24th September 2005, 10:40 AM
Dar/ It does look completely weird, I bet some of th prototypes were ball shaped or like a trackball design. But this remote design is the only real shape that can take advantage of all 3-D game types. Any sports game, any racing game, any game where you fly, any game where you shoot, any game where you use close combat, etc etc. It really is the most perfect design for controlling objects in 3-D and making it fun instead of complicated, since you're just using your hand like you would in the real world.
I thought of something cool a few days ago: Imagine holding the analog stick attachment out with your left arm fully extended, so that the analog stick is facing you. Now, with your right hand, put the remote controller on top of it, as to cover it up, so that it's facing you. Press and hold the B button on the back...
Now pull it back slowly, leaving your left arm fully extended imagine how the tension would create rumble in the controller. When you pull it all the way back to your chest, release the B button.
You just fired an arrow. :D In this configuration, the left hand could give you more precise aiming with the control stick. But you could hold the remote controller either vertical or horizontal to get different types of arrow spin and arc.
Ryan/ You must have been on your period or something because this argument started because someone said that Nintendo innovated with the d-pad and you said they didn't and now you say they did. Nintendo did invent the d-pad, like it or not.
"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."
Okay, so as a toy it was a success, but if you compare it to any video game system in history it was a complete failure. Except maybe if you compared it to the Virtual Boy. I'm sorry Ryan but that logic is absurd, it is a video game system and it is a part of the video game market and in that market it is a failure. I agree that it was still made for years, shit you can buy those plug and play systems now for 20 bucks that have Atari, Intellivision, etc. People would buy them for nostalgia or what have you, but in this industry the Intellivision was not a success as a home video game console.
"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?"
1.) it wasn't already done, because the Intellivision used an unmarked disk. Not a d-pad. The d-pad was better because it's easier to use, more comfortable, easier to pick up and play and, regardless of your opinion, was a revolution for the industry. Everyone and their dog adopted Nintendo's d-pad.
2.) Companies do not think that way, they do their best to create something original that sets them apart while still retaining functionality. Sega's d-pads always looked different, in fact they look like a cross between a disk and a d-pad, sony opted for d-pad that is a collection of four individual buttons, the worst design of the d-pad i've ever seen. Second only to the GC's ultra tiny pad which you cant really use as a full d-pad.. more like extra buttons (for my giant hands anyway). But the point is, as you said, they chose the d-pad design because it's better, not because they wanted to associate their system with Nintendo's. That logic is completely destroyed when looking at current or next gen consoles. Nintendo isn't king, and yet everyone is still using a d-pad.
"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."
Hahaha :D come on, using that logic makes every controller on the market a rip off of the arcade stick and the roller ball. It's not just the tech inside the controller, it's how the player interacts with it, that's where leaps and innovation is made. The technology to give us that level of interaction is a reaction. It starts on a drawing board with ideas of how it should look for comfort and interactivity, once that's settled on it's sent to a different group to figure out how to build the actual controller using existing technology and sometimes inventing new technology. In this case, Nintendo went through R&D and decided that a directional pad would be best, and the entire world agreed.
'If you cracked open a NES, you'd be looking at a N64' = No. Same tech, yes, but used in totally different ways with an overall boost in performance and updated versions of the same hardware and some totally new hardware. The same can be said about the d-pad Vs. Intellivision's disk.
"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."
You yourself said that the d-pad was an necessary evolution. If Nintendo made the NES with a disk instead, and Sega made the d-pad - We would be having a Sega Vs. Intellivision debate. That OMG CROSS design, is what makes a d-pad a d-pad, and it what makes it so innovative over the disk design. It was an evolution, and Nintendo founded it. In evolutionary terms, the disk on the intellivision is the is a mutant gene, the d-pad is the refined gene found in all DNA. *makes lab coat sounds and points at chalk boards*
"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."
Again, with your logic, every car would be a rip off of the first car ever made. What you're saying is that the Model T is the same as a 57 Chevy and ignoring the fact that it's much improved vehicle.
"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 agree for the most part and I happen to like the c-buttons alot more than a second stick (PD :D) but games like Pikmin and Luigi's Mansion could not have been done without two sticks. I think Sony wanted to make their controller seem better saying "we have two instead of one!" while most developers use the second stick for changing camera and little else, most of the time the same functions could have been applied to 4 c-buttons (which is basically a d-pad) anyway.
"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."
Intellivision disk:
A round unmarked disk with no tactile impression of direction. Controller could be held 4 different ways depending on the game with no idea of what is "up" until you pressed the correct corresponding direction on the pad to cause the appropriate movement. Lack of any marks or tactile feedback to the user meant that you didn't know where down was until you character moved down or you had to look at the controller.
Nintendo d-pad:
A cross shaped button with 4 main directions, used in conjunction with eachother could perform 4 diagonal directions with a total of 8 directions. Tactile feedback of pad design allowed users to feel what direction they are going.
Outcome - Intellivision disk is not a directional pad as much as it is a 'movement' pad as no actual directions are made apparent on the disk to the user.
"You have made this more than I intended."
Bullshit, you knew exactly what you were doing and now you're getting your ass handed to you. :D
"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."
And what might that be? Using your thumbs? No, that was done before Intellivision. Having a phone pad? Nope, before Intellivision too... what could you mean? Oh! Creating another failed input device for video games, yes! oh, but it wasn't the first at that either. :D
"If you measure it against the NES, it's a failure. Then again, would not the N64 also be a failure?"
No, because according to Nintendo the N64 sold more consoles in the same amount of time. To date, the NES wins... over every console in existence, but in a 5 year span, the N64 outsells the NES. This is because more people play video games now in America than in 1984.
