Random Nintendo rant (I was bored, OK!?)

what entirely new genre would that be?

platform? no.
puzzle? no.
light gun (we already established that they didn\'t)? no.

so on and so forth. You are bringing up null points.

NOBODY CARES THAT NINTENDO WAS SUCCESSFUL AT COPYING SOMEONE ELSE\'S IDEAS!!

being innovative is not always being successful, and vice versa, much like a rectangle is not always a square.

them having an illegal monopoly over EVERY third party made it for other, more innovative and fresh companies, to fail at their consoles. Nintendo only had balls to try a few ew ideas in that genre, since they had money to blow. After Sega took them to court and won, Genesis came out of the gates whooping Nintendo\'s ass. People saw that Sega was changing the way we play. And people saw that Sega gave third party freedom. Mortal Kombat anyone?


Eric Jacob

Originally posted by AlteredBeast
Sega is the all time innovator in software and hardware.

software - 3D fighting, 3D racing, strategy genre (copied by Warcraft, Starcraft,etc.), first racing game with moving vehicles, first with differing terrain, 3D glasses (which worked DAMN well might I add), Card game input, built in modem, add-on modem, internet play, etc.

Bravo.  While I think you\'re being an ass through most of this thread, you certainly drove your point home here.

Of course, to play Devil\'s advocate I could say that making a fighting game into a fighting game with polygons isn\'t very innovative.  (That would give you an idea of what you\'ve been putting the Nintendo supporters in this thread through.)

Anyway, I feel that Nintendo is about as innovative as one can be with everything having been done already (I mentioned earlier something like it\'s not so much innovation anymore as it is evolution and progression), but as far as Sega goes, you certainly made your point.

Oh, and I still question the light gun thing.  Did you see my earlier post?  Though, since I wrote that I learned that EGM might have some contradictory info in its most recent issue.  Who knows...

-Eik

All right, if god ever needed to fill an ocean, he could use the ignorance of mm and AlteredBeast and transform all of it to water. j/k I love you two. But you know I gotsta say something here.

1. they made their Mario characters race...BRAVO!! That isn\'t innovation, that is merely playing old hat with new characters. I don\'t know if I should give you that one, or slap you.

Ah but it all related to one thing every gaming company desires thw most and what Sega seems to be desperate for lately; money.

It\'s the same deal wiht Mario 2 for the NES. In Japan it was called something totally different and had completely different characters. Nintendo just slapped Mario on it for the American release. Smart move in my book. Mario 1 was just a pheonominal game in gereral at that time and everyone wanted more of it. Nintendo gave the people what they want. Even if it wasn\'t a true Mario game, the people still loved it and it sold  A LOT of copies. It was an original game might I add. I could go on with that but everyone acknowledges that I think/hope.

Now, just because Nintendo had a cart game with Mario and friends doesn\'t make it not innovative. The concept behind it was totally innovative. The races were awesome, unique, and very challenging(rainbow road, UGH!). and combine all the weapons into the races perfectly make it an innovative game. I now for a fact that mm likes this game. Ha.

2. a collection of mini-games?

Correction-a board game with mini-games. Strategy always came into play. It\'s not just mini-games. A perfect mutiplayer game is  what it was. One of the first games to mainly focus on multiplayer.

3. opinion. I think they suck at 3D games, go figure.

The general public has a major difference in opinion than you do my friend. Same with magazines, gaming sites, etc. You\'ll never admit it to yourself but Mario 64 and Zelda:OOT changed the way we play games. There wouldn\'t be a vast amount of quality  games if those two blockblusters never came out.

Mario 64 revolutionized platform genre, like to see you argue with that. And Zelda simply wrote the book on how 3D games should be done. Those two games are innovative btw Nintendo+innovation working in the same sentence, ya gotta love it.

Right now, I would just like to point out how Sega has failed so much. What\'s the reason behind that? Thye were going strong in the Genesis days. Then they just kind of started to slowly die only to be reborn again as a 3rd party. What\'s the explanation behind that? Other than the fact that they SUCK. j/k Though I would like that question answered.

