Are we a bunch of Sony haters?

Sony also brought gaming out of the closet, so to speak. After five years of PlayStation, gaming was no longer geek-only. This did more than simply grow the industry (which it did), also changing the sort of games that are made.

Sony's also created more, better new franchises than Nintendo or Microsoft in the same period (to be fair, Microsoft is five years late). Gran Turismo had huge impacts on more than just gaming, but even the automotive industry (I saw a RC Skyline car at a toy store yesterday--yet who in the US knew of Skylines before Gran Turismo [no one]).

If you want to count stupid little innovations, you can also credit Sony for popularizing the Link Cable and dual analog sticks. And while they weren't the first to do disc media, they were the first to do it successfully, guaranteeing future consoles would do the same. Sony also changed the way first parties work with third parties.

Microsoft has done good stuff with their online, but the overall impact isn't as massive as what Sony's done, not even close--I remember pointing out a year or so ago that Gran Turismo 3 alone was more played than all of Xbox Live.

Ironically it was the success of Virtua Fighter in the arcades that made them push for 3d at home, at least according to that Kutaragi/Sony book(I forget the name).

I liked the early PS1 first-party releases. While not on Sega or Nintendo's levels, were still damn good at the time. No futuristic racer was quite like Wipeout, Warhawk was a massive improvement over similar games before it, Twisted Metal was innovative, Jumping Flash was a big step for 3d platformers(especially on console; I'm aware of Alpha Waves and Geograph Seal). Sure, these were done by developers Sony bought or contracted but it's not like Nintendo and Sega hadn't done that before. The PS2 and PS3 had weaker beginnings.

I'm glad the PS3 is so unappealing right now. Not because it's Sony but because there's already too much stuff to buy. I don't feel bad about not owning a PS3 because it's so not worth it at this stage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kedawa

Up until the mid 90s, the console industry followed the arcade's lead, and there were 3D arcade games out well before the PS1 that were fully texture mapped with 60Hz frame rates.

Sony may have anticipated the shift to 3D, but they were certainly not behind it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by outRider

Sony did do one thing right (or wrong, if you're one of those people that still complains about the "death of 2D gaming"): the PS1. It basically kick started the consumer 3D hardware industry.

---

Arcade and workstation hardware at the time was a lot more expensive than consumer hardware (at least 10x, probably upwards of 20-50x), and it still didn't do everything the PS1 GPU did, nor did it do everything in hardware. Sony did the 3 most important things in polygon-based 3D visualization (drawing and texturing, depth sorting, and T&L) at the same time, completely in hardware, at a consumer price.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

Ironically it was the success of Virtua Fighter in the arcades that made them push for 3d at home, at least according to that Kutaragi/Sony book(I forget the name).

I liked the early PS1 first-party releases. While not on Sega or Nintendo's levels, were still damn good at the time. No futuristic racer was quite like Wipeout, Warhawk was a massive improvement over similar games before it, Twisted Metal was innovative, Jumping Flash was a big step for 3d platformers(especially on console; I'm aware of Alpha Waves and Geograph Seal). Sure, these were done by developers Sony bought or contracted but it's not like Nintendo and Sega hadn't done that before. The PS2 and PS3 had weaker beginnings.

.

---

I remember this time period as well. Going from the Yoshi Island and the rest of the great SNES stuff to the PS1 was amazing. I remember going to a toy store with friends just to play Toshinden before the thing was released. Good times!

Once I finally got a PS1 with Wipeout, Tekken and Destruction Derby, I was HOOKED. My non-gamer friends were hooked as well. Sure the games look horrible now, but it was all new tech then.

While I agree that Sony got REALLY fucking lucky with the PS1, I cannot deny them their accomplishments. The PS1 truly brought gaming to the masses.

The PS2 and PS3 don't give me the same feelings. The negatives for these systems have been repeated over and over , but I do have early fond memories of the PS1 (before mine died on me) ;) I doubt any other console will feel so "advanced" or so new quite like PS1.

Sony came up with the dual analog sticks after they saw the analog controller for the N64 much in the same vein of Sony "creating" the six-axis controller after the Wii's controls were revealed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by outRider

Nobody thought of doing 3D on that level before the PS1 came along. Sega was designing their hardware to do very basic 3D so they could mostly use it for scaling and rotation of their 2D sprites and BGs. Nintendo wasn't even talking about a new system. 3DFX wasn't in the picture. nVidia was just starting, and had some simple hardware similar to Sega's.

