windbane, Watch your blood pressure. I just provided you with the links you asked for. The GC was 99% offline, the PS2 was 95% offline, the XBox was 90% offline. I think you can pretty much call that an offline generation.

Well I consider any game played on a network "online". Internet ~> Inter NetWORK. GC had no community aspect like XBox Live, no, but with those LAN broadband games people could play the same game on different machines in different areas so that's online to me. Not players having to be in the same room on the same machine.

Phantasy Star Online just had a infinite selection of people to choose from at will. A more open network. You could just get the game and then search for players. That's really the only difference but both games were online. Mario Kart & 1080 being more closed and Phantasy Star Onlines being more open. Local Area Network. Global Area Network. The only difference. Both networks hence both online.

Yeah, it's in my profile. Don't say I didn't warn you about my long-windedness. I like to be thorough.

Didn't say Nintendo didn't make errors. They're making errors now not quite anticipating demand of their products here. The question is what is the impact of those errors. Saying long load times were bad was NOT a mistake. Using cartridges to remedy this is debateable. They should have tried a happy medium that allowed the durability of a cartridge with the room of a CD. Low memory as in jumper pak? I'll go with that. And I think they anticipated it which is why they made the slot upfront where it could be changed if needed. Taking 3rd parties for granted. Yes the TRUE mistake. That is the one I'll agree with you on. It set them back console wise 10 years.

Controller being a mistake is absolute nonsense. You wouldn't even HAVE a Dual Analog later Dual Shock without the N64 controller. Are you saying camera buttons and truly functioning analog sticks and rumble technology were mistakes??? That controller was one of their most influential controllers outside of the original NES one! Sega stopped doing their special A,B,C,X,Y,Z evolution of the NES control standard and got on board with N64's control in the Dreamcast. The controller pak & its bay inspired the DC's VMU. That controller brought about full-fleged 3-D play in Super Mario 64 which the controller was designed in mind with. How many people followed Nintendo's 3-D gameplay model after that game came out? Though PC guys loved mouse & keyboard for console FPS gamers there was none finer than the N64's controller and N64 exclusives like Turok from PC and Rare's Goldeneye/Perfect Dark influenced FPS for years to come.

TOTALLY disagree with you on that point. That controller was not only useful but highly influential and some people still say that that was one of the best controller designs yet as unwieldy as it looks from afar. Gamecube's controller is just the evolved summarized version of the N64 controller.

Here's a link on Nintendo's online history. Maybe you've heard of a game called BS Zelda?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellaview

Old Famicom or NES even had a modem which coincidentally is reminiscent of the Wii Channels of today. You could check weather, news (though mainly about Nintendo), also download programs, even jokes (there might be a Wii Joke channel one day who knows?). Yamauchi wanted the Famicom to be lifestyle system that sought to have businessmen checking it for stock market prices and stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Entertainment_System#Regional_differences

"Famicom MODEM was a modem that allowed connection to a Nintendo server which provided content such as jokes, news (mainly about Nintendo), game tips, and weather reports for Japan; it also allowed a small number of programs to be downloaded."

From the Malstrom files:

http://thewiikly.zogdog.com/article.php?article=29&ed=2&p=8

Nintendo's long dabbled in these endeavors. Only because it wasn't released in America only Japan do many here don't recognize it. Satellite View? Broadcast Satellite? Wi-Fi??? Hello?

Sega Channel was ONLINE gaming as well (Boy I miss Sega Channel). Seganet?

Networked interplay between individuals is not the ONLY meaning of "online play". If a system is connected to a network of other systems that is online.

