-----------------
Found it to be oddly accurate.
FUCK objectivity, this guy is an asshole.
Phil Harrison, aka Captain WANKER of the 46th Sony Bastard Legion just claimed that Sony, yes Sony, invented 3D with Playstation.
And not only that, but the cocky little shit suggested that Nintendo might have stolen the idea from them, if you apply the same logic when you say Sony ripped off Nintendo!
[LEFT][quote][SIZE=2]When we brought the PlayStation to the market in 1994, we introduced real-time 3D graphics for the first time. When Nintendo launched its N64 in 1996 it also had 3D graphics, did we say, "Nintendo stole our idea?" Of course not.[/SIZE]
Scumbag, scumbag, scumbag.[/LEFT]
What the hell...
PSX's 3D was far from mind-blowing but I really don't think they INVENTED anything with it. Where's all this coming from?
Nintendo didn't invent motion detection technology either, yet Nintendo is accusing Sony of copying them. And he's clearly just talking about consoles, and seeing as the PSX was the first console with any reasonably good real time 3-D graphics, there isn't much fallacy in the quote.
Heck, he's taking a much better attitude than Nintendo, and you're not helping Nintendo's case, Speedfreak... :P
lol what a fag
Game miestro... wtf are you talking about.
Yes we know they didn't invent the motion sensor but they're implementing it in a major console for the first time. They're using what's there in a completely new different way, thus innovative. I mean, how come sony didn't release anything about it's controller being motion sensative and only did MONTHS after the Wii announced it's controller?
I'm not saying that Sony did not copy Nintendo, in fact, common sense would say they did. But to say that Nintendo's next console just happened to be in 3-D is a little absurd.
He also believes the PS3 makes PCs obsolete.
""We believe that the PS3 will be the place where our users play games, watch films, browse the Web, and use other [PC] functions," said Harrison. "The PlayStation 3 is a computer. We do not need the PC.""
He's an idiot. Plain and simple.
[quote=GameMiestro]Nintendo didn't invent motion detection technology either, yet Nintendo is accusing Sony of copying them. And he's clearly just talking about consoles, and seeing as the PSX was the first console with any reasonably good real time 3-D graphics, there isn't much fallacy in the quote.
Heck, he's taking a much better attitude than Nintendo, and you're not helping Nintendo's case, Speedfreak... :P
Nintendo invent hardly anything, and they don't claim to. Nintendo take existing, proven technology and use it in a new and interesting way. Motion-sensors have never before been used in the way the Wiimote uses them, but they've existed for a very long time.
Nintendo are saying Sony copied their use of their technology, not the technology itself.
Sony, on the other hand, not only claim to invent technology they didn't, but also claim the company that revolutionalised the way that technology was used since ripped them off. They're a total joke.
[quote]When we brought the PlayStation to the market in 1994, we introduced real-time 3D graphics for the first time.
This could be interpreted as:
A. The first time Sony ever used real-time 3D graphics in consoles (true)
B. The first time true real-time 3-D graphics were ever used in consoles (also true)
C. The first time real-time 3-D graphics were ever used (not true).
2 times out of 3, Sony wins.
[quote]When Nintendo launched its N64 in 1996 it also had 3D graphics, did we say, "Nintendo stole our idea?" Of course not.
Taken literally, that statement is completely true. It may be hard to admit it, but if the Playstation was never released, it probably would have taken Nintendo much longer to start making 3-D consoles. I'm not going to say they outright copied Sony, and niether does Mr. Harrison, but I believe there was quite a bit of influence there. If you think that Sony copied the Wii remote's technology, it makes you look pretty dumb to disagree with this statement... :cookie:
I do disagree. 3D consoles were inevitable. And every time there was a console, Nintendo had the lead in graphics. Whether Sony "invented" 3D or not, it was coming. Nintendo 64 only came out shortly after PS1, and I doubt the graphics would've been much worse had the PS1 not come out.
[quote=GameMiestro]This could be interpreted as:
A. The first time Sony ever used real-time 3D graphics in consoles (true)
B. The first time true real-time 3-D graphics were ever used in consoles (also true)
C. The first time real-time 3-D graphics were ever used (not true).
2 times out of 3, Sony wins.
Taken literally, that statement is completely true. It may be hard to admit it, but if the Playstation was never released, it probably would have taken Nintendo much longer to start making 3-D consoles. I'm not going to say they outright copied Sony, and niether does Mr. Harrison, but I believe there was quite a bit of influence there. If you think that Sony copied the Wii remote's technology, it makes you look pretty dumb to disagree with this statement... :cookie:
It's either Sony telling the truth and making an irrelevent, nonsenical statement or Sony making a direct comparison and lying through their teeth.
Given their history, which is more likely?
And furthermore, B is also untrue. Sega Saturn was released before PlayStation, and 3D graphics were done way before either of them. If you really want to talk about true 3D then the N64 was the first to do it, with a seperate graphics chip capable of many advanced effects, way more than just texturing and lighting polygons.
Making an irrelevant, nonsensical lie seems to be more likely.
Jesus christ now I actually think sony's doing everything possible to **** people off.
-----------------
Found it to be oddly accurate.
Oh really, so Sony invented real-time 3D Graphics? I guess the Saturn, 3DO, Jaguar, SNES, and the high number of 3D arcade games that came out before the PS were a result of jumping forward in time to steal technology.
I wonder how many times the word "scum" would be uttered about this guy if Reprisal still posted here.
