Support NeoGAF

[IFireflyl]

Did that Sony pad have any compatible games released in the two days before N64 rumble and starfox?

Or did they chuck rumble in a pad then start to work on games whilst Nintendo were launching a complete product?

Your fanboy "gotcha!" post is shallow. As I've already said, this is 100% irrelevant. The question isn't, "Which console feature had more impact for games at launch?" The question is which console was more innovative, and people keep giving N64 the win for rumble because they are (falsely) under the impression that Nintendo had rumble first, and that Sony only improved upon their design. In fact, Sony implemented the rumble feature into their controller first, and that same rumble feature is what is now used by virtually every controller with rumble. So not only did Sony beat Nintendo to the punch with rumble, but their implementation was far more impactful since it is still used in modern controllers by everyone, including Nintendo with the Switch Pro controller.

It doesn't matter that games didn't take advantage of the rumble feature right away. What matters is that the Rumble Pak started and ended with the N64, but Sony's rumble function was out first (by a couple of days) and is still used today, almost 25 years later, and it is used in all standard controllers, including Nintendo's.

This means that Sony beat Nintendo in terms of innovation in this particular area.

 

[German Hops]

 

[BigLee74]

All I can add is that I bloody loved my PlayStation back in the day.

 

[ProgenitorCastle]

When all is said and done I'd go with the 64 for having the sweet analog stick and 4 player multiplayer, things PS did like CD drive ultimately didn't age as well in the long run now you have other parties making SD/USB solutions to replace the aging optical drives

 

[Lognor]

Gotta give it to the Nintendo 64. It was the first to have rumble and analog controls. Sony stole both of their ideas and put them into the updated PS1 controller. If we're talking only about innovations Nintendo wins handily.

 

[Fafalada]

A lot of the RAM issues could have been solved with built in sprite solutions which 3D systems didn't really do.

Sprites still draw ram bandwidth (and eat the same ram space as textures), there's no magic that bypasses the throughput. It'd simplify dealing with large sprites perhaps (the whole limit of 4k texture-scratch) but that wasn't really a performance limiter in 2d, just cumbersome to work with.

PS1 and N64 however had a bit more horse power to run 2D in some cases at better frame rates, but still limited overall.

PS1 in particular had substantially more pixel throughput than any console before it (which is what 2d 'power' is all about). Not sure how it compared to higher end arcade 2d hw, but it's a moot point when looking at consoles. It's also hard to argue PS1 did sacrifices for '3d' since fundamentally the only part of the system that did any 3d computation was the CPU, rasterizer was still operating in 2d only. N64 was the first console to start introducing actual 3d elements into rasterization (At a steep cost, but still).

 

[Tarkus98]

I can't agree with this one. I remember well how much polygonal gaming had started to arrive in prominent ways before the PS1 (for example, games like Star Fox or Stunt Race FX, where custom chips were pushing early 3D graphics on the SNES). When the PS1 hit, it felt like a media powerhouse, but not like anything new in terms of 3D graphics except for incremental improvement with a lot of the jankiness still on display everywhere. But when I first laid eyes on Mario64 at a kiosk, holy hell... it was mindblowing just how real the rendering looked, and that was the moment that 3D gaming truly felt like it arrived for the first time. Subjective, of course, but I honestly don't recall anything wowing about the early PS1 apart from its stellar multimedia and games-as-media capabilities.

Wasn’t it more parallax scrolling? Can’t recall Star Fox being 3D on the SNES to be honest but if so, good call.
Anyway as I said I believe ps1 properly introduced 3D games and had the hardware built around it (to specifically support it).
Can’t argue about Mario 64. Fucking game blew my mind when I first saw AND played it. Truly nothing else like it before. But again, the N64 came out a year or two later. Of course it would be more powerful and with its Z buffer it had better 3D rendering. I always wondered how awesome the console would have been if it had a cd drive instead of or in addition to cartridges.

 

[6502]

Your fanboy "gotcha!" post is shallow. As I've already said, this is 100% irrelevant. The question isn't, "Which console feature had more impact for games at launch?" The question is which console was more innovative, and people keep giving N64 the win for rumble because they are (falsely) under the impression that Nintendo had rumble first, and that Sony only improved upon their design. In fact, Sony implemented the rumble feature into their controller first, and that same rumble feature is what is now used by virtually every controller with rumble. So not only did Sony beat Nintendo to the punch with rumble, but their implementation was far more impactful since it is still used in modern controllers by everyone, including Nintendo with the Switch Pro controller.

It doesn't matter that games didn't take advantage of the rumble feature right away. What matters is that the Rumble Pak started and ended with the N64, but Sony's rumble function was out first (by a couple of days) and is still used today, almost 25 years later, and it is used in all standard controllers, including Nintendo's.

This means that Sony beat Nintendo in terms of innovation in this particular area.

Calm down you big jessy. It was a genuine question.

You're missing the point. Round disks with holes in the centre were in civilisations which did not have the wheel (ie egypt using them for artworks). The innovation comes it its use case, not just manufacturing.

So Nintendo releasing a product which set the standard for rumble interaction in games tops a motor with no use case coming out two days prior with regards to innovation.