---

Actually Nintendo was actively researching and talking about their next system. Sony and Nintendo originally planned on co-producing a system. Their plans fell through and Sony went ahead and made their own. That's word on the street anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rico

Sony came up with the dual analog sticks after they saw the analog controller for the N64 much in the same vein of Sony "creating" the six-axis controller after the Wii's controls were revealed.

---

If you want to get technical, Sony released their dual analog sticks before Nintendo.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lightStick.jpg

One of the most important things the Playstation did was make CG FMV widespread. Some of that stuff was mindblowing back in 1995, and Nintendo couldn't put anything in a commercial that could compete with FFVII's cutscenes. I think that did alot to convince the general public that gaming contained enough wow-factor to be worth their time.

Sure it had been around before, but systems like the 3D0 didn't have enough memory to stream fullscreen video of the same calibre, and Saturn's cinepak was wretched.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J2d

Let’s just ignore the fact that Sony puts out a huge variety of games with plenty of million sellers yea.

---

Done.

Especially since that "huge variety of games" is primarily the work of third parties. Sony is the house that Square built, never forget this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

If you want to get technical, Sony released their dual analog sticks before Nintendo.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lightStick.jpg

---

Well flights sticks have been around long before but technically you're right but in terms of the actual console controller sony has always gotten its ideas from nintendo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

Actually Nintendo was actively researching and talking about their next system. Sony and Nintendo originally planned on co-producing a system. Their plans fell through and Sony went ahead and made their own. That's word on the street anyway.

---

Yeah, you're right. It looked like a combination of upgraded SNES and SegaCD, still designed to push sprites and BGs. It seemed like their biggest concern at the time was reducing load time off CDs. We're probably better off that Sony went their own way.

Probably right, but it's not like Nintendo wasn't thinking about the future. Not to mention, as previously already mentioned, the PC market heading in that direction anyway.

I don't hate Sony, (or Microsoft for that matter), I just feel more ‘at home with' with Nintendo. Under different circumstances I possibly could have just as easily been a Sony or MS fan, although I'm still a little sceptical about this claim.
When all is said and done I recommended a 360 over Wii to two of my friends. They asked me about Sony, and I told them flat out what I knew about the system. They knew why I chose not to mention PS3. They didn't know much about video games. not that I'm an expert, but I knew more than they did.
I'm also still enjoying playing my PS2 BTW.

Why would you be skeptical about your own claim?

Well I guess what I meant to say is that I really can't say whether or not the Big N would be able sway me, even if I grew up at a different time, or under certain circumstances. It's difficult to distinguish to what degree certain aspects about the products have kept me a big fan of Nintendo since the NES. Great games, nostalgia, being a huge Mario fan, even a kind of 'loyalty' plays a small part.
The thing is, I respect others who just as loyal to Sony or MS. I really don't give a shit. Never did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StriderKyo

One of the most important things the Playstation did was make CG FMV widespread.

---

So now they killed 2D and removed gameplay for the sake of stupid ass pre-rendered movies. God damn I am loving them more and more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J2d

How does one go on to argue that Sly cooper and God of War is the “extent of Sony’s useful franchises”? It’s such a ridiculous statement that could only fly here. Let’s just ignore the fact that Sony puts out a huge variety of games with plenty of million sellers yea.

---

So you equate sales with quality? Name some of these mythical great Sony games. I'm sure they're at least as worthy as naming the Eye Toy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master of 7s

Done.

Especially since that "huge variety of games" is primarily the work of third parties. Sony is the house that Square built, never forget this.

---

I think it's worth noting that Gran Turismo has outsold every Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Metal Gear, Grand Theft Auto, Madden, Zelda and Halo game.

Crash Bandicoot also outsold every franchise on PS1 other than Final Fantasy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rico

Sony came up with the dual analog sticks after they saw the analog controller for the N64 much in the same vein of Sony "creating" the six-axis controller after the Wii's controls were revealed.

---

So what? Analog controllers had been around before Nintendo as well. Dual analog was still an important step forward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RDM Brian

In terms of price, a lot of you keep spewing $600 this $600 that. A lot of people have spent as much if not more to match feature for feature that of the PS3.

---

No. A lot of us arn't that fucking retarded.

Quote:

---

I am not arguing that you like or dont like the games the 360 has, or that the PS3 has the number and quality of games as the 360 has, but many of you have spent just that much.

---

You realize that you just made everyone's point right? Why would anyone plunk down $500 or $600 bones on something with no games anyone here really wants to play?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RDM Brian

In terms of price, a lot of you keep spewing $600 this $600 that. A lot of people have spent as much if not more to match feature for feature that of the PS3.

---

A lot more haven't.