The community aspect brought by Microsoft is fresh but online INTERplay really didn't take off until a couple of years ago and that is shown in the numbers. Nintendo doesn't waste. They are not going to do anything if it's not profit-minded first. And I don't blame them. Let these spendthrifts waste funds. It only hurts themselves. I'd rather my company stay in business long-term in order to continue bringing me my games & game machines instead of my company spending itself into oblivion like a certain Hedgehog's homebase. Microsoft can waste like that. It won't bother the users any. They get what they want but Microsoft won't be able to do that forever if they don't start turning that thing into a profitable venture. Shareholders don't put up with TOO much waste. Money don't grow on trees like it do on Animal Crossing now. Nintendo had the broadband adapter for local networked interplay and not enough people bit, not enough people were going for Phantasy Star Online's setup so they obviously called it right. Some people wanted online but not enough to make it worth their while. Not a mistake from a business standpoint and if they tried it it would've been a money drain that still wouldn't have changed the course in PS2's domination. One guy out here might have wanted to call the Wii the Public Toilet as an official name but he's one in billions. His opinion doesn't mean anything for the bottom line.

PS2 had online interplay but that didn't seem to matter much. Never really made the headlines. If online play mattered so much XBox 1 would have had a much better representation on the market than it did.

You'll never understand it because we can't see hypothetical industries in action if certain companies were magically taken out but believe me the bedrock of the modern day videogame industry has Super Mario Bros. 1 groundstones. Nintendo isn't just a part of the industry, they ARE the industry. The 7th gen will prove that to you shortly. If they didn't make mistakes they'd never have any competition upstaging them.

John Lucas

I love that sidenote. Technology advances are supposed to make things run smoother not get more cumbersome. It's not solely for graphical output.

I think the people's love of those 3rd party icons made them accept those loadtimes rather than Sony's implementation. If not for Street Fighter, Final Fantasy, and all the rest only showing up on Sony's platform predominantely people woulda tossed that slow tech out on its 'arsenal'. I remember finding a 3DO Super Street Fighter II Turbo in the bargain bin at Wal-Mart years ago (would see that thing in there forever so one day I finally picked it up) and gave it to my friend who had a 3DO. I remember when your power level got low to the danger level where the music gets faster, this daggone thing had to pause and load up the danger music before continuing! I'm like BOOOOOOOOO!!!

You're up there fighting and there's this brief moment of silence where the BGM breaks to load the faster danger music. I SEE why Nintendo had concerns about using CD's on their system looking at the CD-based systems of the time.
My biggest beef with Sony really is how they've lowered the bar for system design. That's what REALLY irritates me about them more than anything. I can't stand higher priced lower quality goods. I'm very glad the PS3 is better in durability (for that price it'd better be) but if that system still has long load times I'm like forget it. In the CD days that coulda been a forgivable excuse but not now. Especially not now. No gamesystem be it XBox 360, PS3, or Wii should have long load times anymore. That's a big no-no in my book. GC's Battalion Wars annoys me with that long yellow bar going across the screen on every scenario. That had BETTER be straightened out on BWii.

John Lucas 

I was honestly thanking you, but thanks for your concern about my blood pressure anyway.

Considering 7.89 million people bought Halo 2 and the single player sucked, I'm pretty sure it was a lot higher than 10% online for the xbox, but nice try. I'd wager it was significantly higher for the PS2 as well. I'll agree with your GC estimate.

I did not say the controller wasn't influential, but the controller's design sucked. A tripod grip was stupid, it didn't have a good analog stick, and the button configuration wasn't the best. Also, when has rumble ever been a good game feature? Very rarely. But that's just me.

Sony was the first company to have 2 analog sticks. The Dual Shock design is still one of the best ever. "The DualShock controller was given an Emmy Award for "Peripheral Development and Technological Impact of Video Game Controllers" by The National Academy of Television Arts & Sciences on January 8, 2007."

Indeed, online gaming means internet, not LAN. I'm pretty sure direct links were done for a long time but not many people gathered a bunch of consoles and TVs together to play with each other until Halo on the Xbox.  Which leads me to my quick recap:

Dreamcast was the first to include a modem with the system, PS2 was the next to include online gaming on a decent scale, the XBox 1 greatly expanded the online console market with Halo 2 (mainly), and the PS3 and Xbox 360 continue to expand it.  If you think that market wasn't there before, then why did so many people play online games on the PC?  Battle.net alone is probably still larger than xbox live, but the console market is growing and Nintendo has yet to be a part of it. 

