By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Sony always improves Nintendo's innovations

Michael-5 on 13 June 2011
Acevil said:
Galaki said:
Acevil said:
CGI-Quality said:
Acevil said:
CGI-Quality said:

It definitely was a good post. Nintendo did a bit less innovating than I thought (though I won't deny that Sony seems to polish used ideas).


I think this whole thread is confusing the term innovation with invention. Seriously this whole thread, I been reading it over, and people are acting like they are one in the same. 

I'm not confused on it. Invention is something nobody has really done in the last 2 decades, but I'd agree that Nintendo has done the bulk of "innovating" of late. Just not on the level some make it out.


My Second Part:
Nintendo is innovators of the industry, as they take the best technology they seem fit, and try to make it work. While Sony is the innovators that typically see something that already works, and incorporate it.  

See the both are innovators, one can be considered more, but people on both side of the camps, Nintendo and Sony are jumping the gun in this thread. Nintendo also incorporates things that already work as well.

Add: Nintendo does deserve the innovation title, but sony and microsoft aren't bad too. I get annoyed, when sony fans act like Nintendo has no hand in sony releasing products ala playstation move (I find it funny, as well), and when nintendo fans act all high and mighty and treat innovation as invention. All three companies are innovative companies. Also the playstation move is an innovation, but an innovation that is direct result to the wiimote.  

You seem to be confused  yourself.

There are 3 phrases.

1. Creation

2. Innovation

3. Improvement

Creation is useless without Innovation. Improvement comes after that.

Nintendo is doing the hard part by taking risk and bundle the creations. Usually, it takes many creations(techs) to make a successful innovation. Sony then comes and and take what's been tried and true and further improve it.

That's not to say Sony doesn't try with innovation themselves. They did. Many times. But they just failed at making it mainstream(innovate).
An easy recent example that you all are aware of is the eyetoy.

In the end, we all benefit. Microsoft joining the fray is actually really good since the competition is what forces the prices lower. Lower prices means we can buy more games.


Improvements are still under the fine line of innovation. At least in what I been learning in the past couple of years. Pretty much around this saying taken from Wiki "The central meaning of innovation thus relates to renewal or improvement, with novelty being a consequence of this improvement." Also I think sony does a good job of innovation in the sense of what you mean as well. The incorporation of DVD and Blu-ray into a device, that also plays games (don't say PC) :P. 

hm..........

hm..........

I see

and I respond with........

In this case every company can be considered innovative. I think the original post as refering to controller layouts, not system specifications.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Around the Network
M.U.G.E.N on 13 June 2011
Doobie_wop said:
ninty_shareholder64 said:
Doobie_wop said:
Nintendo are probably the least innovative manufacturer in the biz, Sony copies Nintendo's copied concepts, it's like stealing from a thief. Outside of maybe the rumble and the two screens on the DS, they haven't done that much. Now Sega is a whole different story, they've pretty much had a hand in nearly everything.

Sony works on old concepts and makes them better, every improvised concept they've done has basically become an industry standard (dual analogue, built in rumble, BC in consoles, optical media). This thread is an innocent one, but claiming Nintendo is innovative only means that you don't know to much about gaming history. I don't like when credit is given to undeserving companies, people could at leas be a little bit respectful towards the real creators of analogue sticks, touch screen gaming, 3D plat-forming, side scrolling plat-formers and console motion controls and not just throw all the praise on Nintendo just because they had the marketing budget to make the concepts well known.

The process of creating something new is always a long way. There are very many different people and/or companies involved. Of course analogue control, rumble, motion-controls etc. were invented before Ninty used it for their current console. Nevertheless, it was Ninty that invented these features as console-specific features, so of course Ninty innovates.

Do you think optical media, built in rumble etc. was invented from the very beginning from Sony? min 3 of your 4 arguments are rediculous, imo. dual analogue after Ninty built N64 controler, built in rumble after Ninty introduced it and optical media, you know the Saturn right?

So every company adds something new in the end. And i agree with the conclusion that Ninty introduced many things on the console market and Sony makes them better . There's never given credit to the basic researchers, i doubt you know any of them.

Don't forget, without Ninty Sony most probably wouldn't be part of the gaming market at all.

All the inovations I mentioned were console specific features at some point, features that Nintendo copied, improved upon and pushed into the mainstream. I wrote a long post on it a while back, I had a point to prove and I spent about two hours researching the history of these features and what I found is that Nintendo isn't as innovative as people make out, it's just that they take their ideas from smaller companies and then market the hell out of them, making it seem as if it's a feature that is related specifically to them.

I said that Sony took old ideas and improved upon them, I didn't say they invented them, they did exactly what Nintendo did, the difference is that people don't give credit to Sony for those inventions, but they do give credit to Nintendo for their improvisions when they should be crediting the original creators. 

I could re-write the report and re-research everything on the topic, but I don't have the time or the patience to re-exaplain these things to overly sensitive Nintendo fans. I'll just add a few points:

- Donkey Kong copied Space Panic as a platformer game. Nintendo did not invent platform games.