In the same way Nintendo does not get credited for online play for the famicom modem when Xbox (Sega et al) demonstrated the use case by addressing the market with a fully functional product supported by purchasable software.

 

[IFireflyl]

Calm down you big jessy. It was a genuine question.

You're missing the point. Round disks with holes in the centre were in civilisations which did not have the wheel (ie egypt using them for artworks). The innovation comes it its use case, not just manufacturing.

So Nintendo releasing a product which set the standard for rumble interaction in games tops a motor with no use case coming out two days prior with regards to innovation.

In the same way Nintendo does not get credited for online play for the famicom modem when Xbox (Sega et al) demonstrated the use case by addressing the market with a fully functional product supported by purchasable software.

Yay, Nintendo's rumble feature had a game which supported it on release date. That doesn't mean Nintendo's rumble feature was more innovative than Sony's. I've said multiple times that implementation is more important than who was first. Sony's implementation of rumble was superior to Nintendo's implementation. It does not matter that a game didn't support that implementation on day one.

What does matter is that Nintendo's single-motor Rumble Pak that required two AAA batteries was a worse implementation than Sony's dual-motor vibration (with one motor being intentionally stronger than the other) which was built into the controller without need of an external part or an additional power source.

If you think that the Rumble Pak was more innovative than Sony's dual-motor vibration, then tell me why the Rumble Pak started and ended with the N64, and yet the dual-motor vibration that Sony created still lives on in modern controllers. And without saying, "But this had X game support," please explain how Nintendo's rumble technology was more advanced and/or innovative than Sony's. You even said that innovation comes from use. Using that logic (which I agree, it's sound logic), Sony was more innovative than Nintendo regarding rumble support since their rumble support spanned multiple [console] generations.

Also, it didn't seem like you were asking "genuine" questions since I've already addressed the point you were trying to make multiple times. It's easy to get irritated when Nancy's like yourself don't take the time to read posts.

 

[IFireflyl]

Gotta give it to the Nintendo 64. It was the first to have rumble and analog controls. Sony stole both of their ideas and put them into the updated PS1 controller. If we're talking only about innovations Nintendo wins handily.

Do you intentionally not read the threads you post in? Sony released their rumble support two days before Nintendo, and their implementation was better. The implementation is more important than the idea. Also, Nintendo didn't have the first analog controller. I've said this multiple times.

 

[Lognor]

Do you intentionally not read the threads you post in? Sony released their rumble support two days before Nintendo, and their implementation was better. The implementation is more important than the idea. Also, Nintendo didn't have the first analog controller. I've said this multiple times.

I did read the thread and you're wrong. Confidently wrong, I will say. But still wrong. Nintendo had rumble first. If you're talking about some limited controller that Sony never released in most of the world, no one cares. Nintendo made rumble mainstream. And I thought the N64 had much better rumble too, but that's an opinion. Much like you saying their implementation was better. Unless you're talking about them putting it in the controller without the need for an accessory. But rumble felt better on the N64.

And tell me, which SUCCESSFUL console had analog controls before the N64? We're comparing the N64 to the PS1 in this thread. Do you even read threads before posting? No need to bring in any other obscure consoles that no one has heard of and is not being discussed in this thread.

 

[Elbow Identity Shallow]

I always feel that it's worth reminding people in threads like this that the N64 was not the first home console to include a controller with an analogue stick by a long way, the Audiosonic 1292 APVS system which launched 20 years earlier and included an a fully analogue control stick. Others in the following 20 years included the Vectrex and Atari 5200 also used analogue sticks although I do believe that the controller that was included with the 5200 could vary depending on the country that you lived in.
Either way, not being the first consumer console to launch with analogue control doesn't make either the N64 or the PS1 any less wonderful and both had a fantastic selection of games that I absolutely love and still play now with my family.

 

[IFireflyl]

I did read the thread and you're wrong. Confidently wrong, I will say. But still wrong. Nintendo had rumble first. If you're talking about some limited controller that Sony never released in most of the world, no one cares. Nintendo made rumble mainstream. And I thought the N64 had much better rumble too, but that's an opinion. Much like you saying their implementation was better. Unless you're talking about them putting it in the controller without the need for an accessory. But rumble felt better on the N64.

And tell me, which SUCCESSFUL console had analog controls before the N64? We're comparing the N64 to the PS1 in this thread. Do you even read threads before posting? No need to bring in any other obscure consoles that no one has heard of and is not being discussed in this thread.

*sigh*

I guess I'll just continue repeating myself:

Dual Analog Controller - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Only the Japanese version features a vibration feedback function. The European and American versions of the controller do however include circuitry and mounts for a rumble motor, a possible leftover from the Japanese version of the controller, and therefore installing the motor is a simple process. Due to a lack of vibration-compatible games at the time, the European and American versions were not shipped with rumble feedback and, as a result, weigh significantly less than their overseas counterpart, and fall somewhere between the weights of the standard controller and the DualShock.

That same rumble feature that was released two days BEFORE the Rumble Pak for N64 was later implemented in the DualShock line. Also, even in the non-Japanese versions of the Dual Analog Controller you could obtain the motors, open the controller, and install them. The rest of the hardware/software was there, they were just missing the motors themselves.