And I would rather have the option to opt out of a feature I might not use and pay less than be forced to pay for it up front whether I want it or not. If someone with an Xbox 360 decides they want HD movies, they have the option to upgrade, but if someone with a PS3 decides they don't want HD movies they have to pay for it anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

Actually Nintendo was actively researching and talking about their next system. Sony and Nintendo originally planned on co-producing a system. Their plans fell through and Sony went ahead and made their own. That's word on the street anyway.

---

Sega and Sony were one step away from joining to make a console, and this was before Nintendo ever entered the picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

So you equate sales with quality? Name some of these mythical great Sony games. I'm sure they're at least as worthy as naming the Eye Toy.

---

Word. Shadow the Hedgehog's million copies sold say hi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkRyan

Gran Turismo had huge impacts on more than just gaming, but even the automotive industry (I saw a RC Skyline car at a toy store yesterday--yet who in the US knew of Skylines before Gran Turismo [no one]).

---

I did, and I'm sure many others did as well. And I'd wager most of the gay Honda drivers who rice out their cars and worship some lame overpriced Nissan (zomg, it's fast and unavailable in the US, therefore it's cool) as a direct result of Gran Turismo can die in a fire and we'd all be better off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

So you equate sales with quality? Name some of these mythical great Sony games. I'm sure they're at least as worthy as naming the Eye Toy.

---

Shadow of the Colossus was good. I'm not a huge fan of Ico but people seem to like that as well.

Really I just want another Jumping Flash. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Really I just want another Jumping Flash. :(

---

fer reel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StriderKyo

I think it's worth noting that Gran Turismo has outsold every Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Metal Gear, Grand Theft Auto, Madden, Zelda and Halo game.

Crash Bandicoot also outsold every franchise on PS1 other than Final Fantasy.

---

File that shit under sales don't equate to quality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew

Probably right, but it's not like Nintendo wasn't thinking about the future. Not to mention, as previously already mentioned, the PC market heading in that direction anyway.

---

Yes, what I should have said was that Nintendo wasn't thinking about their eventual next system, the N64, they were thinking yet another 2D machine with maybe some basic 3D thrown in, not unlike the Saturn. The PC market wasn't heading that way either, it didn't even exist. Sony kicked off consumer 3D video games, and if they hadn't we'd be years behind today, no doubt about it in my mind, for reasons already mentioned.

I'm just not buying that argument. Sega didn't learn of the PlayStation's 3D intent then go and develop games like Panzer Dragoon from the ground up and have them ready for launch. Clearly the Saturn was intended to do 3D all along. I also don't believe that Sega didn't intend to port Daytona and Virtua Fighter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by outRider

The PC market wasn't heading that way either

---

PC gaming was definitely heading 3d regardless of the console market. Games like Doom and Descent were the big things at the time. Even though Doom used sprites, it was still a huge deal for mainstreamizing 3d perspective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

PC gaming was definitely heading 3d regardless of the console market. Games like Doom and Descent were the big things at the time. Even though Doom used sprites, it was still a huge deal for mainstreamizing 3d perspective.

---

Flight and space sims were big deals at the time, too.

I'm talking hardware here. I didn't say Sony invented 3D games or even 3D hardware, I said they did affordable consumer 3D hardware first, ahead of anybody. Yes Wolfenstein and Doom and Hard Drivin' exisited, but 3DFX and Nvidia were nowhere in sight in 1994. Sega and Nintendo weren't thinking about dedicated 3D for their consoles, and Sega was using Model-1 and Model-2 hardware cost 10s of thousands of dollars and didn't even do everything in hardware, despite the crazy price. Like I said before, it wasn't until 99 that Nvidia finally brought out the Geforce and did everything that the PS1 did, even though by then it did some things a lot better.

And 3D on the Saturn was definitely an after-thought. It didn't even draw triangles, it drew quads (squares), primarily so they could use it to draw scaled and rotated sprites head on. It had dedicated hardware for drawing multiple BGs, but not for transforms or lighting or shading or blending. At best they expected 3D to be an abberation. After they got wind of the PS1 Sega added an extra processor and DSP to try to replicate what Sony's GPU did, and we all know how that turned out.

Credit where credit is due, the PS1 shook things up huge.

Also, just want to add that Sony really didn't develop any good games.

Syphon Filter? - First one was better than the next installments.
NFL Gameday? - that series was terrible.
The games that did really well were not in-house games, but rather third party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Compass

I did, and I'm sure many others did as well.

