News Nintendo sues Palworld developers Pocketpair for patent infringement

[newtechldtech]

not mastered 3D, wii needed the motion plus
DS was nice HW but not gorundbreaking
N64 was great machine , codeveloped with Silicon Graphics y Rambus Inc., lack of texture and cartridge were it demise. GC the dumb minidisc hurt it.
PS1 won by the small cost to publish in CD, many developers took risks, you can´t have that with cartridge also when you know first party games take the big chunk of the market. in the end 33 Million are a great number for consoles sold for N64, but the PS1 was the consoles for the masses, to have 10 CD games or a couple of cartridges?

lack lack lack ? compare it against its generation ! no one came NEAR THEM.

 

[TheHerald]

Although I was a Playstation fan back in the day, Nintendo games just aged better. Much, much better. A vast majority of their nes, snes and n64 era (of course GameCube too) are still very playable and very enjoyable. Can't say the same about ps1 games.

And ofc the switch is awesome

 

[jasonf2]

Hardware are lacking ? I dont care about performance , they were the FIRST to master 3D controllers and smooth 3D movement.

they were the best who master virtual controllers in their Wii System . it was so accurate and fun that no other could match it ...

Nintendo 3DS , DS , and the dual screen and fun games that used even blowing on the mic to play ??

N64 was a great leap , Wii as well , The N64 was the first TRUE 3D gaming system , but they made the mistake no going to CD .. and that gave PS1 the edge over them , not in terms of game play , no in terms of cut scenes and voice inside games that I never cared about really...

Consoles developed as a product for the masses. That required(s) that the product be priced in the reach of the average joe. Nintendo tries to keep to the bottom with that and really performance wise quit competing somewhere in the N64 era. The N64 was the apex of the cartridge. We can argue that they made a mistake going that way, but anyone from that era that actually used one saw it a little differently. Cartridges didn't scratch and loaded pretty instantly. Discs, short of RPGs, back then were terrible. And computers were so unreliable as gaming machines that when you bought a game it was 50/50 if it worked right without crashing, assuming you had hardware that could game at all. Lets be real, the GameCube was everything terrible about cd and cartridge (slow load and small storage.) and Nintendo never competed for the high performance space again. Their innovative controller refresh saved the company with the WII, and switch continued the innovation at low performance but really their biggest magic has always been the IP. Virtually everything "Nintendo" is exclusive. People buy the latest Nintendo console to play Zelda or Mario kart. If Nintendo didn't have the very broad reach of Mario, Zelda, Pokémon and had to play on performance to price alone they would have been gone long ago. Nintendo is a software company that sells consoles that are based on last gen processors. It is why they are going to sue you if you put together an emulator to play IP developed for a console that hasn't been in production for 20 years, or you make the fool mistake of making a game too close to something they made for the Gameboy.

 

[ivan_vy]

lack lack lack ? compare it against its generation ! no one came NEAR THEM.

PS2 put DVD on every machine and analog buttons, PS3 Blu-ray, Xbox Kinect, PS4 touchpad in every controller and VR, Xbox made cloudgaming usable, PS5 dualsense is really good...but yeah, Nintendo is the only one innovating.

 

[jasonf2]

PS2 put DVD on every machine and analog buttons, PS3 Blu-ray, Xbox Kinect, PS4 touchpad in every controller and VR, Xbox made cloudgaming usable, PS5 dualsense is really good...but yeah, Nintendo is the only one innovating.

Nintendo isn't playing in the same space as Sony and Microsoft are. Microsoft and Sony are basically battling each other with the same console over volume of sales. All they can do is evolutionary tweaking because they are completely dependent on external game developers (which absolutely do not want the xbox and playstation to be radically different from each other) . Nintendo lost their place in the high performance console space with the Gamecube. Their niche is the innovative controller and console space and their uniquely close held IP let them integrate hail mary changes into the product.
The PS1 with the CD was innovative. DVD, Blu-ray, HDD and SSD were not in following iterations. They were just obvious evolutionary steps solving storage problems for game developers. Controllers for the big two have had some minor tweaks, but the fanboys are so fixed on the designs that when radical changes are even hinted at, focus groups throw them out before they make it to market. Cloud gaming is nothing new, bandwidth and latency have just kind of caught up with it, and it still isn't really that great. I have to give VR to Nintendo first, not Sony, although a flop (look up Nintendo Virtual Boy) due to processing power of the time. Xbox Kinect was innovative, but also was a swing and a miss and when Microsoft cuts its losses they just kill the product entirely. Nintendo's real magic is that they have been able to find the innovation in the console space that actually connects with the casual gamer and they have kept their consoles cheaper-ish.

