Are Multi-taps Becoming Extinct?

[Ascending Wordsmith]

Without a doubt, Saturn Bomberman is the greatest party game ever made. So many people could play it simultaneously, that you needed TWO multi-taps to accomodate all the players! Hudson Soft was kind enough to produce Bomberman multi-taps and special, matching controllers.

At one point in time, there were only two controller ports in each console. If a game could be played by three or more people, somebody would have to bring along a multi-tap so everybody could get in on the action. I think it was the Nintendo 64 that was the first console to be produced with four controller ports. (Goldeneye and Mario Party are a blast!). Shortly after, the Dreamcast was created and it too featured four ports. The XBox and Gamecube followed suit by incorporating quad ports on their systems. Only the Playstation 2 retained a pair of controller ports. Three or four player games require the PS2 multi-tap.

With consoles doubling up the controller ports on consoles that feature online gameplay, is the multi-tap a thing of the past?

[bargora]

You mean, will Sony lose enough ground to Nintendo and Microsoft that it feels compelled to release PS3 with four ports, rather than sticking it to the consumer to buy a $35 add-on?

[MarkM2112]

Actualy, I think the first console to have 4 ports was the Atari 5200...

[bargora]

And the Atari 2600 paddle controllers came in pairs connected to a single input, so many (most?) paddle games supported a four-player mode (Warlords rocks the house). But we nitpick.

[Ascending Wordsmith]

And the Atari 2600 paddle controllers came in pairs connected to a single input, so many (most?) paddle games supported a four-player mode (Warlords rocks the house). But we nitpick.

That's the one I forgot.

Anyway, is there a reason why Sony didn't follow the four port trend?

[bargora]

And the Atari 2600 paddle controllers came in pairs connected to a single input, so many (most?) paddle games supported a four-player mode (Warlords rocks the house). But we nitpick.

That's the one I forgot.

Anyway, is there a reason why Sony didn't follow the four port trend?

I thought it was to reduce the hardware cost so that at the initial $299.00 price Sony would lose less money per unit sold, and also because they thought they could "get away with it", which they seem to have done. Having 2 ports didn't cripple PS2 sales, and having 4 ports didn't save the Dreamcast.

If GCN or Xbox required separate multitaps, though, I'd bet there'd be loud complaints, and I imagine that's the last thing you want when you're trying to overtake the leader.

[kainemaxwell]

I just found my old SNES Super Multitap when I was reorganizing my room.

Maybe cause Sony wanted players to buy more their items, being the Multi-tap and controllers.

[CrazyImpmon]

And the Atari 2600 paddle controllers came in pairs connected to a single input, so many (most?) paddle games supported a four-player mode (Warlords rocks the house). But we nitpick.

I think there was something a few years earlier that had 4 players support. A pong clone but I'll have to dig through my personal "landfill" to find it.

Anyway it does seems like multiplayer is becoming a standard nowday and if a console doesn't have at least 4 ports or a multitap, it's probably more than 10 years old.

PS another case of Nintendo stealing the spotlight, they once claimed N64 was the first console to use analog joystick, completely oblivious to the fact Atari 5200 was out almost 15 years earlier! So Nintendo stole Atari's claims a few more times.

[YoshiM]

Anyway, is there a reason why Sony didn't follow the four port trend?

I think the reason stemmed from its backward compatibility. In order to be that compatible with PSX games, they could not go with 4 ports. That's what I heard anyway and I can't find a straight answer on the validity of that info.

Besides, it's a way to get more money by selling the taps.