5. whats innovative about Pikmin? You can\'t say something and not give me a reason. Other wise I could say that I hate Nintendo because they rape children.

Pikmin is innnovative is many ways. Honestly, I don\'t have the mental energy to explain why becasue I thought it was general knowlegde. RTS by a Japanese developer, the super-smooth controls for a RTS(doesn\'t happen too often), the goals of the game, etc. Read a preview at IGNCube. I think this will be the best game from Nintendo in a long time. It\'s the only game I\'m getting this year.

Sega is the all time innovator in software and hardware.

That may be true, but saying Nintendo isn\'t innovative is ridiculous. From DK to Pikmin, there always willing to try new stuff.

Quite frankly, Sega hasen\'t been so innovative lately. All there doing is ports and sequals I find with the exception of Monkey Ball. VF4, JSF, Panzie Dragoon 4(gotta love it), Virtua Striker 4, SA2 and the GBA Sonic done, what have they\'ve done lately to hold their supposed crown of being the most innovative gaming company around? Rien de significance.

Thanks, Eiksirf. Having the goodside of a Nintendo fan helps

I read your post, but I kind of question it. I know that in the 60\'s and 50\'s they had light gun type games, I dont know what made them work, and I still am amazed at Nintendo\'s and Sega\'s light guns, but I know they had them. I think I read somewhere in one of tose cheesy remember this decade thingy. I also used to play some light gun game in the Ozarks that was made in the 60\'s or 70\'s, it was a western and was old, but I can\'t say how old.


Eric Jacob

good to see you are off of temp ban, Jumpy.

Sega just made an RTS last yea, in Japan, called Hundred Swords, it got rave reviews and I believe it is coming to PS2.

You have some point though, even though I believe Platofrm games have gone downhill since 3D, but if Mario 64 didn\'t come out, I would bet we would still have a 3D Sonic, as NiGHTS came out right after Mario64. Mario64 set what 3D controls shoudl be, more so than what a platform game should be.

Mario 2 is crap. 1 and 3 eclipse it in every way. I can\'t wait til mario Advance 2 comes out!

Sega not being innovative may be because nearly eveything has been done.

They are still bringing good, fresh idea to te forefront, though.


Eric Jacob

Originally posted by Jumpman
[Saying Sega is the most innovative] may be true, but saying Nintendo isn\'t innovative is ridiculous.

You ramble a lot, but this point here makes sense.  And, in your own wordy way, you support it somewhat. ;]

Also:

what has [Sega] done lately to hold its supposed crown of being the most innovative gaming company around?

Besides Monkey Ball (which despite the Marble Madness comparisons, hasn\'t really been seen before), the GBA/GCN link with Sonic will be the first for that system...

Not truly innovative (but what is?) if you consider the Kirby demo and the N64\'s Transfer Pak; but then again if you call Mario Kart innovative basically because it\'s fun, then this should fit in your definition somewhere...

-Eik

Sega just made an RTS last yea, in Japan, called Hundred Swords, it got rave reviews and I believe it is coming to PS2.

Any Japanese RTS is innovative in my book.

You have some point though, even though I believe Platofrm games have gone downhill since 3D, but if Mario 64 didn\'t come out, I would bet we would still have a 3D Sonic, as NiGHTS came out right after Mario64. Mario64 set what 3D controls shoudl be, more so than what a platform game should be.

A 3D Sonic still would of most likely been released, but I can guarantee you it wouldn\'t be like what Sonic Adventure is. It had what I call, "The Castle Concept" in it, along with every other platform game that\'s been released in Mario 64. That\'s why the genre has been so stale lately.

In Mario, you had the castle and in it had every level of the game. Different parts, different levels. It was just so perfect how everything was connected. That\'s why a lot of people still consider Mario 64 to be the best 3d platform game ever. Only Banjo-Kazooie improved on it IMO. SA had it, there\'s no denying it. Everything was connected fluidly, just like M64.