The N64 version of rumble started and ended with the N64. No console since has implemented the N64's version of rumble, not even by Nintendo. Sony's implementation of rumble, however, is still used in current-generation controllers. That means that Sony wins the innovation battle (in terms of rumble) not only because they implemented it first (which they did), but also because they implemented it better (which they did).

As to the analog controller, the XE-1 AP controller by Dempa was a Japanese-release-only controller. It wasn't console specific, and it worked with the Sega Mega Drive, the Sega Mega-CD, the Sega 32X, and also with actual computers. It was a universal controller, not a console/platform-specific controller.

Both the original Dual Analog Controller with rumble and the XE-1 AP controller were Japanese-only releases, but that doesn't mean that the innovation gets ignored. Especially since Nintendo is located in the same country where both of those products were released, and (in regards to rumble) there were even gaming magazines in the U.S. that mentioned the fact that Japanese Dual Analog Controllers had rumble.

NEXT Generation 33 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

NEXT Generation 33

archive.org

 

[RAIDEN1]

Easily the N64, prior to that the only other "64 bit" console in the neighbourhood was the Jaguar, and that decided to go with a controller from the 80s....Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't Nintendo who introduced the analogue stick and the Rumble feedback first? Then Sega and Sony followed?

 

[6502]

Yay, Nintendo's rumble feature had a game which supported it on release date. That doesn't mean Nintendo's rumble feature was more innovative than Sony's. I've said multiple times that implementation is more important than who was first. Sony's implementation of rumble was superior to Nintendo's implementation. It does not matter that a game didn't support that implementation on day one.

What does matter is that Nintendo's single-motor Rumble Pak that required two AAA batteries was a worse implementation than Sony's dual-motor vibration (with one motor being intentionally stronger than the other) which was built into the controller without need of an external part or an additional power source.

If you think that the Rumble Pak was more innovative than Sony's dual-motor vibration, then tell me why the Rumble Pak started and ended with the N64, and yet the dual-motor vibration that Sony created still lives on in modern controllers. And without saying, "But this had X game support," please explain how Nintendo's rumble technology was more advanced and/or innovative than Sony's. You even said that innovation comes from use. Using that logic (which I agree, it's sound logic), Sony was more innovative than Nintendo regarding rumble support since their rumble support spanned multiple [console] generations.

Also, it didn't seem like you were asking "genuine" questions since I've already addressed the point you were trying to make multiple times. It's easy to get irritated when Nancy's like yourself don't take the time to read posts.

The dual rumble was a better implementation but it was a refinement in execution, in the same vein analogue on N64 was surpassed by dual sticks on the sony pad. N64 gets credit for taking the innovations mass market with software first.

I would question the origin of the idea as Sony seems to have rushed something to market without software support whilst Nintendo was previewing the total package and released within days of Sony's.

Also the dreamcast and ds had a rumble pack plug in accessory so the entire idea of rumble as an accessory was not so bad that it was never repeated.

Unless you can pull patents to establish dates I doubt we are going to agree.

 

[IFireflyl]

The dual rumble was a better implementation but it was a refinement in execution, in the same vein analogue on N64 was surpassed by dual sticks on the sony pad.

It's not refinement in execution when Sony executed it first.

EDIT: Also, it turns out Sony's PSX did have a game that supported the rumble feature on launch day April 25, 1997. Tobal 2 had rumble support day one. So Sony was the first one to release rumble feature in the controller, and the first to have a game released that supported the rumble feature.

 

[6502]

It's not refinement in execution when Sony executed it first.

Without software that first pad was a still birth.

Sega had vibration in arcade games since the 70s (motocross). Seems a bit suspect how Sony suddenly had the idea after Starfox had been doing the rounds and rumble had become a feature of their competitors console.

I will indulge in some fanboyism here and point out the shoulders, shape and button layout of their pad was also a rip off of Nintendo's previous pad, not a bad thing and the snes design has served them well for generations.

 

[6502]

It's not refinement in execution when Sony executed it first.

EDIT: Also, it turns out Sony's PSX did have a game that supported the rumble feature on launch day April 25, 1997. Tobal 2 had rumble support day one. So Sony was the first one to release rumble feature in the controller, and the first to have a game released that supported the rumble feature.

Re edit: In that case my argument falls. I concede.

 

[nkarafo]

It's not refinement in execution when Sony executed it first.

EDIT: Also, it turns out Sony's PSX did have a game that supported the rumble feature on launch day April 25, 1997. Tobal 2 had rumble support day one. So Sony was the first one to release rumble feature in the controller, and the first to have a game released that supported the rumble feature.

Nintendo demonstrated the rumble pack before everyone else but they were slow to release. They delayed everything N64. Sony managing to release their take just a bit earlier doesn't give them the credit.

 

[IFireflyl]

Nintendo demonstrated the rumble pack before everyone else but they were slow to release. They delayed everything N64. Sony managing to release their take just a bit earlier doesn't give them the credit.