"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."
Okay, if we remove the Intellivision from the video game industry and put in the toy industry, it's a success. put it in the video games market, and it's a total failure. Understood.
I thought of something cool a few days ago: Imagine holding the analog stick attachment out with your left arm fully extended, so that the analog stick is facing you. Now, with your right hand, put the remote controller on top of it, as to cover it up, so that it's facing you. Press and hold the B button on the back...
Now pull it back slowly, leaving your left arm fully extended imagine how the tension would create rumble in the controller. When you pull it all the way back to your chest, release the B button.
You just fired an arrow. :D In this configuration, the left hand could give you more precise aiming with the control stick. But you could hold the remote controller either vertical or horizontal to get different types of arrow spin and arc.
Ryan/ You must have been on your period or something because this argument started because someone said that Nintendo innovated with the d-pad and you said they didn't and now you say they did. Nintendo did invent the d-pad, like it or not.
"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."
Okay, so as a toy it was a success, but if you compare it to any video game system in history it was a complete failure. Except maybe if you compared it to the Virtual Boy. I'm sorry Ryan but that logic is absurd, it is a video game system and it is a part of the video game market and in that market it is a failure. I agree that it was still made for years, shit you can buy those plug and play systems now for 20 bucks that have Atari, Intellivision, etc. People would buy them for nostalgia or what have you, but in this industry the Intellivision was not a success as a home video game console.
"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?"
1.) it wasn't already done, because the Intellivision used an unmarked disk. Not a d-pad. The d-pad was better because it's easier to use, more comfortable, easier to pick up and play and, regardless of your opinion, was a revolution for the industry. Everyone and their dog adopted Nintendo's d-pad.
2.) Companies do not think that way, they do their best to create something original that sets them apart while still retaining functionality. Sega's d-pads always looked different, in fact they look like a cross between a disk and a d-pad, sony opted for d-pad that is a collection of four individual buttons, the worst design of the d-pad i've ever seen. Second only to the GC's ultra tiny pad which you cant really use as a full d-pad.. more like extra buttons (for my giant hands anyway). But the point is, as you said, they chose the d-pad design because it's better, not because they wanted to associate their system with Nintendo's. That logic is completely destroyed when looking at current or next gen consoles. Nintendo isn't king, and yet everyone is still using a d-pad.
"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."
Hahaha :D come on, using that logic makes every controller on the market a rip off of the arcade stick and the roller ball. It's not just the tech inside the controller, it's how the player interacts with it, that's where leaps and innovation is made. The technology to give us that level of interaction is a reaction. It starts on a drawing board with ideas of how it should look for comfort and interactivity, once that's settled on it's sent to a different group to figure out how to build the actual controller using existing technology and sometimes inventing new technology. In this case, Nintendo went through R&D and decided that a directional pad would be best, and the entire world agreed.
'If you cracked open a NES, you'd be looking at a N64' = No. Same tech, yes, but used in totally different ways with an overall boost in performance and updated versions of the same hardware and some totally new hardware. The same can be said about the d-pad Vs. Intellivision's disk.
"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."
You yourself said that the d-pad was an necessary evolution. If Nintendo made the NES with a disk instead, and Sega made the d-pad - We would be having a Sega Vs. Intellivision debate. That OMG CROSS design, is what makes a d-pad a d-pad, and it what makes it so innovative over the disk design. It was an evolution, and Nintendo founded it. In evolutionary terms, the disk on the intellivision is the is a mutant gene, the d-pad is the refined gene found in all DNA. *makes lab coat sounds and points at chalk boards*
"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."
Again, with your logic, every car would be a rip off of the first car ever made. What you're saying is that the Model T is the same as a 57 Chevy and ignoring the fact that it's much improved vehicle.
"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 agree for the most part and I happen to like the c-buttons alot more than a second stick (PD :D) but games like Pikmin and Luigi's Mansion could not have been done without two sticks. I think Sony wanted to make their controller seem better saying "we have two instead of one!" while most developers use the second stick for changing camera and little else, most of the time the same functions could have been applied to 4 c-buttons (which is basically a d-pad) anyway.
"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."
Intellivision disk:
A round unmarked disk with no tactile impression of direction. Controller could be held 4 different ways depending on the game with no idea of what is "up" until you pressed the correct corresponding direction on the pad to cause the appropriate movement. Lack of any marks or tactile feedback to the user meant that you didn't know where down was until you character moved down or you had to look at the controller.
Nintendo d-pad:
A cross shaped button with 4 main directions, used in conjunction with eachother could perform 4 diagonal directions with a total of 8 directions. Tactile feedback of pad design allowed users to feel what direction they are going.
Outcome - Intellivision disk is not a directional pad as much as it is a 'movement' pad as no actual directions are made apparent on the disk to the user.
"You have made this more than I intended."
Bullshit, you knew exactly what you were doing and now you're getting your ass handed to you. :D
"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."
And what might that be? Using your thumbs? No, that was done before Intellivision. Having a phone pad? Nope, before Intellivision too... what could you mean? Oh! Creating another failed input device for video games, yes! oh, but it wasn't the first at that either. :D
"If you measure it against the NES, it's a failure. Then again, would not the N64 also be a failure?"
No, because according to Nintendo the N64 sold more consoles in the same amount of time. To date, the NES wins... over every console in existence, but in a 5 year span, the N64 outsells the NES. This is because more people play video games now in America than in 1984.
"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."
Okay, if we remove the Intellivision from the video game industry and put in the toy industry, it's a success. put it in the video games market, and it's a total failure. Understood.