All I remember is playing FFIX, and the left analog was a D-Pad alternative. No pressure sensitivity there, and FFIX was quite a blockbuster. Yeah, I'm mostly assuming for Sony's flagships, but I would be hard-pressed to find that a game offered less functionality on the de facto config (D-Pad) by offering sensitivity on the dual-shock. Confirmation on this would be good, but it wouldn't change the fact that it was most likely implemented on a handful of games, the sales total of which, software-wise, wouldn't touch the sales Nintendo achieved with its analog+pressure sensitive gaming offerings. By that standard, Nintendo brought it to the masses. Case closed.

I meant it in terms of purely analog, dual or single was irrelevant for my point, I was referring to the left analog if you wish, the right analog was not part of my point. But given you attach so much importance to it, granted that's Sony's doing and credit to them. Again, though, I doubt it was used, with pressure sensitivity and all, in much of Sony's PS1 offerings. My point stands.

You most certainly did, I don't want to treasure-hunt your posts! You're posts, you should remember. But anyways, for shits:

Post 1. Post 2. I understand why you made the point (in counter to using Wii sales for motion), but if you don't stand by it, don't damn use it. Otherwise you play bait and switch and I have 0 patience for that. Having to address this takes up post space. Every post item takes time to read, reflect on, and reply to. Try not to be so sloppy o_O.Q.

Dual analog wasn't required to get the full analog experience I'm referring to. That's a second improvement, after the fact. The first jump in gaming enjoyment was Nintendo's analog stick. The dual analog adds support features which are now fundamental to console FPS', and probably there is still more to improve (who knows). But at the time of the N64 and PS1, the 2nd analogue wasn't a necessity, as can be shown by the games that made use of the right analog. The full experience could hence be found on the N64, at the time.

As for sales, I would have to disagree, since ALL N64 games supported analog controls de facto. Only a handful of PS1 games, especially Sony 1st+2nd party games supported the analog controls iirc.

@bold. You shouldn't use that expression. Everything on the forum is opinion and POV based on info and facts. Some are just more reliable than others.

Given what I've presented thus far, I consider my POV on this more robust than yours, sorry. However I'll concede we need to do some research on analog-enabled games on PS1 versus total N64 software sales. I'll attempt to compile that and seal this argument once and for all, bind it to the spam bin for it never to emerge again.

God damn, this is one of the most intelligent posts, i have ever read, if this doesnt shut some people up, i dont know what will

@bold. I addressed each point...

" by offering sensitivity on the dual-shock. Confirmation on this would be good, but it wouldn't change the fact that it was most likely implemented on a handful of games, the sales total of which, software-wise, wouldn't touch the sales Nintendo achieved with its analog+pressure sensitive gaming offerings. By that standard, Nintendo brought it to the masses"

for one we don't know for certain if it was pressure sensitive or not ( i'm leaning to it was ) 

secondly this point "implemented on a handful of games" is absolute nonsense, most ps1 games supported the analogs..

you know... franchises like resident evil, metal gear solid, spyro etc?

and finally "Nintendo brought it to the masses" they brought it to the masses when they sold a fraction of what the competition sold even after the dual analogs became standard ( ps1 > 100 mil   n64 < 40 mil )?

even if i were to cut off the first year of sales for ps1 ( before analogs became standard ) its still obvious that after analogs became standard it still significantly outsold the n64

"Again, though, I doubt it was used, with pressure sensitivity and all, in much of Sony's PS1 offerings. My point stands."

well i'll just have to guess that you never played the ones i mentioned above then in addition to the other series that supported dual analogs on ps1... 

"

You most certainly did"

post 1 : 

"uess i misinterpretated what you said there and besides there were several consoles that used analogs before either of them like the vectrex... but in terms of relevance going by sales the ps1 and ps2 sold more than any of nintendo's home consoles so far

so i'd have to say that they played a bigger part in making analogs relevant ( if sales is what counts in making something relevant )"

i didn't say anything here about improvement at all

post 2 :

"to your first part i'm not really sure what all the text is suppposed to prove i never argued about which was more ergonomic, had better design etc all i stated is that analog thumbsticks is not something that nintendo brought to gaming

yes i would agree that they improved upon it and the controller in general but the same could be said of microsoft and sony, my main gripe is that i see many nintendo fans praising nintendo for their work with analog sticks when really for me they have only been implementing their own take on them like microsoft and sony after implementation by other gaming companies that aren't mentioned in this regard at all"

i'll just assume you mean this part "yes i would agree that they improved upon it and the controller in general but the same could be said of microsoft and sony"

where i actually said nintendo, microsoft and sony improved on analogs and controllers

...one of us really sucks at reading comprehension

"Only a handful of PS1 games, especially Sony 1st+2nd party games supported the analog controls"

wheres the evidence that only a handful of ps1 games supported it?

