Well first of all - the GameCube DOES have online capabilities.
There' s a modem for it, and you can play Phantasty Star Online on it.


And please - it' s Xbox Live that has made everybody see the importance of online console gaming.

In ten years nobody will mention Sony in the history of how consoles went online.

great that we have historians in the world who remembers what others dont then

I' ve got to agree on that one. I was very disappointed with Nintendo' s approach to online multiplayer. It had Phantasy Star online but that was pretty much it.
Sony were pretty stupid themselves with the PS2 as they didn' t want a unified online service and they didn' t want to focus on online games. They' ve learned their lesson to and now they' ve announced Playstation hub.
But this is a little off topic. This was supposed to be about innovation but now all I see are complaints aimed at Nintendo and attempts to defend Sony. Fanboy discussion warning.

Well being sarcastic will get you nowhere.

Have you ever heard anybody you didn' t know talk about Central Station?

I think GameCube online was pretty crap too.
But it is there - Nintendo just didn' t use it, which was stupid.

By Cetra:
And every gaming site is fairly poor compared to real enlightened magasines that actually has journalism of real calliber.

I hope Adam read that. In fact, why don' t you say that to him the next time he stops by here .

Now they have realised the importance of online gaming. And still if dreamcast had it before ps2, does that mean the playstation do not deserve credit for having online abilities?

Yeah, it does deserve credit for incoorporating the ability. However minus points
for being lazy, even Dreamcast had DreamArena, and that was nice, but leaving
it to developers is not wise, they don' t usually have the time to think effectively
(what, with up coming projects and deadlines?) Sony chose an unhealthy way to
deal with online, and for me, their changes to the industry stopped at Playstation
(ok, DVD PS2).

They chose to do the same old thing with PS2, and now they are doing the same
thing with PS3. (Choosing to have it' s own gravitational pull on companies ideas
around them).

So Microsoft only brought X-box live to the market, but already that was great
idea which Microsoft took and successfully brought into games consoles.

Sony rested on their laurels and depended on their exclusivity rather than doing anything new and challenging.

(Except Shadow of The Colossus which is a needle in a haystack of...)

Credit is given where credit is due, and I have yet to see even slight innovation
from the PS3, even the improvement of a good idea they had (Magic graphics!).

Graphics seem to be the only thing they are improving, and then just piggybacking
on 1 established idea (Live!) and pilfering another (downgraded motion-sensing).

Expect to see PlayStation Anywhere at TGS 2006..

Also, can someone confirm whether the Playstation Live Service will free?

If you have yet to see innovation from PS3, then you might just forget it if you havent already. No matter how little you care about graphics, the CELL is a truly innovative processor which deserves all credit for how great it is. The potential for it, for the long future is also great as a new standard. Maybe this technology finally will offer a full blooded valid counterpart to the x86 standard we have today.
BluRay also deserves credit for innovation. It will help the movie industry alot, prevent piratcopying, and hold no limits on how great the picture quality can get. The potential for this format is also greater cause they currently are experimenting with a 200 gb patent.

This is where to draw the line of the different types of innovation. Nintendo innovates a controller for you, directly to you, and developers find interest in using what you use, to bring you things. While playstation 3 is a direct innovative creation to the developers, not to you but for them. Letting them take care of how you will be entertained and how to use their creationism.

Easy words to describe this is... your gonna use the wiimote and be happy with what a genious creation it is, but your not gonna use the cell combined with the rsx to produce games.

Wiimote - fun for you
Cell+RSX - fun for developers

To the above post: Huh???

Now, you are crossing over what is done in the movies, and what is done in games.

I didn' t want to get too directly involved with what you are saying Cetra, but that
last statement was a strange 1..

If you have yet to see innovation from PS3, then you might just forget it if you havent already.

It seems to me that you are signing up for PS3 for all the wrong reasons, we are
talking about innovation here, not new developments. CELL= New
developments in computer processors. I can buy a new computer, and
it can have the fastest processor, I would say that I bought a wicked computer,
NOT this computer is by far the most innovative I have ever come across.

I buy PC' s because I want an all-purpose media hub, I do not however buy
consoles to be multi-media hubs. You seem like a smart person, but you are
buying into this way too much. In that whole post you wrote, nothing mentions
the games, the fun (accept at the end); but the emphasis lies on the technology.

Adding a layer of knowledge ontop of what is already there does not count for
innovation really, but changing something does. PS3 in no way shape or form from
what I have seen so far, is going to change the way I play games, apart from
make me say Wow, revamped!