It does. You're assuming that Sony wasn't already working on their own version of rumble. You have no idea if Sony was working on it prior to Nintendo's first mention of their Rumble Pak. But even if Sony did start working on it after Nintendo mentioned the Rumble Pak, that's irrelevant for a couple of reasons:

Firstly, Sony still had to engineer a rumble feature that would work. It doesn't matter who had the first idea. If I thought of Bitcoin but someone else created it, does that mean I'm the innovative one? No, the credit goes to the one who did the actual work.

Secondly, Sony's rumble feature was released first, and (as I've said a dozen times) their design was better. The N64 Rumble Pak started and stopped at the N64. Sony's rumble feature lives on in current-generation consoles. Sony's implementation wasn't just quicker. I would argue that even if Nintendo had released the Rumble Pak two days sooner than Sony that Sony's implementation was far more innovative because it stood the test of time. But in this case we don't have to play that game because Sony implemented it both first AND better.

You cannot argue that Nintendo was more innovative when Sony beat them with the release date (and having a game that supported it on release) and with the better implementation. I mean, unless you're saying that whoever gets the idea of something first is the only real innovator. But then it would mean that neither Sony or Nintendo were the innovative ones (when it comes to rumble at least) since the rumble feature itself existed in arcade games all the way back in the 1970's.

 

[chromhound]

N64 but Playstation had the CD's

 

[nkarafo]

It does. You're assuming that Sony wasn't already working on their own version of rumble. You have no idea if Sony was working on it prior to Nintendo's first mention of their Rumble Pak. But even if Sony did start working on it after Nintendo mentioned the Rumble Pak, that's irrelevant for a couple of reasons:

Firstly, Sony still had to engineer a rumble feature that would work. It doesn't matter who had the first idea. If I thought of Bitcoin but someone else created it, does that mean I'm the innovative one? No, the credit goes to the one who did the actual work.

Secondly, Sony's rumble feature was released first, and (as I've said a dozen times) their design was better. The N64 Rumble Pak started and stopped at the N64. Sony's rumble feature lives on in current-generation consoles. Sony's implementation wasn't just quicker. I would argue that even if Nintendo had released the Rumble Pak two days sooner than Sony that Sony's implementation was far more innovative because it stood the test of time. But in this case we don't have to play that game because Sony implemented it both first AND better.

You cannot argue that Nintendo was more innovative when Sony beat them with the release date (and having a game that supported it on release) and with the better implementation. I mean, unless you're saying that whoever gets the idea of something first is the only real innovator. But then it would mean that neither Sony or Nintendo were the innovative ones (when it comes to rumble at least) since the rumble feature itself existed in arcade games all the way back in the 1970's.

All i know is that Nintendo hyped and marketed the function and showed it working a long time before everyone else.

Sony managed to silently release it a few days earlier on it's own. Nintendo still needed for Starfox to be completed so they could have it as a pack in. Otherwise they would probably be able to release it months before since it was working during the very early previews anyway. They just needed a strong title to sell it and Starfox was it. Don't forget how during the N64, Nintendo were very slow perfecting their 1st party titles and delaying them again and again.

Dunno, this still smells like a Nintendo innovation to me. Also, sure, the rumble feature existed before the rumble pack but not in the console space. Force feedback needed big arcade cabinets or stationary, mounted joysticks on PCs. Nintendo were the ones who risked to make it a standard on console joypads.

As mentioned already, it's not a coincidence Nintendo decided to hide the Wii controller and keep it a secret until they were close to release the thing. They did this to avoid shit like that and they succeed since Sony and Microsoft only managed to copy them when it was too late.

 

[IFireflyl]

All i know is that Nintendo hyped and marketed the function and showed it working a long time before everyone else.

Sony managed to silently release it a few days earlier on it's own. Nintendo still needed for Starfox to be completed so they could have it as a pack in. Otherwise they would probably be able to release it months before since it was working during the very early previews anyway. They just needed a strong title to sell it and Starfox was it. Don't forget how during the N64, Nintendo were very slow perfecting their 1st party titles and delaying them again and again.

Dunno, this still smells like a Nintendo innovation to me. Also, sure, the rumble feature existed before the rumble pack but not in the console space. Force feedback needed big arcade cabinets or stationary, mounted joysticks on PCs. Nintendo were the ones who risked to make it a standard on console joypads.

As mentioned already, it's not a coincidence Nintendo decided to hide the Wii controller and keep it a secret until they were close to release the thing. They did this to avoid shit like that and they succeed since Sony and Microsoft only managed to copy them when it was too late.

And again, I'm not saying you are definitively wrong about Sony getting the idea from Nintendo. There is no way to prove that that's what happened, but I can see your perspective and I can't definitely say that wasn't the case.

I could understand saying Nintendo gets all the credit if Nintendo launched their rumble 6+ months prior to Sony. Then it would feel more like a rip-off, and that Sony just improved Nintendo's product. The point I'm making is that even if Nintendo announced it and Sony said, "That sounds like a great idea," they still had to implement this feature themselves. They not only did that, but the way in which it was implemented became the golden standard for rumble implementation going forward, even by the Switch Pro controller. And if they didn't start working on rumble until Nintendo announced it then that means they implemented this in less time than Nintendo as well, and that's certainly impressive considering it was far from a shoddy job!

If you want to say that ideas are more important than execution then there's really no room for much debate. I strongly disagree with claiming the idea is more innovative than the execution, but if that's your opinion then that's that.