"I consider my POV on this more robust than yours, sorry"

lol the same goes for me

This should be so awesome that my head will explode

Don't cut off the first year o_O.Q. Cut out all sales for games that didn't make use of the Analog sticks, since the masses would be using the D-Pad in such occurences, so it would not support your point in such cases, If you know what I mean. Then compare that to N64 total software sales. This will give us the right metric for software exposure to Analog experiences. Then you can divide each by their respective attach ratios and you're good to go for an indicator of exposure.

Anyways we're grasping at straws. A fair position would be to say both platforms exposed it in relative terms to the masses. At worst, Nintendo exposed 5 times less users to the concept. But in all realism, considering the games that actually made use of the dual shock (and wikipedia says Ape Escape is the only one that made full use of it), then in all realism let's just call it fair game and say it's even, until someone finds the answers. I did some looking up online, but found little information on it. As far as I know, RE, MGS, FF, and all these flagships used the Dual Analog in very limited ways so as to ensure full backwards compatibility with the original PS1 controller. Everything it offered was possible on the D-Pad, the same cannot be said about the N64 controls. My personal experience on PS1 Analog controls for flagships is with FFIX, but other users can jump in to shed light.

Sorry, I should've been explicit. I meant this part of the post mentioning sales as a metric:

"secondly i made the point i made because many nintendo fans say that nintendo made motion gaming relevant through the sales of the wii ( even though it has existed before now in other forms ) but then when it comes to analog sticks even though the playstation sold more than the n64 that argument changes"

It was a reference to you using sales as an argument. I made sure to qualify my bringing it up by mentioning I understood your intent, but watch the bait and switch, it makes it hard to debate.

Good to know we're on the same page :P

edit : well in terms of software sales ps1 > 900 n64 > 200 according to the platform tools page

its clear for me at least that the ps1 played a bigger part in pushing analogs from the pov of sales

"wikipedia says Ape Escape is the only one that made full use of it"

lol can you quote the part that says so?

"RE, MGS, FF, and all these flagships used the Dual Analog in very limited ways so as to ensure full backwards compatibility with the original PS1 controller"

how do you add limited support for analogs? as far as i would think you either have the capability or you don't

"I understood your intent, but watch the bait and switch, it makes it hard to debate."

thats the thing... i didn't do that, you clearly said i said something i did not

"

You most certainly did"

"meant this part of the post mentioning sales as a metric"

cool if you had said that from the beginning and quoted that part there wouldn't have been a misunderstanding

Do I have to do all your homework? :P j/k. Here it is bud:

"Released in 1999, the PlayStation hit Ape Escape became the first game to explicitly require DualShock/Dual-Analog-type controllers, with its gameplay requiring the use of both analog sticks."

You're right here, I confused this with posts online. Most users were saying it was the only title to require Dual Shock and that made full use of it. Wikipedia only says it's the first. Good thing you asked for the quote :). Then again, it did release in 1999, so being the first title and releasing only a year before the PS2 gives you mostly a year to hope for another title to make fully required use of the DualShock and making full use of its features.

Nah, it didn't work that way. Some games only mapped the joystick controls to D-pad input, like FF for instance as far as I remember. One thing is certain most games didn't have pressure sensitivity. In that sense, a game like Ape Escape had full support while a game like FF had limited support. It's a fact if you lurk online abit on the topic (which I did I advise you to do it too, it'll save us both some time). ;)

Sounds good. So do we drop the "sales volume means bringing it to the masses argument", since you don't agree with that anyways? Let me know.

FiNALLLLLLLLYYYYYYYY!

" you mostly a year to hope for another title to make fully required use of the DualShock and making full use of its features."

not having something required suddenly means that you can't use it to its full ability? and besides that, what control features did prior games not make use of?

"like FF for instance"

FF is a dumb example to use for this context obviously because it isn't a game that allows for control in 3D

much better examples would be as i mentioned before 3D games such as mgs, resident evil and spyro

""I understood your intent, but watch the bait and switch, it makes it hard to debate."

thats the thing... i didn't do that, you clearly said i said something i did not"

"Sounds good. So do we drop the "sales volume means bringing it to the masses argument",since you don't agree with that anyways?"

that wasn't what you accused me of saying so i don't see why you would quote that as its completely unrelated

and as i said before i only reffered to that point because nintendos fans tend to speak of the wii in that context but when it comes to the n64 things suddenly change