---

No doubt about it, the popularization of the Skyline--and probably Nissan's decision to bring it Stateside--was heavily influenced by the popularity of Gran Turismo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Advocate

Also, just want to add that Sony really didn't develop any good games.

---

Syphon Filter's pretty good, especially when it came out. Gran Turismo is excellent. Crash Bandicoot 2 and 3 are both very good (I personally think Crash Team Racing beats any of the modern Mario Karts). NFL GameDay was way ahead of Madden by '97--the first 3D football game and actually pushed the genre forward with other innovations. There's also Twisted Metal 2, Jumping Flash, Ape Escape, Omega Boost, Rally Cross...not to mention their new franchises for PS2. Sony's first party has always been pretty strong--I don't think they get enough credit for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StriderKyo

I think it's worth noting that Gran Turismo has outsold every Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Metal Gear, Grand Theft Auto, Madden, Zelda and Halo game.

---

If you're using just US numbers then possibly true.

I'm not a Sony Hater. I'm a Realist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BonusKun

That wouldn't be a waste tho.

---

QFT.



As for me, I have a burning hate for Sony's video game division. They killed 2D. Booted it's ass right out the door. I will never forgive them for that.

I own a PS because I am a Bemani addict and a PS2 because it's library cannot be denied, but that's in spite of my Sony hate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

I hate them so much I bought their products.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

File that shit under sales don't equate to quality.

---

Not arguing quality, just that the Playstation wasn't built by Square. I'm pretty sure Sony releases more games a year than MS or Nintendo, and they have alot of very successful franchises like Socom or ATV Offroad - it's just that people here don't care about many of them. Sony also doesn't go out of their way to emphasize first party games in the same way the others do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bbobb

If you're using just US numbers then possibly true.

---

No, world wide. It's a Japanese game with a European name, remember.

Here: http://www.vgcharts.org/worldtotals.php

If you can come up with a better source go for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by outRider

And 3D on the Saturn was definitely an after-thought. It didn't even draw triangles, it drew quads (squares), primarily so they could use it to draw scaled and rotated sprites head on. It had dedicated hardware for drawing multiple BGs, but not for transforms or lighting or shading or blending. At best they expected 3D to be an abberation.

---

That's the best explanation for why the Saturn used four sided polys I've seen, and there was no question at the time Sega was caught somewhat flat-footed by the 3D thing - early on they were pushing games like Astal, Bug and Clockwork Knight.

But at the same time their arcade division had made the jump to 3D, and Virtua Fighter was the Saturn's flagship system-seller in Japan. It seems odd to think they weren't planning for 3D.

The PS was outstanding. It brought a great many fantastic things to gaming, really helped push 3D, made decent analog sticks standard and had four shoulder buttons, and offered an easy development home open to anyone with a push on content aimed more at my age group at the time. They did a shitload of things right and few things wrong.

The PS2 was a piece of shit from start to finish. The controller was exactly the same with one unasked for and completely useless addition (analog buttons) that were thankfully ignored after the five games that tried it out realized how pathetic it was, while not adding earlier developments of triggers and finally having a good d-pad. The system was more powerful then the DC yet still far behind the GC and Xbox while simultaneously taking Sony forever to get good development tools out the door, ensuring that the majority of games that generation would be held back in terms of both hardware and software (the outstanding efforts of KCEJ, Squaresoft, and Criterion are greatly appreciated). Even their first-party teams had a hard time doing working with the hardware; Skygunner needed a special mode to eliminate slowdown, SOTC had a bunch of issues including the undulating landscape, GT4 couldn't do HD properly, etc. They failed (and still are) to get a good unified online system working. In what should've been the Saturn of its generation, it sold on brand name alone which allowed them to snowball through.

Then the PS3 comes out and Sony is flat-out blatant about how their only goals to improve are only to copy Microsoft and that they expect to sell their system not on games but on the PS name alone. They give us a system that is powerful but can only seem to think of things by stealing them from someone else, ensuring that everything is tossed in at the last second and therefore half-assed. People debate the long-term effects of the Wiimote on games but no one gives a shit about the Sixaxis. I wonder why. At least they finally gave us triggers, although they're backwards and I'm not yet sure how I feel about that. Even Nintendo - which still doesn't have a single game on the Wii online - appears to have a better set up and more unified online structure. NINTENDO. JESUS FUCK.

So yeah. Sony did a wonderful thing with the PS but they fucked up hardcore with the PS2, and instead of fixing their mistakes with the PS3 they do the exact thing only more pronounced. That's my issue with Sony. They have a fantastic game lineup so I buy their hardware, but it has nothing to do with my faith in the hardware and everything to do with my faith in developers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

the PSX was the orginal name of the playstation. The playstation got its new nickname, PS1, after the release of the smaller playstation.