However, if we're talking about which execution was more innovative then it was definitely Sony, and not because they had months to review Nintendo's product and improve on it. You said that Nintendo were the ones who risked to make it a standard, but Sony was risking just as much as Nintendo. Sony didn't wait for Nintendo to take all the risk. They certainly could have waited to see how the rumble worked out for Nintendo and then improved upon the existing design based on feedback from Nintendo's implementation. But they didn't wait for that, and Sony's implementation was a game-changer.

I think we can both agree that regardless of who was actually more innovative, both Nintendo and Sony deserve major credit for changing the landscape of gaming.

 

[cartman414]

Disagree, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro the Dragon, Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Crash Team Racing, WipeOut, Parappa the Rapper, and the list could go on. if anything N64 games aged worse. it's only that you have nostalgia for them.

I have no nostalgia for either system, and most of the PS games you listed were dated the moment the generation ended.

Mario 64 at the very least stood on its own when all was said and done.

 

[Paulistano]

PS1 is a clear innovator as a whole, it doesn't depend on gimmicks, fanboyism and is was cheaper to develop for and to manufacture the games, in the end Rumble was just a expensive gimmick that Starfox was perfectly fine without it and a waste of batteries, on the other hand the PS1 had the DualShock who had everything included in the controller, clearly superior in everyway.

I played intensely on both consoles at the time had great times with both but N64 can't even compare to the PS1 in the sheer volume of excellent games, to inovate you need everything and clearly N64 was lacking in everyway, just having a rumble and a analog won't save it, for me the N64 has aged very badly the games have a low framerate, the graphics are very blurred, the textures have ultra low quality, the controller sucks and the analog has a poor quality and aparently even Nintendo can't emulate it properly.

On the other hand we got the PS1, the games aged like wine, has great textures, great framerate, the controller is modern and with duckstation it can be even better.

 

[Lognor]

*sigh*

I guess I'll just continue repeating myself:

Dual Analog Controller - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That same rumble feature that was released two days BEFORE the Rumble Pak for N64 was later implemented in the DualShock line. Also, even in the non-Japanese versions of the Dual Analog Controller you could obtain the motors, open the controller, and install them. The rest of the hardware/software was there, they were just missing the motors themselves.

The N64 version of rumble started and ended with the N64. No console since has implemented the N64's version of rumble, not even by Nintendo. Sony's implementation of rumble, however, is still used in current-generation controllers. That means that Sony wins the innovation battle (in terms of rumble) not only because they implemented it first (which they did), but also because they implemented it better (which they did).

As to the analog controller, the XE-1 AP controller by Dempa was a Japanese-release-only controller. It wasn't console specific, and it worked with the Sega Mega Drive, the Sega Mega-CD, the Sega 32X, and also with actual computers. It was a universal controller, not a console/platform-specific controller.

Both the original Dual Analog Controller with rumble and the XE-1 AP controller were Japanese-only releases, but that doesn't mean that the innovation gets ignored. Especially since Nintendo is located in the same country where both of those products were released, and (in regards to rumble) there were even gaming magazines in the U.S. that mentioned the fact that Japanese Dual Analog Controllers had rumble.

NEXT Generation 33 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

NEXT Generation 33

archive.org

You're talking about an accessory that released AFTER the n64 and was not included in the console. The ps1 came with no analog controller and no rumble. In fact, Sony came out with the analog and rumble in response to after the n64 was revealed and they saw what a game changer it was. So Nintendo wins out in innovation easily. Sony may have improved on these items but Nintendo brought it to the forefront.

It's like comparing the ipod to the zune. A lot of ppl would say the zune is better but the ipod won out. Apple innovated and ms copied and improved. Same thing happened here. Nintendo improvised, Sony copied

 

[Griffon]

The PS1 3d hardware was fucking nuts at release in 1994, nothing could touch it in 3d capabilities, no PCs nor consoles.

Nintendo had the advantage of coming a few years later, getting more modern chips from SGI and taking the analog stick from Sega and running with it.

Both consoles are great.

 

[keefged4]

N64 just for Goldeneye, Perfect Dark and Banjo Kazooie/Tooie. If I had one when I was a kid though, PS1 and FFVII would have crushed all of this. Nostalgia is a hell of a thing. Love both consoles nowadays.

 

[TLZ]

You're talking about an accessory that released AFTER the n64 and was not included in the console. The ps1 came with no analog controller and no rumble. In fact, Sony came out with the analog and rumble in response to after the n64 was revealed and they saw what a game changer it was. So Nintendo wins out in innovation easily. Sony may have improved on these items but Nintendo brought it to the forefront.

It's like comparing the ipod to the zune. A lot of ppl would say the zune is better but the ipod won out. Apple innovated and ms copied and improved. Same thing happened here. Nintendo improvised, Sony copied

Don't Nintendo themselves say they don't innovate, and instead look at exisiting dated and existing hardware they think is interesting to them and make something out of that works for them?

It also has to be very cost effective for them because they want to sell cheaper than the competition and still make profit from their hardware.

 

[crozier]

Nintendo had more revolutionary hardware, Sony software.