The potential for this format is also greater cause they currently are experimenting with a 200 gb patent.

Again, potential counts for nothing until it is realised, and if you can find me one
company that will fill up 200GB please let me know, and I' ll invest, it seems
that here particularly you are falling into the numbers game.

While playstation 3 is a direct innovative creation to the developers, not to you but for them.

It may be a resource better for making games, I wouldn' t go as far as to say
innovative for them (it can' t be said at this stage), if it were innovative, half of
the good titles we see would not be multi-format. (Kojima has already gone on
record to say that the MGS4 demo could have been done on a 360 as well).

Letting them take care of how you will be entertained and how to use their creationism.

It' s CREATIVITY, but what I can see with these new consoles, is M$ bringing
new IP and again PS3, re-packaging old ideas, I know a couple of people that have
decided to start saving now for a PS3 because of FFXIII. Nintendo Wii brings
something completely new to the table, we will see the industry from a different
side. M$ brings X-box live/Anywhere to the table, people like playing together
and the incorporation of the X-box live home button and Dashboard makes for
a much better gaming experience.

Sony brings fireworks, but we bring our own food, and have to pay loads to get in
on the display.

I would say the PS3 is a raw brute of a console, and will have the most advanced
graphics in the long run, but also in the long run, if console history dictates, Sony
want this to last for 10 years at least so they say, and if history serves correctly
in the next 4 or 5 years as PS3 graphics begin to look flawless (speculation here..)
the tech demos for new consoles roll in again and PS3 graphics look obsolete
(that' s just an opinion), they will no longer have innovative graphics because the
next console will fly the flag..

..Numb fingers..

I’m rather new, not only here, but to forums in general, and this is the only gaming forum I am posting on. Therefore I sort of reacted to people complaining about fan boys (particulary Sony fan boys), when I thought most on the forum clearly seemed to favour Xbox over anything Sony. But then I met Cetra (met?/read his posts) and now I think I know what a fan boy is. But to make sure I ask my Senpais of Kikizo forum: Is Cetra a “true” fan boy?

Original by: myself
Welcome SeventhSun. Now it is my duty to give you a handjob. Don' t ask why, that' s just how it works.

Original by: SeventhSyn
You have BG&E as avatar, so that' s alright with me.

/ I don' t know which...

Jeez this Cetra guy is getting owned. When he tries to make statements that have little to no facts, you guys just deliver a haymaker to his beliefs and prove him wrong. And more than once too. And when he tries to go around it, he just gets pummeled again. This may be my first post, but I have been reading this and I would seriously suggest you just...stop.

I don' t know which...

@ Dionysius. lol.

I love this guy

First of all, my first post! :D
I' ve been reading Kikizo for a while, but seeing this thread title in the main page just compelled me to join and reply.

Anyway, Cetra, I' ll first concede that you were quite wise in the title: " Why I think Nintendo is not creative and historically original" .

That " think" in there worked in your favor at the beginning of the thread, giving the impression that you could be corrected with the facts, but it just hasn' t happened.

Anyway, one problem I see with the points you' re using to defend your position is that your supposed " research" is quite inaccurate, even failing to know that the SNES had launched before the CD-I. Now, from what you say the CD-I launched before the SNES in your country, but that does not make it predate it for that reason. The territory and date of the original release are the release details. You can' t just ignore that.

Another problem is that you use weird filters to end up defending Sony. You mention the limitations of Sega' s CD format for the Sega/Mega CD for instance in order to glorify Sony' s use of it, yet you forget the reason for using CD' s to begin with: more storage capacity in a cheaper medium! That' s it. And in that sense, Sega/Mega CD certainly predates PSX' s use of it. Heck, the TurboGrfx CD predates the Sega/Mega CD by a few good years. Now, the format took off when the PSX became a hit, that' s true, but Sony did not innovate with it. They took what already existed and used a more advanced version of it.

Then there' s the fact that you mention a lot of innovations that were by third parties rather than Sony and credit Sony with them. The Dance Pad for instance - did Sony develop a single Dance Pad title? Did Sony develop the Dance Pad? From what I understand, it' s a big no to both. So why count Sony as innovating with it? And anyway, ever seen a power pad? Same thing as a dance pad, made by Nintendo long before Nintendo considered the CD add-on for a system that ended up turning into the Playstation eventually. Of course, the games for it were not as hip as the DDR' s of our time - there' s only so much the technology of the NES could do.