*sigh*. No one liked loading times, but it was a consequence of improved games and having more space for FF and MGS. A lot of people preferred sports games on the N64 and GC because of load times. The load times have significantly improved on the PS3 because of the included hard drive.

Well, I've heard the load times for the 360 aren't fantastic because developers can count on everyone having a hard drive. Motorstorm could be faster on the PS3 but for some reason Sony did not include an install option to the hard drive. Anyway, every other game has had great load times that I've played. The console itself only takes a little over 10 seconds to start up.

Saying Sony has set the bar low for system design is just ridiculous and shows your vendetta against Sony. If anything their bar was set too high with the inclusion of blu-ray. Wireless, blu-ray, nice size hard drive (again, for quick load times), 7 SPES in addition to the main CPU, HDMI 1.3 (which not even the 360 Elite supports months after the PS3 launch), everything inside the box (unlike 360's power brick and optional wireless connector), bluetooth support for any keyboards, mice, and webcams, and so far very few hardware problems. I'd say that is FANTASTIC system design.

We'll be going 'round and 'round with this.

Anything played on a network of connected systems is ONLINE PLAY. PERIOD.

Now I CLARIFIED the distinction by saying Networked INTERPLAY between INDIVIDUALS. THAT'S what's going on now. LAN uses Internet. How else are you receiving the signals? Magic?

Now that I've showed you you clarified YOUR statement by saying Dreamcast was first to INCLUDE modem in system. But you SAW that Nintendo had done modem long ago. DECADES ago like I said.

I didn't say the market wasn't there. It's been here on computers forever decades back. What IS is that the market wasn't viable enough until RECENTLY. Those XBox numbers showed that. Reverie clarified it for you. And if PC was such a big deal in shaping industry there would be no consoles. PC DOES have some influence on gaming world but PC, the high-end side of it anyway, is niche and will always be as such. Else you'd be seeing more companies making games for them since the money would be there. They have their place but everything in PC world doesn't necessarily affect console world.

Load times necessity. FMV's man. That's all it was about. FMV's. Sony brought their movie background into it when they joined this business and the industry was heading more to a Cinematic era as Sean Malstrom laid out in this Theory of Cycles article.

First of all the fact that we're still talking about load times today is a bit BS. That issue should've been solved by 10 years time. 10 years later and we're STILL talking about this mess? Why not fog effects of the 5th gen era? And all the technical limitations of that time? The fact of the matter is these other competitors are not as committed to the quality of this experience as old school game companies are. They've got their own designs for this business and it serves as a bargaining chip or a side venture for each of the monoliths. That's why we have to put up with beta, gamma, delta systems to correct the mass flaws of original launch systems. Sure one or two off the line will always foul up. That's natural human error but as a rule stuff breaking down? That's frankly Bull Shoots. PS1 & especially PS2 lowered the bar, man. I'm glad they've brought back some durability to PS3. Haven't heard any malfunctions out of that system yet. But they lowered the bar no doubt about it. That's why gamers expect faulty systems at launch. It didn't use to be this way. When I went to buy my Wii I expected a well-functioning system out the box and haven't been disappointed yet. Yes I have one with original "thin" strap.

Now as for your controller comments. Dual Shock is just most popular because of Playstation's dominance. All it is is a souped up and redoubled SNES controller with N64 elements. The ONE thing I give them credit for is putting the rumble within instead of adding a separate pack. So they refined N64's controller. But without SNES or N64 there wouldn't even BE a Dual Shock. That is a straight rip off of Nintendo's designs but everybody does that. It's expected. They are the standard makers. Sega & 3rd party control makers refined N64's grips fusing middle and left into one solid grip but N64 is daddy that produced all these sons.