- Sidescrolling platforming Mario was copied from Pitfall!! and Jump Bug. Nintendo did not invent sidescrolling platform games.

- The Game.com was the first touch screen gaming handheld. Nintendo did not invent touch screen gaming.

- Motion controls were first introduced on consoles by Sega with Samba di Amigo and the Sega Activator, before them it was something frequently used in the Arcades. Nintendo did not invent motion controls and were not the first to bring it to consoles.

- The first 3D platforming game was not Mario 64, it was Alpha Waves on the PC, the first on console was released on the PS1 and it was called Jumping Flash. Nintendo did not invent 3D platforming on consoles.

- The Vectrex was the first console to use an analogue stick. Nintendo did not invent the analogue stick.

- The first force feedback controllers were found on the PC, Nintendo popularized it on the console, but they didn't invent it.

I could list more, but I haven't got the time. Nintendo are as original as Lady Gaga in a steak costume, meaning that they aren't original at all, they just like to pretend that they are and the ignorant press and the overly obssessed Nintendo userbase just gobble it all up and treat it as truth. If you want to praise an innovate company, then praise Sega, despite their downfall, they've done more for new ideas in games than any other company on the market.

what an epic post with epic pwnage! 'claps slowly' I actually learned quite a bit from this post :D thanks

and ugh if you don't mind me asking, what the bolded about exactly?



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

Acevil on 13 June 2011
Michael-5 said:
Acevil said:
Galaki said:
Acevil said:
CGI-Quality said:
Acevil said:
CGI-Quality said:

It definitely was a good post. Nintendo did a bit less innovating than I thought (though I won't deny that Sony seems to polish used ideas).


I think this whole thread is confusing the term innovation with invention. Seriously this whole thread, I been reading it over, and people are acting like they are one in the same. 

I'm not confused on it. Invention is something nobody has really done in the last 2 decades, but I'd agree that Nintendo has done the bulk of "innovating" of late. Just not on the level some make it out.


My Second Part:
Nintendo is innovators of the industry, as they take the best technology they seem fit, and try to make it work. While Sony is the innovators that typically see something that already works, and incorporate it.  

See the both are innovators, one can be considered more, but people on both side of the camps, Nintendo and Sony are jumping the gun in this thread. Nintendo also incorporates things that already work as well.

Add: Nintendo does deserve the innovation title, but sony and microsoft aren't bad too. I get annoyed, when sony fans act like Nintendo has no hand in sony releasing products ala playstation move (I find it funny, as well), and when nintendo fans act all high and mighty and treat innovation as invention. All three companies are innovative companies. Also the playstation move is an innovation, but an innovation that is direct result to the wiimote.  

You seem to be confused  yourself.

There are 3 phrases.

1. Creation

2. Innovation

3. Improvement

Creation is useless without Innovation. Improvement comes after that.

Nintendo is doing the hard part by taking risk and bundle the creations. Usually, it takes many creations(techs) to make a successful innovation. Sony then comes and and take what's been tried and true and further improve it.

That's not to say Sony doesn't try with innovation themselves. They did. Many times. But they just failed at making it mainstream(innovate).
An easy recent example that you all are aware of is the eyetoy.

In the end, we all benefit. Microsoft joining the fray is actually really good since the competition is what forces the prices lower. Lower prices means we can buy more games.


Improvements are still under the fine line of innovation. At least in what I been learning in the past couple of years. Pretty much around this saying taken from Wiki "The central meaning of innovation thus relates to renewal or improvement, with novelty being a consequence of this improvement." Also I think sony does a good job of innovation in the sense of what you mean as well. The incorporation of DVD and Blu-ray into a device, that also plays games (don't say PC) :P. 

hm..........

hm..........

I see

and I respond with........

In this case every company can be considered innovative. I think the original post as refering to controller layouts, not system specifications.

In a sense, every technology company has to innovate to survive, no company can truly sit-back on something . The level of innovation may vary (Some might introduce new-to-world, some might just add a better design to an existing product). 

The original poster was talking about controller layouts, and honestly this thread went to hell fast. 



 

sethnintendo on 13 June 2011
CGI-Quality said:
Michael-5 said:

OH WOW!!! I forgot, original PS1 controllers had no analog sticks!

 

That settles it, everyone copies Nintendo. However not everything is copied.

MS introduced achievements, a home button, and basically introduced online play onto consoles. They also made Kinect.

Sony introduced less, all I can think of is the built in battery pack to controllers, Eyetoy (but one can argue that's a copy of Gameboy Camera), and that's about it. Maybe Analog sticks for handhelds?

Nintendo leads with innovation, simple.

I just hope they introduce some form of achievement/trophy system with the Wii U. They are addictive, and I like completing my favorite games. Completing a Zelda would be a very daunting task, but I've done it for Ocarina of Time.

Sony was the first to incorporate a DVD drive in a console, along with the first to introduce dual analog on a controller. They have their fair share of innovations (and/or polish to current ideas - if you will), but I'd hardly argue with the notion that they trail Nintendo.