 

[ManaByte]

Your fanboy "gotcha!" post is shallow. As I've already said, this is 100% irrelevant. The question isn't, "Which console feature had more impact for games at launch?" The question is which console was more innovative, and people keep giving N64 the win for rumble because they are (falsely) under the impression that Nintendo had rumble first, and that Sony only improved upon their design. In fact, Sony implemented the rumble feature into their controller first, and that same rumble feature is what is now used by virtually every controller with rumble. So not only did Sony beat Nintendo to the punch with rumble, but their implementation was far more impactful since it is still used in modern controllers by everyone, including Nintendo with the Switch Pro controller.

It doesn't matter that games didn't take advantage of the rumble feature right away. What matters is that the Rumble Pak started and ended with the N64, but Sony's rumble function was out first (by a couple of days) and is still used today, almost 25 years later, and it is used in all standard controllers, including Nintendo's.

This means that Sony beat Nintendo in terms of innovation in this particular area.

Immersion v. Sony - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[captainraincoat]

N64

• Analog stick paired WITH gameplay mechanics
• Texture filtering
• Anti Aliasing
• Rumble Pak

PS

• CD

N64 was waymore advanced BUT the Risc Processor of the PS was way cheaper and easier to develop

Nintendo was definitely the more innovative of the 2 but Sony did make a fine gaming machine

 

[ManaByte]

Nintendo had the advantage of coming a few years later, getting more modern chips from SGI and taking the analog stick from Sega and running with it.

Sonic Team got the idea for the Saturn analog controller from Super Mario 64. So Nintendo was still first.

 

[IFireflyl]

Immersion v. Sony - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This is simply a licensing issue, and it isn't truly relevant to the issue at hand. Not that it's bad information to have; it just doesn't have an impact on the points I made.

You're talking about an accessory that released AFTER the n64 and was not included in the console. The ps1 came with no analog controller and no rumble. In fact, Sony came out with the analog and rumble in response to after the n64 was revealed and they saw what a game changer it was. So Nintendo wins out in innovation easily. Sony may have improved on these items but Nintendo brought it to the forefront.

It's like comparing the ipod to the zune. A lot of ppl would say the zune is better but the ipod won out. Apple innovated and ms copied and improved. Same thing happened here. Nintendo improvised, Sony copied

The Dual Analog Controller that had rumble built in was released in Japan on April 25th, 1997. As was the first game that supported rumble for the PSX (Tobal 2). Stop saying it was released after the N64 released their Rumble Pak. That wasn't released until April 27, 1997. This is all verifiable information, and I've provided the proof.

Please learn how to read before you attempt to engage in a discussion with adults.

 

[nkarafo]

Nintendo had more revolutionary hardware, Sony software.

Sony had more revolutionary games than the likes of Mario 64, Goldeneye and OOT?

 

[SoulTas]

The Dual Analog Controller that had rumble built in was released in Japan on April 25th, 1997. As was the first game that supported rumble for the PSX (Tobal 2). Stop saying it was released after the N64 released their Rumble Pak. That wasn't released until April 27, 1997. This is all verifiable information, and I've provided the proof.

Please learn how to read before you attempt to engage in a discussion with adults.

Nintendo had their patents for the rumble pack since late 1995

Immersion v. Sony - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Sony allegedly stole the idea from a different company. They got sued and this is why, most likely, the rumble feature was removed from the US and PAL releases of the dual analog controller. Sony also had similar legal issues with their rumble features in later consoles.

Sony probably had a knee jerk reaction after Nintendo previewed the rumble pack. And you insist on giving Sony credit for this because they managed to release their controller just two days before Nintendo released Starfox 64 and the rumble pack, which was previewed god knows for how long? I remember waiting for that thing for months.

I wonder, were you gaming in 1996/97? Did you experience the previews, launch and the first few years of the Playstation/Saturn and the N64? Or do you just google for numbers and Wikipedia articles?

 

[marquimvfs]

IFireflyl Bushido Blade Also had rumble day one, but my point still stands. I think that the launch date was a lucky consequence of a StarFox delay. Again, I agree I can be wrong. But the point is who innovayed more, and Nintendo always showed their idea and implementation first, that's why I (respectfully) disagree with your opinion in the rumble feature. The pattent dispute that I quoted can also be used as proof that they didn't fully developed a feature from ground up and merely looked arround and saw something that could be used as a solution.

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

Playstation. Even today the model we have is an evolution of what Sony bring to the market at that time.

Not to say that N64 wasn't important, but we need to keep it real, the format that shape the industry didn't come from Nintendo.

 

[IFireflyl]

Nintendo had their patents for the rumble pack since late 1995

Not really relevant.

Immersion v. Sony - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Sony allegedly stole the idea from a different company. They got sued and this is why, most likely, the rumble feature was removed from the US and PAL releases of the dual analog controller. Sony also had similar legal issues with their rumble features in later consoles.

Sony's failure to license doesn't mean they didn't innovate. The lawsuit you're referring to was well after DualShock controllers were released worldwide.

Sony probably had a knee jerk reaction after Nintendo previewed the rumble pack. And you insist on giving Sony credit for this because they managed to release their controller just two days before Nintendo released Starfox 64 and the rumble pack, which was previewed god knows for how long? I remember waiting for that thing for months.