Two analog sticks? How about NO working analog sticks before N64 made it happen. Sony wasn't gonna do it. Sega wasn't gonna do it; they were still trying to redouble NES & SNES controller design. After Nintendo dropped this bomb Sony scrambled to catch them put out Dual Analog then Nintendo slipped that Rumble Pak on 'em and Sony once again scrambled to make the 1st Dual Shock. Leader and Follower. Industry foundation and industry highrise. Highrises can't exist without a foundation to rest on. Gravity and all that.

Here it is.

•Nintendo changed everything with the NES Standard. Controller rested in palms & fingers of hands, left thumb hovering atop control pad, right thumb hovering atop action buttons, alternative buttons for secondary/tertiary functions. This root standard stood for 23 years before Nintendo changed it again into Wii. All designs were rooted on this basic outlook first. The Atari Joystick standard and Intellivision "calculator" standard were done away with when the Famicom came on the scene. Sega switched from an Atari like control to NES like control in Master System. NEC TG-16/PC Engine followed suit similarly.

•Nintendo evolved the NES Standard with NES Max alternate controller bringing in for first time controller grips & ergonomic contours. Then evolved it some more with the SNES Standard. Everything like the basic NES standard but ALSO NOW with index fingers hovering around left & right shoulder triggers, action button layout set in a diamond shaped layout, furthering contour evolution. Ah and one more...color coded buttons of red, green, blue, and yellow. Sega was stubborn and stuck to their redoubled version of original NES Standards (A + B and NOW C!) and then RE-redoubled it to match SNES buttons with A,B,C,X,Y,Z. They would eventually succumb to Nintendo's hardline when they added shoulder triggers to Saturn and later abandoned their rebellion when they added color coded diamond layout to Dreamcast. Who's your daddy? Industry followed Nintendo either directly copying from source or indirectly by copying Sega's style of NES standard. Sony worked with Nintendo on Playstation so it's no surprise why that control came out like it did. And they TOO used color coding though not effectively. Check out the color of those shapes on the PS action buttons. And like Sega all Sony did was double up what Nintendo did. Two L's & Two R's.

•Nintendo evolved NES/SNES Standards further with N64 Standard. Adding in first truly viable analog stick with combination digital and analog play on one controller, adding in undertriggers like Z button and adding in camera buttons in famous SNES diamond layout, even more ergonomic grips, button size differentials, and controller bays. XBox's controller is nothing but Dreamcast's controller beyond. Sega towed Nintendo's line with Dreamcast controller. Dreamcast's L & R triggers were undertriggers on shoulder. XBox 360 uses undertriggers on ITS shoulders. Sony towed Nintendo's line and just doubled or refined everything with Dual Analog and Dual Shock.

•Gamecube only made a refined summary of all of Nintendo's standards so it didn't seemingly make as much of an impact at first but they evolved the camera buttons into a camera stick and had both analog sticks on different levels of each other. Right stick low. Left stick high. XBox & XBox 360 followed this Gamecube Standard. They furthered button size differentials making giant A, small B, bean shaped X's & Y's. Took a page out of Sega's book and made analog triggers (Sega no doubt being inspired by analog stick). THEN came Wavebird alternate control and Gamecube ushered in the fully functioning & reliable wireless controllers to finish off the Gamecube standard. The others got in line and put together their own wireless controls for upcoming 7th gen which they weren't doing before Nintendo made it viable. Leader and Followers.

•Now we're at the Wii standard which basically throws out Nintendo's old evolutions of the NES Standard. Sony smelled what the Wii was cookin' and put out Sixaxis. Only got it half right but it shows Leader and Follower once again. Still hanging on to Nintendo's old old standards not changing that Dual Shock design makes it not work and will make them old hat as Wii's potential realizes. XBox 360 even put together a power off button on 360 controller reflecting Wii's off button on the remote. Leader and Follower everytime. They will eventually follow Nintendo's Wii standard in time or rebel for awhile like Sega only to get pulled in like they all eventually do.

See why I say Nintendo IS this industry?