This is how I see-the developers decide how a platform should be, and there all copying a Nintendo game that was relased 5 years ago for a reason. It works, perfectly.

he could use the ignorance of mm

and what brought this on fella?

becasue i consistantly denounce the "house of nintendo"?

ill be remembering that while i play my GBA on the bus tomorrow to class

or perhaps ill take my gamegear, cause sega was thoughtfull enough to put a BACKLIT screen on thier 1st handheld, not like nintendo

after 3, we still dont have that option

gamecube , huh?
im still shocked they arent using cartridges

:P

I thought when you said "after 3..." you meant how GameGear\'s batteries completely ran out but you meant after 3 handhelds Nintendo still can\'t put a backlit in there screen. Cleverness at it\'s finest.

SA had it, and it was the best platformer ever, IMO.

SA2 screwed with it, nixed SOnic from most of the game, which is why it sucked. We need more Sonic, less Sonic friends.


Eric Jacob

This is how I see-the developers decide how a platform should be, and there all copying a Nintendo game that was relased 5 years ago for a reason. It works, perfectly.

I\'m sure if all systems were designed with one single game in mind, those games would be the best in the world as well.  Just don\'t forget that in order for Mario to be great, it took the controller and a system design that could pull it off and the N64 was designed with Miyamoto\'s ideas of Mario 64 in mind.  Not trying to bash anyone, just saying that this great step in innovation likely cost Nintendo a lot of money in the long run by sticking with certain things that Miyamoto prefered over the other companies.

Hmmm, not much left to say here.  AB, you seem to have run out of steam.  You are reusing your tired Sega 3D games argument, which I responded to over in the first page.  Adding polygons to pre-established gameplay, while making very little gameplay changes isn\'t much of an innovation, just evolution.

I am not a techie, so I know not the exact differences between Nintendo\'s DPad and its precursors on older systems.  However, when every single major media and publishing gives accredits Nintendo for the DPad, and the fact that everyone other digital gamepad copied that particular format, lends credence to the idea that perhaps Nintendo did develop that particular innovation.  *rolls eyes*

Oh, thanks for the support Tim, JJ.

However, when every single major media and publishing gives accredits Nintendo for the DPad, and the fact that everyone other digital gamepad copied that particular format, lends credence to the idea that perhaps Nintendo did develop that particular innovation. *rolls eyes*

Well, just like about light gun games, just because everyone ripped off Nintendo does not mean they invented it themselves. The ignorance of the masses does not change the facts. Nintendo\'s DPad was not only unoriginal, but inferior to prior attempts by Mattel. I don\'t understand where you divine Nintendo\'s innovation in this matter. You confuse "making popular" with "innovation".

If the bulk of the media (and the public) believe that Atari was the first videogame maker on the market, does it mean it is true?

I don\'t care if some other systems have put a similar d-pad on their controller, some companies actually like to change and develop their products, which is why we saw a circular d-pad on Master System, far superior to the edgy, corner filled pad of Nintendos.


Eric Jacob

Hell, Nintendo certainly did not invent 3-D gaming, but they certainly were the first company to make fantastic, fun, and brilliant playing 3-D games.

not true, there were many fun and good playing 3d games before n64 was released and many of them where by sega

Here is another thing people fail to notice.  Nintendo can make a game for ALL ages!!!  Unfortunately, many gamers are so insecure that they don\'t even give games like Mario 64 a try because it looks to "kiddie".   I\'m sorry, but that was a fantastic game!

all ages, might be true. However when I see zelda in powerpuff cell shaded land I must say that it isn\'t very attractive for older people. Or what about pokemon, yeah sure that isn\'t aimed purely at kids, its aimed at all ages  :rolleyes:

How about the Gamecube controller?   Not only does it melt in your hands and not in your mouth, the buttons are shapped differently and uniquely.  Never again do I have to look down at the controller to be certain I am pressing the proper button.

its a good dual shock rip off, which isn\'t a bad thing since sony copied and perfected the analog sticks from n64