Then you talk about the controllers for the system. You say that the Sony' s PSX pad is an original design. Well, from where I am standing, it is identical to the SNES pad with just 2 extra shoulder buttons. I mean, Sony could have gone for 3 buttons like the Genesis/Mega Drive pad, or even the 6-button layout of the second revision of Sega' s pad (or the Saturn pad, may it be forever praised), or they could have gone for something else entirely, but they went for the SNES diamond-like 4-button layout with shoulder buttons, adding 2 more because they could. Then the deal with analogue: face it, Nintendo did it first. Ok, the Vectrex did it first, but those were not analogue sticks as we know them today. Current " analogue" sticks are actually digital with I 256 levels (8-bit) of sensitivity. Anyway, I give you this handy chart to use as a reference to know which controller came from where. Notice how the SNES controller evolves into the N64 controller - it' s basically the same save for the stick in the middle at first glance. Also notice how if you take the grips away from it, the PSX controller is pretty much identical to the SNES one, save for the funky d-pad at first glance. When sony added analogue, they also wanted to include the extra camera control buttons of the N64 pad, but decided on a second stick to include this function as to avoid the confusion of having 8 action buttons on the face. Now, I find it interesting that through all of this, on unveiling a new controller, Sony will still not make the left analogue stick a primary input method by keeping the d-pad in the primary area. The Xbox and the GameCube had the right idea by making the left analogue take the primary position, but unfortunately, Nintendo' s " traditional" pad for the Wii makes Sony' s mistake.

Anyway, this has been way too long for a first post so I' m stopping now. My thanks to those actually make it to the end! ;)

Cell+RSX - fun for developers

Are you fucking kidding me?
I have heard nothing but piss poor opinions about the cell, and how ill suited the RSX is to be used with it.

Besides what some fanboys might say, there is fact behind the complaints, it' s simply not easy, or fun for programmers and takes a great deal more money to produce games.

Welcome Silver!

*wonders where all the new users are coming from*

Hey Tiz, did you say Kikizo was a Japanese site? I' m not going to pretend i' ve read through the posts since my last, -- i haven' t, -- but i' m sure i saw you call Kikizo Japanese. It isn' t.



Anyway, this thread needs to be left to die now. It' s boring and i' ve completely lost interest now. Ginjirou and myself, along with newer users like Tiz and the Dinosaur guy have tried to explain the inaccuracies stated by Centra, tried to show him that the information he has read is false and have seemingly failed.

The thread started out as him puting his opinion forward, and has turned into him adamantly defending Sony against out FACTS and going as far as calling PS3 innovative. It' s turning into a joke.

Well then I feel very informed after reading thru Silver' s. Nice job there BTW. One helluva way to get started here. Welcome to Kikizo.

well, i admit that i was wrong about the dates between snes and philips cgi, but nomatter how many of you who tries to back each other up with the truth, doesnt make it the truth

like the grips on the controller, and stop bullshitting that the nes and snes controller are made ergonomically, i know the button setup is the same, but the grips on the controller was a new way, a way that nintendo followed with the n64 controller

also, i know sony did not invent the dancemat, its independent developers that did, all i said that it was made huge on the playstation. but even funnier to me is that, though you introduced the line with sony not having made the dancemat, you eventually turned it into an argument against sony being innovative, since thats what this discussion is about, when the dancemat actually had nothing to do with the sony department to do at all. contradiction, if not, why highlight nintendo' s innovative skills on the contrary to.....?


also, to comment on the cell just being good technology, i think you have completely missed the point of the innovative architecture the cell really is, it allows for much smarter graphics and like i said, brings a valid option towards the x86 standard. keywords = innovative architecture

The cell has very little to do with how the graphics are drawn, because the unit is engineered to use the rsx for draw, the cell is used for things like delivering the information and supply-ing the AI.

But to clear this up, the cell has very little to do with how the games look.

ORIGINAL: silverthornne
...
(or the Saturn pad, may it be forever praised),...

You' re gonna earn some point with THAT one, around here! Good job, and welcome.

And I must agree with Centra; the cell processor IS innovative. If nothing else, it is a departure from the norm. Whether it is better suited to gaming than Microsofts solution, we' ll see.

well well ............you remind me the tv spot about duraCELL battaries or something
anyway i dont give a s..... about cell or ibm or rsx or ati.......
it all goes to developers i want good PADS and good GAMES................
the only good thing that sony has done for me is too wideopen the......
lets say............ videomarket.