John Lucas

John, All of that starts from a little thing you might call the Game and Watch Standard. Some G&W titles featured the first modern cross-shaped 4-way directional pad on the left, with the action button(s) on the right. The NES and Game Boy were basically exact copies of this design. And everything since, INCLUDING the DS and Wii, are merely further evolutions. Even beyond controller design though, Nintendo has remained the most influential hardware AND software company, even at its lowest point. Imagine how much money Sony could have made if they understood Yokoi's ideas about hardware design. Sony focused on making a powerful system with both PS1 and PS2, yet failed and had a less powerful system than Nintendo, and still Nintendo was able to charge less. And for example, what if Sony had followed the same price-cuts they did with PS2 after designing a system like Gamecube. It would have made profit at launch, would have been making nearly $100 a unit 12 months later, and today could be making 50 bucks a unit at a $130 price tag. Sony won two generations based around a better strategy, yes, but people refer to this as a "loss leading" strategy, when they merely took a loss on hardware because Nintendo was always looming with cheaper, more powerful hardware. Nintendo have always excluded elements from their consoles which cost a disproportionate amount compared to their value to gamers. And in turn, they're able to keep cost down and offer a majority audience the best value. (Of course this falls apart when they alienate developers...) This requires designing a console to be efficient in the first place, however. A console which isn't a huge loss-leader, requiring the company to sell music or movie downloads, or which can load software efficiently, so it doesn't need to do partial game installs, doesn't need a giant, expensive, worthless-to-most-gamers harddrive (just as one example.)

Yeah I left that out about the Yokoi's G&W Standard.

Called myself saving space! LOLOL!! So silly.

I wrote about all this here. And if you want unedited version private message me. That one detailed the upcoming Wii a little better.

Control

http://www.popzart.com/?page=view&topic=62

And HERE.

http://www.n-philes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26670

(some pics have expired since I wrote this here) 

Boy have I taken this topic off-topic!

This is Coffee Talk with Linda Richman...XBox 360 as a disastrous endeavor is neither an XBox nor a 360, Discuss.

John Lucas

oh, johnlucas. When you say "online" to someone that means internet, not LAN. And "LAN" to people just means that the computers are connected together. They don't have to connect to the internet.  Regardless, Nintendo did not make either popular.

You can tell me that Nintendo tried to do some type of connection, and it may have been on the internet, but they are not the ones that get credit for the concept. It's not like Sega copied them. It's not like Microsoft or Sony copied that concept. PC gaming started all of that. If you want to research who actually started it then by all means tell me. The link that was posted about Nintendo's devices were not decades ago, they were early 90s and on. Thats a decade and a half if you want to stretch it out. Still, Sega, Sony, and Microsoft were the ones that pioneered onling console gaming, not Nintendo. Maybe they tried and gave up, but that doesn't get credit with me.

Nintendo created the NES controller that had a D-pad instead of a joystick. An analog stick is just a joystick for the thumb, so it wasn't a stretch to have an analog stick. I am not taking their credit away, like I said before. I merely said that the N64 controller itself was a monstrosity. Sony improved upon every aspect of that controller and included 2 analogs which changed the way a lot of games were played. So both deserve credit, just like Sega and Microsoft deserve credit for online gaming along with Sony.

I do not think that Nintendo deserves all the credit for the videogame industry, especially in the last 10+ years. That's all I'm trying to say here. Just because they are making this ridiculous comeback does not mean they were the cause of the expansion in the last 10 years.

If you'd like I can expand my wish: I wish Nintendo developed games and controllers for Sony hardware. I just said games before but I'll throw in controllers, as long as Sony can redesign them. If that dream of mine came true I'd only have to buy 1 console instead of 2. Then I'd have my PC for all the shooters and Bioware RPGs I miss out on.

Nintendo does a lot of great things but it just scares me how worshiped they are, especially after the last 10 years. I hated both of those controllers (N64 and Gamecube...why is symmetrical bad?) and the N64's hardware was too limited.