REVOLUTION CONTROLLER HAS BEEN REVEALED!!!!!

[Weltall]

1.) You're arguing your points by agreeing with mine and others.

2.) As I told you before, I played Intellivision many times growing up and found it to be 'another Atari' which I quickly got bored with. Let's recap: It's a disk... with a TELEPHONE PAD. it is not a good controller for any type of video game from any era unless you have to dial a phone in the video game. It is uncomfortable, it is useless, it is a bad design, it is not used in any video games today or since, it is a failure.

I dunno why you keep calling the machine a failure. It was in production from 1979 to 1991, and was the second-best selling machine, behind the 2600, of the Pre-NES era, which says a lot considering that there were literally dozens of competitors from almost every single electronics and toy company of the day. It was a success. Not nearly as much so as the NES, no. I'd never argue that. But it was a success.

And why are you arguing about the keypad? I've already said that it wasn't the best idea in the world, though for a select few games, it was a nice thing to have. In other games it was utilized in such a way to allow for lazy programming also.

3.) If it was not a major catalyst to the improvment of all video games then why do all 8-bit, 16 bit, 32 bit, 64 bit and all current gen and all NEXT gen controllers have a directional pad that is based off of Nintendo's and not Intellivision's disk? To offer a radically different design that renders other designs of the same function obsolete and creates a new tier or industry standard is innovation; That is a fact.

Because the Nintendo D-Pad is based off of the disc. If you crack open the plastic, you're looking at the same technology underneath. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself in regards to this fact.

Why was the Nintendo design the one duplicated? It was a better design. But also, Nintendo ruled the world for years. You're going to try to beat the king by doing what he does. It was a good design and a familiar design, that's why it remains to this day, not because it was an earthshattering revolution in electronic entertainment. How could it be when it had already been done?

Besides, you and I and everyone else all know that had the NES used a disc design for the D-Pad, it would not have been one iota less successful. The NES was a smash success, even moreso considering the state of things in the mid-80's, but no one flew out to stand in line and wait for one because OMG THE DIRECTION PAD IS A CROSS.

[quoteIf you want, we can take a step back and see that Nintendo innovated the d-pad again with the introduction of the analog stick.[/quote]
That I will totally agree with.

No one here is being a blind fan-boy except for you (and with Intellivision no less...).

What I'm doing is pointing out an obvious fact. You're the one trying to tell me the car was not a car until Nintendo put their name on it.

It's obvious that Sony innovated the idea of controllers with dual analog sticks which is now in use on all current gen systems and most next gen. Nintendo opted for 'C-buttons' instead of a stick and the idea failed, as you can see no other company used that idea again. Sony's dual sticks set the standard. They innovated the standard. The same can be said about Nintendo's d-pad. They took an idea, and made it better. So much better, that it caused a major change in the industry.

Yes, the Dual Analog idea was a new one, but I can hardly call that an innovation, not when even almost nine years after its conception, very few games utilize it to any great extent. It was an idea that had little practical application, and I think the only reason it persists is because every once in awhile there is a game that uses it well. Not that I can think of more than maybe three.

I just think you're vastly overstating the importance of the D-Pad to the industry, regardless of who really created it. It was an evolutionary step, and a necessary one at that, since bulky joysticks are harder to use in many games, and they aren't as sturdy. It was purely evolutionary.

4.) You have already proven your own ignorance in this thread (which is really, really confusing me) by arguing something that makes no sense. You are doing more of a job trying to convince yourself of your opinion and doing a bad job at that. The facts are in front of you, but you choose not to see them in the hopes that your OPINION will be seen as fact.

My argument is that the Intellivision was the first console with a digital direction pad used with the thumb. This is a documented fact. What you're trying to say is that it wasn't a D-Pad because Nintendo didn't invent it, which is not only blatantly false, but childish and fanboyish.

Bottom line-

*We all agree that the Intellivision disk was a step in the right direction.

*We all agree that Nintendo's directional-pad is better.

Yes and yes.

*We all agree that no matter how much you or anyone wants to believe that the Intellivision beats Nintendo hands-down in the area of innovation in the creation of how we interact with games, it will always be a failed system that is quickly being erased from the history of video games due its lack of cohesive content and inability to withstand time (ie: sales of retro-Gaming packages including Intellivision games do not sell while Nintendio releases a 20 year old game for full price and makes money). if the disk was true innovation, THEN IT WOULD BE IN USE TODAY. But it's not, the D-Pad is. Long live the King.

You have made this more than I intended. My whole argument was that in one very particular aspect, the Intellivision did something first that the NES is credited for doing first. It's a fact. By no means am I implying that the Intellivision is a better system or in any way more important to gaming history. There's no way I could believe that. But neither is it a failure. It has a cult following that has lasted for a quarter-century, and was marketed longer than any home console ever. Yeah, if you measure it against the NES, it's a failure. Then again, would not the N64 also be a failure? Nobody but Nintendo fans will ever remember it for much other than a footnote in gaming history, and it didn't sell nearly as well as the NES or SNES, and got absolutely trounced by its competitor. Would you apply the same standards as you do to the Intellivision and call it a failure? Of course not. It's not true. Success, like almost anything, occurs in degrees. Calling the Intellivision a lousy failure is very incorrect.

*We all agree that this is a DUMB ARGUMENT.

Sure is looking that way.

*The tomato is possibly a fruit.

I deny that.