Because putting a DVD drive in a console is so innovating.  Nintendo could have (and did in Japan for GCN and Wii) but they just doesn't care to pay the royalties for the rest of the world.   I'd rather go the route of Nintendo.  When I buy a video game console I don't even care about DVD or Blu-Ray etc.  I care about what games I can play.  If you can't afford a DVD player or Blu-ray player right now then you shouldn't even be buying a video game console if you care that much about a watching videos.  Streaming is the future anyways (at least in the USA where most companies don't have cap limits yet).  The only reason why Microsoft jumped into home consoles was because it saw that the video game system (I'll blame Sony) could replace computers for some functions in the future.  They only care remotely for the actual gamer.  If they actually cared then Live would be free.  Just ask any PC gamer if they would ever pay money for Live... 



M.U.G.E.N on 13 June 2011

oh and for the record... I HOPE sony stays the hell away from the tablet controller idea for the next PS...horrible horrible idea imo...maybe a small screen (even that is not needed)..or maybe some trackpad use like in the PSV..but no huge tablet controller please



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

Around the Network
Acevil on 13 June 2011
sethnintendo said:
CGI-Quality said:
Michael-5 said:

OH WOW!!! I forgot, original PS1 controllers had no analog sticks!

 

That settles it, everyone copies Nintendo. However not everything is copied.

MS introduced achievements, a home button, and basically introduced online play onto consoles. They also made Kinect.

Sony introduced less, all I can think of is the built in battery pack to controllers, Eyetoy (but one can argue that's a copy of Gameboy Camera), and that's about it. Maybe Analog sticks for handhelds?

Nintendo leads with innovation, simple.

I just hope they introduce some form of achievement/trophy system with the Wii U. They are addictive, and I like completing my favorite games. Completing a Zelda would be a very daunting task, but I've done it for Ocarina of Time.

Sony was the first to incorporate a DVD drive in a console, along with the first to introduce dual analog on a controller. They have their fair share of innovations (and/or polish to current ideas - if you will), but I'd hardly argue with the notion that they trail Nintendo.

Because putting a DVD drive in a console is so innovating.  Nintendo could have (and did in Japan for GCN and Wii) but they just doesn't care to pay the royalties for the rest of the world.   I'd rather go the route of Nintendo.  When I buy a video game console I don't even care about DVD or Blu-Ray etc.  I care about what games I can play.  If you can't afford a DVD player or Blu-ray player right now then you shouldn't even be buying a video game console if you care that much about a watching videos.  Streaming is the future anyways (at least in the USA where most companies don't have cap limits yet).  The only reason why Microsoft jumped into home consoles was because it saw that the video game system (I'll blame Sony) could replace computers for some functions in the future.  They only care remotely for the actual gamer.  If they actually cared then Live would be free.  Just ask any PC gamer if they would ever pay money for Live... 

Two problems with your statement. One you assumed, people don't want a device that does more than one thing. Two you don't consider it an asset. A lot of individuals by consoles for features as well, my friend bought a ps3 for blu-ray...and he can also game. Having perks helps the companies.  Secondly incorporating DVD and Blu-ray was an asset to the ps brand, as it allows more room for developers to work with. One of the major weakness of Gamecube and Xbox360, is that they cannot handle that much storage on a disk. 

Oh and I just noticed another problem, the future of video, has no relation to the past of video. PS2 with DVDs is the past, PS3 with Blu-ray is the past. Online Streaming is the future. 

Seriously I think I need to argue biased opinion against microsoft, and I might have hat trick in this thread. 



 

sethnintendo on 13 June 2011

I'll counter the asset part of DVD drive in PS2. PS2 had numerous disc drive failures/read errors. It is pretty common knowledge that a ton of PS2 systems DVD drives failed. How is that an asset if you included something that makes the system less reliable. Sure it added benefit when it actually worked.



Hynad on 13 June 2011
sethnintendo said:
I'll counter the asset part of DVD drive in PS2. PS2 had numerous disc drive failures/read errors. It is pretty common knowledge that a ton of PS2 systems DVD drives failed. How is that an asset if you included something that makes the system less reliable. Sure it added benefit when it actually worked.

Wow, are you for real?  



Acevil on 13 June 2011
sethnintendo said:
I'll counter the asset part of DVD drive in PS2. PS2 had numerous disc drive failures/read errors. It is pretty common knowledge that a ton of PS2 systems DVD drives failed. How is that an asset if you included something that makes the system less reliable. Sure it added benefit when it actually worked.


Well in retrospect, it didn't hinder the brand that much. Infact when Sony built their most reliable machine to date, is when the company experienced the loss (obviously not for those reasons). 



 

fps_d0minat0r on 13 June 2011

1) sony had a ton of work done on motion controls before someone even thought of the wii (and kinect) it was like the combo of the two but back then in ps2 days the camera wasnt good enough and the technology was too expensive (and still is e.g. kinect, trackir) so they didnt do much with it.

2) wii u seems like what ps3/psp already did with lair years ago. but again the technology wasnt good enough (in terms of graphical power and analogue sticks. with NGP its possbile so just because they enter the market at a feasible time people will think they copy nintendo when the fact is they know the right time for the right technology.