I have a wonderful point to make.
sooo ps3 is gonna support aol messanger and allow me to view porn sites on it? it will NEVER make a pc obsolete. 2 months after its release, a new video card will hit the market and make the ps3 look like a gameboy. this phil harrison guy needs to pull his head out of his ***
Sony's ghey. [Plain and Simple.] :D
I don't see what big deal is , al gore said he invented the internet. Phil Harrison used an excellent business strat imo.
everyone forgot about stunt race fx and star fox for the snes. those were "3d" long before the psx and n64 came along. remember the Super FX chip?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_FX
All of you guys forgot about the Nintendo Virtual Boy... (probably because nobody has heard of it) but anyway...it was the first (real) 3D console. Nintendo went all out to try something unique but...no one really bought it.
Yes, its monochromatic...but still it's 3D.
It isn't 3d in terms of using polygons, it's 3d in terms of it seems to pop out.
GUYS! As juliebriggs and Pit said, there were 3D games for the SNES before the Playstation. How can you keep ignoring that point?
nintendo has been pushing 3D before sony even released a system. wheres this dude get off claiming that sony "invented 3d".
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v713/zen3/rehosted/spike-vectrex.png[/IMG]
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vectrex]Vectrex[/url] for the win!
Pong was 3-D, you always just saw it from the top.
[quote=Sean the Wicked]I have a wonderful point to make.
[IMG]http://img335.imageshack.us/img335/2200/cloudstrifefieldmodel5ra.jpg[/IMG][IMG]http://img335.imageshack.us/img335/4721/mario64dirediredocks8un.png[/IMG]
...go on then, because I don't see a point yet.
[quote=Speedfreak]...go on then, because I don't see a point yet.
His point was that Sony's 3-D looked like crap compared to Nintendo's :cookie:
If claiming to invent 3D gaming is such a brilliant business strategy for sony, then why doesn't Nintendo just claim to have invented the video game in the first place? They started around that time, after all.
Showing a shot of Ocarina of Time Link next to Cloud would have made for a better comparison.
I honestly dont care about this whole LOL PS1 WASNT REAL 3D ****. It was 3d enough to me. And besides, its not like any of this really matters anyway.
Oh yeah, there were plenty of true 3D games on the ps1. The main problem is that there was maybe one that was any fun. In any event, I believe games like Star Fox and Virtua Fighter, and later Super Mario 64 and Zelda: Ocarina of Time, of course, pioneered the way for the 3D gaming we have today far greater than any game you could name that even touched sony's console during that generation.
are you saying that jumping flash wasnt good? lol
[quote=Prince Shondronai]Oh yeah, there were plenty of true 3D games on the ps1. The main problem is that there was maybe one that was any fun. In any event, I believe games like Star Fox and Virtua Fighter, and later Super Mario 64 and Zelda: Ocarina of Time, of course, pioneered the way for the 3D gaming we have today far greater than any game you could name that even touched sony's console during that generation.
Come to think of it, pretty much every significant game on that system that springs to mind either uses a lot of pre-rendering (FF, Resident Evil) or is relatively 2D gameplay-wise (Metal Gear Solid).
Well, there was Tomb Raider, but that's pretty much a slow and fiddly version of Mario. With a D-Pad.
[quote=Speedfreak]Well, there was Tomb Raider, but that's pretty much a slow and fiddly version of Mario. With a D-Pad.
Not really, lol. I'm not sure what you mean by "2-D" gameplay when it comes to MGS- but I guess I see where you're coming from if you apply it to games like Crash Bandicoot (which was significant).
Right, but if you're talking about influence on today's 3D gaming as opposed to just who got there first, it's relevant.
atari had battlezone too. one of the first 3d games
Not one of. Battlezone was THE first 3D game.
Oh hey, guess what? The PlayStation was Nintendo's idea in the first place.
The idiot has some rather interesting things to say about their controllers, too.
"The difference between our strategy and that of our competition is that our controller is still similar to the Dual Shock, the industry standard controller. I estimate that nearly 400 million Dual Shock controllers have been sold worldwide."
He reckons every single person that ever owned a PS1 or PS2 on average bought 2 controllers for each, and then if the system failed they bought 2 more. Otherwise there's no way in hell they could sell that many controllers. Playstation isn't a multiplayer system.
And what's this? Dual Shock is an indsutry standard? I think you'll find it's a ripoff of a certain other industry standard, the SNES pad. Then combined with another industry standard, the analog stick, as an afterthought.
Oh, come on. You can't honestly say that the Xbox controller wasn't based off the Dual Shock. I'll give him that, even if it was all based on Nintendo's ideas. They're the ones that have brought it to the fore.
I know I have both a PS1 and PS2, and have two controllers for each. What's your point? :)
[quote=Wings]Oh, come on. You can't honestly say that the Xbox controller wasn't based off the Dual Shock. I'll give him that, even if it was all based on Nintendo's ideas. They're the ones that have brought it to the fore.
I know I have both a PS1 and PS2, and have two controllers for each. What's your point? :)
Er, actually, I can. It's got way more in common with a SNES and N64 pad than a Sony pad.
Do you also have 2 controllers for every PS1 and PS2 you replaced? He's basing the 400 million figure on 100 million PS1s and PS2s each being in peoples homes, with 2 controllers for each on average. We all know the 100 million figure is bull, mainly because it's only a shipped figure, not sold. But we also know that, of the three, Sony's consoles are the most poorly made and most often prone to failure. If 100 million PS1s and PS2s have really been sold then a good portion of them are re-buys. And if a good portion of them are rebuys, and the average amount of controllers per machine is 2, that means that people bought 2 controllers for their replacement systems too.
But this is all obviously bunk, we all know how poorly PS2 serves multiplayer needs.
sony is just ****ed at nintendo since they blew em off for phillips to make the cd attachment for the snes
Your logic is flawed. Get data on how many people bought the Multi Tap, and how many people lost/broke controllers, not consoles. You're just straining to link the unreliability of the console to this and further discredit Sony.
Yes, he's probably quote non-existent figures. But your reasoning is wrong. :)