 

[UnforcedERROR]

The PS1 with the CD was innovative. DVD, Blu-ray, HDD and SSD were not in following iterations.

DVD popularity grew as a result of the PS2's built-in playback capability, and Blu-ray became the dominant format over HD-DVD because of Sony's push for use. Maybe not "innovative," but certainly culturally relevant.

I have to give VR to Nintendo first, not Sony, although a flop (look up Nintendo Virtual Boy) due to processing power of the time.

The Virtual Boy was VR in name only. It was stereoscopic 3D, but not actually VR by the standards to which you would judge it today. The tech is more akin to the 3DS or the NVidia 3D monitors from the end of the 2000s.

but the fanboys are so fixed on the designs

I would be careful to avoid this terminology, it's clear you are in similar territory as those you're attempting to disparage.

 

[Eximo]

Ah the virtual boy. I recall one of the titles I had for it was Bomberman, a distinctly 2D game type. But it was also not Bomberman, it was Bomberman themed Tetris/Bejeweled sort of thing. The 3D elements were all pointless. (3D Tetris was also one of the available titles)
4/14 titles the day we got it. Never picked up another game. I wonder why it wasn't successful!

It just wasn't powerful enough for any decent 3D gameplay and most of the titles were 2D style games with an added forced, and usually fixed, perspective. It was silly.

 

[ivan_vy]

they are completely dependent on external game developers (which absolutely do not want the xbox and playstation to be radically different from each other) .

Sony has 21 major first-party development studios, PC gaming clamoring for Playstation first party studios games to come to PC, I have not see the same for Nintendo except for Pokemon (Palword scratching that itch), and Zelda.
https://www.pushsquare.com/guides/p...t-party-developers-and-what-theyre-working-on

 

[logainofhades]

Microsoft owns Bethesda and Activision Blizzard now too.

 

[jasonf2]

DVD popularity grew as a result of the PS2's built-in playback capability, and Blu-ray became the dominant format over HD-DVD because of Sony's push for use. Maybe not "innovative," but certainly culturally relevant.

DVDs were already established as the successor to VHS by the time that the PS2 came into play ( I had one before my PS2.). Sony using the format for the PS2 just sweetened the deal and helped Sony (Colombia) sell DVDs too.

The Virtual Boy was VR in name only. It was stereoscopic 3D, but not actually VR by the standards to which you would judge it today. The tech is more akin to the 3DS or the NVidia 3D monitors from the end of the 2000s.

Agreed. The Virtual boy was terrible. The processing power and tech of the time had no chance to produce anything on par with what we have today. However it was to my knowledge the first attempt from a major console maker to market in the VR space.

I would be careful to avoid this terminology, it's clear you are in similar territory as those you're attempting to disparage.

I actually own a Xbox series x, PS5, switch and PC. I don't honestly really like the switch that much but I do like playing Mario kart with my kids. I am pretty much in the middle when it comes to consoles honestly.

 

[jasonf2]

Sony has 21 major first-party development studios, PC gaming clamoring for Playstation first party studios games to come to PC, I have not see the same for Nintendo except for Pokemon (Palword scratching that itch), and Zelda.
https://www.pushsquare.com/guides/p...t-party-developers-and-what-theyre-working-on

The mergers and acquisitions of gaming developers has left ownership of most older big names being held in portfolios of only about seven companies today. Of them Sony (Number 1) and Microsoft (Number 3) are high on the list of ownership. Nintendo is still 4 on the list according to Wikipedia, which arguably is a poor source, but easy enough. The part not so easy to separate out though is that while Sony and Microsoft each both own a huge portfolio of studios, a large chunk of it is not exclusive to their perspective brand whereas Nintendo is pretty much there. Because so many of these companies in the portfolios are acquisitions (that were originally independent) portfolio ownership removes context of how the independent developers started out and the fact that the acquisitions were strategic purchases to block exclusivity issues (or create them). This again points to Sony's and Microsoft's dependence on independent game developers for their consoles, or at least they were before they bought all of them. Nintendo's choice to run on slower hardware and different controllers left them in a position where backporting for these developers was costly to develop and not as pretty. This left them out of many (not all) of the AAA titles over the last number of years. The casual element of their systems also required development of games like Wii sports, which with over 82 million copies sold is one of the most successful video games of all time, even though a lot of us don't really even remember its name. Nintendo's portfolio is full of such titles.