You have no evidence to support that claim. Your opinion is fine, but don't treat it like it is fact.

I wonder, were you gaming in 1996/97? Did you experience the previews, launch and the first few years of the Playstation/Saturn and the N64? Or do you just google for numbers and Wikipedia articles?

Yes, I was gaming since before the PSX launched, and I got it launch day.

 

[ManaByte]

I wonder, were you gaming in 1996/97? Did you experience the previews, launch and the first few years of the Playstation/Saturn and the N64? Or do you just google for numbers and Wikipedia articles?

I've found recently that a lot of people weren't at that time and rely on Wikipedia and Google searches. People don't know or don't remember that Nintendo would show off their stuff very far in advance. I saw someone saying that Nintendo took the analog controller idea from Sega (NiGHTS), both were released in 1996, when it's the other way around and Sonic Team said they took the analog idea for NiGHTS from seeing Super Mario 64.

In 1997 almost everyone got on Sony's case at the time for copying the rumble pack. Nintendo revealed that LONG before the Dual Analog came out and at the time everyone knew that Nintendo innovated there and everyone else was rushing to catch up.

 

[ManaByte]

Another innovation on the N64 some people forget about: Four built-in controller ports. No multi-tap needed. Sega picked that up on the Dreamcast and Nintendo continued it on the GCN and MS used it on the original Xbox.

 

[OmegaSpirit32X]

I have no nostalgia for either system, and most of the PS games you listed were dated the moment the generation ended.

Mario 64 at the very least stood on its own when all was said and done.

Not really, they're all still pretty enjoyable. then again i also think Sonic Adventure is still very enjoyable.

 

[Lognor]

This is simply a licensing issue, and it isn't truly relevant to the issue at hand. Not that it's bad information to have; it just doesn't have an impact on the points I made.



The Dual Analog Controller that had rumble built in was released in Japan on April 25th, 1997. As was the first game that supported rumble for the PSX (Tobal 2). Stop saying it was released after the N64 released their Rumble Pak. That wasn't released until April 27, 1997. This is all verifiable information, and I've provided the proof.

Please learn how to read before you attempt to engage in a discussion with adults.

Released in Japan with very limited support. And was rushed to the market after they saw the n64 reveal. They copied them and couldn't get it out worldwide until much later. This is known. Sony getting it out in one market with limited use a week before means nothing. They saw Nintendo had a hit on their hands and copied them. It's well known

 

[Berserking Guts]

Loved my PSX back in the day. It introduced me to a franchise of games that I love dearly to this day, including Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, and Metal Gear Solid.

But if we're talking innovation then for me personally the N64 is the most mind-blowing console I ever owned, nothing has ever come as close to reshaping how I'd view games going forward then Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, and Goldeneye.

 

[sinnergy]

Loved my PSX back in the day. It introduced me to a franchise of games that I love dearly to this day, including Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, and Metal Gear Solid.

But if we're talking innovation then for me personally the N64 is the most mind-blowing console I ever owned, nothing has ever come as close to reshaping how I'd view games going forward then Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, and Goldeneye.

Objective looking this , but fanboy wars you know. N64 was for the console biz what switch is now

 

[IFireflyl]

Released in Japan with very limited support. And was rushed to the market after they saw the n64 reveal. They copied them and couldn't get it out worldwide until much later. This is known. Sony getting it out in one market with limited use a week before means nothing. They saw Nintendo had a hit on their hands and copied them. It's well known

It's not "well known". It may be "well suspected", but what you're saying isn't grounded in provable fact. It is entirely speculation. And you're saying Sony "rushed" to copy Nintendo, but Sony's version was implemented WAY better than Nintendo's version, and it's the type of rumble that virtually all standard controllers still use (including Nintendo with their Switch Pro controller). So in terms of innovation, even if Sony did get the idea from Nintendo, Sony was more innovative. If they did get the idea from Nintendo then it's even more impressive that their version of rumble was released before Nintendo's, it took less time to implement it, and it was superior to Nintendo's implementation of rumble. That's innovation right there.

Also, Sony the non-Japanese version of the Dual Analog Controller had everything it needed for rumble except for the motors. The non-Japanese version of the controller wasn't a different controller at all, it was just missing the motors (which you could install yourself if you got the motors and wanted to open your controller). To say that they were unable to get rumble released worldwide is false since the only thing missing from the non-Japanese versions were the motors.

And what's with your comment that Sony "saw Nintendo had a hit on their hands"? It wasn't released yet. They couldn't have known if it would be a success or a flop since it hadn't even been released.

You're really toeing the fanboy line here. If you think Nintendo was more innovative, that's fine. But don't make up lies or use speculation as "proof" of anything. Sony released vibration first. Sony's implementation was better. Sony's implementation still exists in current generation controllers. Nintendo's implementation, on the other hand, has never been seen again after the N64. How you think Nintendo was more innovative just because they said they were going to try to implement vibration first makes no sense to me. Especially since Sony beat them to the punch and had the better implementation.

