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

Forums - Gaming - Sony named 10th most innovative company. Where is Nintendo?

omgwtfbbq on 08 May 2007
your mother said:

Although I understand this list is not focused on gaming but on businesses as a whole, from a strict innovative viewpoint I fail to see why some of these companies are on the list at all.

In fact, most of the top companies are there because of their marketing skills more than their contributions towards innovation.

Apple: There are many outstanding mp3 players that have won product design awards (www.red-dot.de); Apple knows their marketing,

Google: There are many search engines; Google knows their marketing (remember their "we only focus on search"?)

Toyota: Their Prius is actually not nearly as environmentally friendly as they claim it to be (http://omidr.typepad.com/torque/2007/03/toyotas_prius_i.html); Toyota knows their marketing

And on, and on, and on...

And all this Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft stuff? Give it a rest, guys. The list is not about consoles.


well marketed companies will always get the "innovative" view, because that's generally how they sell themselves.

Google, however, are an exception in this case, Google are on the list not because of great marketing, since they do not market at all. They are on the list because their search algorithm was innovative, and it gave better results. They became popular through word of mouth alone.

Of course, they haven't really done much innovative since then, but don't discount the reason why they're where they are. 



Help! I'm stuck in a forum signature!

Around the Network
your mother on 08 May 2007
omgwtfbbq said:
your mother said:

Although I understand this list is not focused on gaming but on businesses as a whole, from a strict innovative viewpoint I fail to see why some of these companies are on the list at all.

In fact, most of the top companies are there because of their marketing skills more than their contributions towards innovation.

Apple: There are many outstanding mp3 players that have won product design awards (www.red-dot.de); Apple knows their marketing,

Google: There are many search engines; Google knows their marketing (remember their "we only focus on search"?)

Toyota: Their Prius is actually not nearly as environmentally friendly as they claim it to be (http://omidr.typepad.com/torque/2007/03/toyotas_prius_i.html); Toyota knows their marketing

And on, and on, and on...

And all this Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft stuff? Give it a rest, guys. The list is not about consoles.


well marketed companies will always get the "innovative" view, because that's generally how they sell themselves.

Google, however, are an exception in this case, Google are on the list not because of great marketing, since they do not market at all. They are on the list because their search algorithm was innovative, and it gave better results. They became popular through word of mouth alone.

Of course, they haven't really done much innovative since then, but don't discount the reason why they're where they are.

Word-of-mouth is in itself a form of marketing.

And what about Google Earth, Gmail, Froogle, and their new puppy YouTube?

What I meant was Google built their name on a better search engine algorithm, true, but like any other search engine, they have started to diversify and guess what? They used their "in-good-standing" brand name to branch out.

And if you look at the way they have branched out, plus the YouTube acquisition, they are only continuing to build their brand awareness, albeit on a different level now. Before it was "we only do search, so we are the best"; well, now that their search engine supremacy has been established, they are "innovating" on other fronts.

And on, and on, and on...



Cobretti on 08 May 2007

haha sony make good TV? They use to. I use to own everything Sony. Then i decided to upgrade to a new sony tv and it broke 3times. I blame playsation on this. It cuased sony to do crappy efforts on other sections of its company. But i agree Sony has done more inovation then nintneod in general. I jsut hope soon there televisions will be the same quality as the good old says.



omgwtfbbq on 08 May 2007
your mother said:
omgwtfbbq said:
your mother said:

Although I understand this list is not focused on gaming but on businesses as a whole, from a strict innovative viewpoint I fail to see why some of these companies are on the list at all.

In fact, most of the top companies are there because of their marketing skills more than their contributions towards innovation.

Apple: There are many outstanding mp3 players that have won product design awards (www.red-dot.de); Apple knows their marketing,

Google: There are many search engines; Google knows their marketing (remember their "we only focus on search"?)

Toyota: Their Prius is actually not nearly as environmentally friendly as they claim it to be (http://omidr.typepad.com/torque/2007/03/toyotas_prius_i.html); Toyota knows their marketing

And on, and on, and on...

And all this Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft stuff? Give it a rest, guys. The list is not about consoles.


well marketed companies will always get the "innovative" view, because that's generally how they sell themselves.

Google, however, are an exception in this case, Google are on the list not because of great marketing, since they do not market at all. They are on the list because their search algorithm was innovative, and it gave better results. They became popular through word of mouth alone.

Of course, they haven't really done much innovative since then, but don't discount the reason why they're where they are.

Word-of-mouth is in itself a form of marketing.

And what about Google Earth, Gmail, Froogle, and their new puppy YouTube?

What I meant was Google built their name on a better search engine algorithm, true, but like any other search engine, they have started to diversify and guess what? They used their "in-good-standing" brand name to branch out.

And if you look at the way they have branched out, plus the YouTube acquisition, they are only continuing to build their brand awareness, albeit on a different level now. Before it was "we only do search, so we are the best"; well, now that their search engine supremacy has been established, they are "innovating" on other fronts.

And on, and on, and on...

That is completely besides the point, yes, word-of-mouth is marketing, but Google is not responsible for it, and that is not the reason Google is where they are now (which is what we were originally discussing). No need to get caught up on semantics.

Also, what about Google Earth, Gmail, Froogle, Youtube?

Google Earth was developed by a company called KeyHole Inc, Which Google bought. Buying companies is hardly innovative.

