more successful in their venture.  To say Nintendo 'innovated' motion controls and Sony didn't is just patently false.     No where in the definition of innovation will you find 'success' being a keyword associated with it. 

Nintendo in my opinion had nothing to lose. (N64/Gamecube were failures in light of the critical successes of NES/SNES.) They had a core fanbase that as long as their console was cheaply priced and wouldn't break their bank itwouldn't necessarily matter if they sold 30 million consoles overall or 150 million consoles overall atleast to their bottom line.

With this kind of broad definition the word is useless.

Final-Fan was right, you're wrong. You may define innovation whatever you like, but it only make sense when the newly innovated becomes the standard, otherwise in most of the cases it's just overpriced gimmick. Even I could come up with 'innovative' idea based on cutting edge technology that probably will be unreliable, uncomfortable and cost you an arm and a leg.

In fact, according to Christensen's theory, which Nintendo kinda follows, innovation equals implementation, i.e. only business decisions matter. Ralph Baer, an engineer, 'invented' home console, Nolan Bushnell, an entrepreneur, innovated and bring it to the public. According to Christensen it's even natural to expect from the industry leader to come up with the tech first since they have  more money to burn on R&D and patents, but at the same time they lack foresight the newcomer have. Every one of big companies have a dozens of blueprints of potentially innovative things, since they permanently invest into R&D, but probably none of those will ever see the light of day, and only few companies will benefit from those innovations, those are innovators. What differs them from the rest? The ability, knowledge and initiative to implement innovation, i.e. being innovative. Price of innovation without implementation is zero. That's why ideas cost nothing, while existing businesses with those ideas implemented may cost a fortune.

It would be pithy, if oversimplified, to say that success is the difference between innovation and invention. 

"The tengen version is way better than the nintendo one. I have played both!"

Pics or it didn't happen fucktard. Lol.

It was the post from the John Lee dude in the Anti-trust link.

I wouldn't talk about the Sixaxis and innovation in the same sentence ... you know there are rumors ... here is a quote from wikipedia (Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIXAXIS):

"A major feature of the Sixaxis controller, and from where its name is derived, is the ability to sense both rotational orientation and translational acceleration along all three dimensional axes, providing six degrees of freedom. This became a matter of controversy, as the circumstances of the announcement, made less than eight months after Nintendo revealed motion-sensing capabilities in its new game console controller (see Wii Remote), led to speculation that the addition of motion-sensing was a late-stage decision by Sony to follow Nintendo's move. Further fueling the speculation was the fact that Warhawk was the only game shown at E3 that year which demonstrated the motion-sensing feature. Also, some comments from Incognito Entertainment, the developer behind Warhawk, said that it received development controllers with the motion-sensing feature only 10 days or so before E3. Developer Brian Upton from SCE Studios Santa Monica later clarified that Incognito had been secretly working on the motion-sensing technology "for a while", but did not receive a working controller until "the last few weeks before E3"."

Ah yes, evil Nintendo being evil to hardcore sperm games. So whats new?

The definition is in fact a very broad one at best.  Trying to microscope it and focus it into a specific point you're trying to make is taking it out of context and trying to twist it into whatever you feel it should fit under.

You do not need to be overly successful to be innovative.  You do not need to be the 'market leader' to be innovative.  Again, the PS3 has 35 million reasons why it's been innovative with it's Sixaxis. Does this not matter?  Do you believe that this didn't help usher in motion controls as well?    Do you believe that the Eye Toy may have been the true innovative item that was available to over 150 million people and loosened them up to the idea of motion controls?

Nobody knows.  Again, to say that Nintendo (More over the Wii) innovated motion controls and Sony (PS2/PS3) did not is just patently false.   They both helped usher them into this generation and helped make them common place.

Sony had similar tech years prior? They only had the ball tracking thingy. Current day PS Move uses accelerometers and a gyroscope, guess who did that first...