lucidium said:
Your all out denial of the undeniable advancements made by Microsoft and Sony on their consoles only further underlines your agenda on the matter.
Take for example the following points:
Xbox (classic) ethernet port: Your rubuttal was to claim dreamcast had it first - It did not, it had a modem, when this was pointed out, you backpedaled to "well it was still internet lol!", the ethernet port on the original xbox could be used for internet, or connecting to a local network to share files and on some titles have internet-free multi-console multiplayer, that's a huge difference between a slow dialup system.
Dial up was slow because Dreamcast released in the 90's. Being the first to introduce a new port as standard is not innovative, it's just leading edge.
Also Gamecube released before the XB1 and it had System Link. XB was just the first to make it popular with Halo 1.
PS2 being the first console to allow game updates/patches: Again your claim was dreamcast was first, I pointed out that this wasn't the case and detailed exactly why, yet you somehow came back at me with the ludicrous notion that actually yes, game data and patches could indeed be downloaded and installed to the whopping space available on the.. 128KB of storage.. take away the 28KB reserved for system use and you have 100KB, even on a 56K dialup modem of the time, 100KB would be filled within 50 seconds.
Later in the Dreamcasts life Sega released a 4x memory card.
Game patches were server side and had to be downloaded every time the game was run, direct to the dreamcasts RAM, of all of these games only two actually did any sort of patching and those were phantasy star online and quake 3 arena, both server side, both updating only the core network executable and server configuration files on access with the former, phantasy star online, also allowing up to 1mb of custom patches for regional and festive events while the service was operational.
So, to be blunt, you're wrong, but rather than accept that you defended your stance on it without actually having any real knowledge on the matter, which begs the question, why even defend it at all if you don't actually know?
Your giving way too much credit to advances in technology, this has absolutely nothing to do with innovation. Next You'll say X360 was innovative because it was the first HD console.
Michael-5 said:
Nintendo is innovative, you yourself have agreed with many of my points, no sense arguing over details.
|
Yes, they are
|