 

[Urban]

Both have their place in my heart. That was a good time to be a kid !
But if I have to compare them: Yes the N64 had some groundbreaking incredible games but the PS1 had more 3rd party games and eventually I did play more on the PS1. But the N64 first party games are still one of the best of all times.

PS1>N64

 

[Lognor]

It's not "well known". It may be "well suspected", but what you're saying isn't grounded in provable fact. It is entirely speculation. And you're saying Sony "rushed" to copy Nintendo, but Sony's version was implemented WAY better than Nintendo's version, and it's the type of rumble that virtually all standard controllers still use (including Nintendo with their Switch Pro controller). So in terms of innovation, even if Sony did get the idea from Nintendo, Sony was more innovative. If they did get the idea from Nintendo then it's even more impressive that their version of rumble was released before Nintendo's, it took less time to implement it, and it was superior to Nintendo's implementation of rumble. That's innovation right there.

Also, Sony the non-Japanese version of the Dual Analog Controller had everything it needed for rumble except for the motors. The non-Japanese version of the controller wasn't a different controller at all, it was just missing the motors (which you could install yourself if you got the motors and wanted to open your controller). To say that they were unable to get rumble released worldwide is false since the only thing missing from the non-Japanese versions were the motors.

And what's with your comment that Sony "saw Nintendo had a hit on their hands"? It wasn't released yet. They couldn't have known if it would be a success or a flop since it hadn't even been released.

You're really toeing the fanboy line here. If you think Nintendo was more innovative, that's fine. But don't make up lies or use speculation as "proof" of anything. Sony released vibration first. Sony's implementation was better. Sony's implementation still exists in current generation controllers. Nintendo's implementation, on the other hand, has never been seen again after the N64. How you think Nintendo was more innovative just because they said they were going to try to implement vibration first makes no sense to me. Especially since Sony beat them to the punch and had the better implementation.

I already made the comparison between an ipod and zune. The zune was a much better mp3 player, but the zune just copied and improved upon what Apple had already done. Same thing here. If you want to argue that the PS1 implementation was better, it's because they saw what Nintendo did and iterated off of it. Are you going to argue that the zune was more innovative than the ipod? LOL! No, that's not how it works. And that's why Nintendo was much more innovative than Sony on both rumble and analog controls.

And you're trying to give Sony credit for rumble in controllers outside of Japan when they did not have rumble?! LOL! Oh...it was missing a motor? You mean the very thing that makes rumble work?! No shit! That's what make it rumble. It's not some highly technological thing.

Nintendo released rumble worldwide first. That is a fact. They were the first and every other console maker made rumble after them. Another fact. And this is only talking about rumble. What about analog controls? Another innovative feature from Nintendo. It came much later on the PS1. So not sure how you can argue that Sony was more innovative with the PS1. You can give them the game catalog, but you can't give them innovation. Nintendo wins there handily.

 

[ManaByte]

So not sure how you can argue that Sony was more innovative with the PS1. You can give them the game catalog, but you can't give them innovation. Nintendo wins there handily.

The PS1 vastly grew and expanded the industry and playerbase via a low game price point ($39 was pretty standard) and their image.

The N64 literally changed the way games were designed. Super Mario 64 showed how to do a camera in a 3D environment and introduced analog controls to consoles. As clunky as it was, every 3D platformer or third person 3D camera is derived from what Miyamoto did there. The N64 also established that console FPS games were not only viable, but a legitimate multiplayer genre when it was previously dominated by PC.

 

[IFireflyl]

I already made the comparison between an ipod and zune. The zune was a much better mp3 player, but the zune just copied and improved upon what Apple had already done. Same thing here. If you want to argue that the PS1 implementation was better, it's because they saw what Nintendo did and iterated off of it. Are you going to argue that the zune was more innovative than the ipod? LOL! No, that's not how it works. And that's why Nintendo was much more innovative than Sony on both rumble and analog controls.

The Zune was released about five years after the iPod. Sony's vibration was released two days before Nintendo's. Your comparison is garbage.

And you're trying to give Sony credit for rumble in controllers outside of Japan when they did not have rumble?! LOL! Oh...it was missing a motor? You mean the very thing that makes rumble work?! No shit! That's what make it rumble. It's not some highly technological thing.

Nintendo released rumble worldwide first. That is a fact. They were the first and every other console maker made rumble after them. Another fact. And this is only talking about rumble. What about analog controls? Another innovative feature from Nintendo. It came much later on the PS1. So not sure how you can argue that Sony was more innovative with the PS1. You can give them the game catalog, but you can't give them innovation. Nintendo wins there handily.

It doesn't matter that Nintendo released it worldwide first. That has nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is innovation. If I cured cancer and released the cure only in the United States, and then someone else released another cure that wasn't as good in the rest of the world, do I not get credit for curing cancer? You're fanboying super hard, man. I'm giving you facts and you're dumping on them (and me) because of opinions. You can't refute the facts I presented. Do what another guy did and simply disagree with me, but stop arguing because your opinions are weak and they aren't going to sway me.

Also, N64 did not introduce the analog controller first. I've said this multiple times, so please stop giving misinformation. The XE-1 AP controller came out 8 years before the N64, and it had an analog controller. It was also one of the first "universal" controllers (in quotes because some PCs required an adaptor to plug it it).