sundin13 said:
I think that there is a bit of a bar for what can be considered "innovation". A change needs to be of a certain magnitude (although this is technically unquantifiable) in order to be considered "innovation proper" and not just "technically innovation". Basically, we get tiers of "innovation" that would look something like this: -Stagnation: No change When someone says "only Nintendo innovates with their hardware", I think using context clues one could assume that they are saying "only Nintendo revolutionarily innovates with their hardware". |
Yeah it gets into an area of semantics. What you and I may consider to be an innovation someone else could label gimmick, again semantics but this time coupled with perception. Although I would consider clickable sticks to be an evolution (by your standards) as they added two more "buttons" to the controller and are used in many games for sprint freeing other buttons for other functions without cluttering the controller further. I would consider changing the analog sticks to rubber tipped and making them convex to iterative again going by your standards.
Perception is a powerful thing but by definition any change to the established norm even within a brand is an innovation. I would have to say all the big three innovate but Nintendo is the most daring with their innovations.