Gmail was developed in house, and is a fantastic webmail system (which I use primarily), but it's hardly innovative. It's not like they invented webmail, they just developed a very good webmail system. They were the first to give 1GB of space, I'll give them that.

Froogle, was once again, just another price comparison service. They existed well before Froogle. (I haven't really used it so I can't tell if it's any different from regular price comparison services)

Youtube: See Google Earth. Purchasing != Innovating.

I'm sorry, I love Google as much as the next guy but they are not innovative. Branching out into new areas is not innovation, MS wasn't innovative with the Xbox, they were innovative with Xbox Live. They weren't innovative with Zune, they were innovative with... no, nothing there, it was just a crappy iPod clone. Innovation is doing something completely new, something no one has done before. And all the innovation is doneby thousands of small companies and single people with great ideas an just get bought by Google.



Help! I'm stuck in a forum signature!

johnlucas on 08 May 2007

Some lists aren't worth the paper they're written on. See Time's 100 Most Influential for details. John Lucas



Words from the Official VGChartz Idiot

WE ARE THE NATION...OF DOMINATION!

 

Around the Network
omgwtfbbq on 08 May 2007
johnlucas said:
Some lists aren't worth the paper they're written on. See Time's 100 Most Influential for details. John Lucas

that's a pretty big statement considering this is an online list ;)

Help! I'm stuck in a forum signature!

johnlucas on 08 May 2007
Legend11 said:
Steoandnoodles said:
so...Sony are put as 10th for copying ideas like second life and re making a console with a new name. Nintendo are put as 39 for bringing back the gaming industry, basically inventing gaming today and creating the greatest game franchises ever...well looks to me the writers of that mag a r-tards

Strange I seem to remember the Atari 2600, Colecovision, etc coming out well before the NES... Could you explain how Nintendo "basically inventing gaming today"? Cartidges were around well before the NES. The idea of third parties and licensing agreements were around well before the NES. Atari even released the first analog stick joystick in 1982, that's well before the first time Nintendo had it (in their N64).


The industry DIED, bruh. If Nintendo never came here you wouldn't even be *playing* videogames today.

It WAS Atari but they threw it away. See Crash of 1983. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videogame_crash_of_1983

By 1985 toystores weren't even considering stocking videogaming systems. TOYSTORES now. It was seen as a passed fad and computer gaming was stepping up to take the forefront. Even Atari was headed that way. See Atari ST. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_ST

Why do think it was the Nintendo ENTERTAINMENT System rather than the originally intended Nintendo Advanced Video System? What do you think R.O.B. was really all about? Ever since they stepped up to the game they became the business. They changed all of the practices of the industry and every other company afterwards modeled themselves in some fashion after them to varying degrees of success. Yes including Sony.

They didn't create this beast but they brought it back to life and sustain it even today. Neither Sony nor Microsoft nor Sega (as much as I love Sega) could truly keep this thing going for long. Virtually all the innovations in game design/presentation/interface came from Nintendo and others adapted them. That shows you who the foundation is. The handheld market? Nintendo IS the handheld market. They CREATED the handheld market. Sony's come the closest yet, kudos to them.

All these major 3rd parties you like? They built their name on the NES. Capcom, Konami, ESPECIALLY Square, Enix, etc. Folks hating on Nintendo really know nothing about history and luckily for them Nintendo's not going anywhere or they may just have to find themselves another hobby.

You don't have to like Nintendo's games or their direction or audience aims but at least respect their importance to this machine we call videogaming.

Atari made first analog stick. Nintendo made first analog stick that worked. I don't remember people using analog sticks between 1982-1996. After 1996 analog stick became a standard. Wonder why.

Plenty of various companies made wireless controllers in the past. Nintendo made first wireless controller that worked. Now everyone's wireless. Before then not so much. Wonder why.

Microsoft made the Sidewinder Freestyle Pro motion controller. Nintendo made first motion controller that worked. (Wavebird ) Soon everyone will adapt yet another Nintendo standard. If Sidewinder was so hot why wasn't it made the controller for the original XBox? Wondering? Why?

Unfortunately one lesson none of them have learned is the business side. None of 'em are smart with their money like Nintendo is. We'll see how far money muscle goes in the videogames biz this generation.

Whether you like it or not Nintendo's "urine" is marked all over this territory. This Devil's Advocate game is tiresome. Face the facts. The business is nothing without them.

Yes, Virginia, they basically invented gaming as we know it today.

John Lucas



Words from the Official VGChartz Idiot

WE ARE THE NATION...OF DOMINATION!

 

johnlucas on 08 May 2007
omgwtfbbq said:
johnlucas said:
Some lists aren't worth the paper they're written on. See Time's 100 Most Influential for details. John Lucas

that's a pretty big statement considering this is an online list ;)

I think that was the problem.

John Lucas 



Words from the Official VGChartz Idiot

WE ARE THE NATION...OF DOMINATION!

 

tk1989 on 08 May 2007

im sorry, but most of those peoples comments on that site sound like they came from 6 year olds.... Anyway, back to the point. Sony are innovative, i do have to say, but not that innovative. Theyre phones are innovative, but i dont know what else. The PS3 is as innovative as a computer, they tried to make it as powerful as possible and thats it really, reminds me of the Xbox original...



auroragb on 08 May 2007

I agree with omgwtfbbq. This businessweek (BW) list of innovators is really a list of who's best at marketing products/ features as innovations. To BW, an innovation probably doesn't exist until it's been marketed on a large scale