---

No it wasn't. The PSX was part of the development name IIRC, but the finished product was never, ever, the PSX. Some gaming magazines and other people referred to it as that but they were all incorrect. The PSX was a later product that was a media center.

p.s. The smaller PS is the PSOne, so I'm waiting to hear how you explain the difference when asking a store for a "PlayStation One" as opposed to a "PlayStation 1." Do you put special inflection on the number so that people understand which model you're talking about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StriderKyo

No, world wide. It's a Japanese game with a European name, remember.

Here: http://www.vgcharts.org/worldtotals.php

If you can come up with a better source go for it.

---

Hmmm interesting.

Everyone called the PlayStation the "PSX" back in the day, not just some gaming magazines. "PS" is still a weird abbreviation, and "PSone" is most commonly used now--of course, pre-1999, "PSone" didn't make sense.

Unless I'm discussing colossal failures, I usually associate the "PSX" abbreviation with the original PlayStation. If we are talking about huge mistakes, "PSX" is that big, expensive white box Sony couldn't even sell in Japan. (And Kutaragi was quoted as saying he "promises" a PS3 equivalent. That'll be brilliant and even more expensive.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkRyan

Everyone called the PlayStation the "PSX" back in the day, not just some gaming magazines.

---

Define "everyone." I didn't, no one I knew did, and no one that came into the store where I worked did.

Quote:

---

"PS" is still a weird abbreviation

---

Huh? How is "PS" wierd and "PSX" not? I'm thinking it's just because you're used to one over the other (or you're a huge Phantasy Star fan and it makes you want to kill children to see its valuable initials stolen by another company for their use and desecration, so get ready the blades).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StriderKyo

That's the best explanation for why the Saturn used four sided polys I've seen, and there was no question at the time Sega was caught somewhat flat-footed by the 3D thing - early on they were pushing games like Astal, Bug and Clockwork Knight.

But at the same time their arcade division had made the jump to 3D, and Virtua Fighter was the Saturn's flagship system-seller in Japan. It seems odd to think they weren't planning for 3D.

---

When Sega of Japan head Hayao Nakayama saw the specs for the PS1, he gathered up Hideki Sato and the Saturn hardware team and tore them new assholes, forcing them to up the console's 3D power at the last minute in order to compete. That's why the Saturn's 3D seemed so tacked on, because it was exactly that.

In my opinion, Sega should have pushed 2D more. The games you mentioned are great, and the Saturn's 3D has aged horribly. I love Burning Rangers, for example, but I can barely tolerate looking at it. Astal, on the other hand, still looks wonderful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

I was a Sega fan for well over a decade. Sony eliminated them from the hardware market without returning anything of value. I wanted the Saturn to succeed and the PS1 to fail, and now, over a decade later, I was absolutely right in hoping that. All of my suspicions about Sony have panned out. I was wrong about Microsoft, but I was dead on about Sony. I hope the PS3 fails fantastically before anything I want to play is released on it exclusively. I want Sony's wallet-flashing, innovationless bullshit out of my hobby. Microsoft has proven to have a gaming divison, not completely unlike Nintendo and Sega of 1990. Sony only has a cash cow. Thankfully, the utters are dry. Fuck Sony. And none of that has anything to do with the price tag.

---

I was and still am a Sega fan, but let's not kid ourselves. Sega has been fumbling since the days of the Genesis. The Sega CD was over-priced and poorly supported, the 32x was a piece of shit and the Saturn was barely supported in North America.

Sony just happened to take their time and come up with a solid plan for a gaming console and the 3rd party publishers. Nintendo was pissing on its 3rd party publishers and both Nintendo and Sega failed to realize that those developers benefitted from having tools to take advantage of their hardware. Now its pretty much an industry standard, for console manufacturers to provide tools to develop for those consoles.

Sure, Sony has been way to arrogant since the days of the PS2, but they've really brought the industry from just a nerd hobby, to a legit media outlet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MechDeus

Define "everyone." I didn't, no one I knew did, and no one that came into the store where I worked did.Huh? How is "PS" wierd and "PSX" not? I'm thinking it's just because you're used to one over the other (or you're a huge Phantasy Star fan and it makes you want to kill children to see its valuable initials stolen by another company for their use and desecration, so get ready the blades).

---

"PSX," in my experience, was mostly used in online chat and message boards since typing "PlayStation" is a pain in the ass--just like you'd type "N64" but probably wouldn't say "En Sixty-Four" instead of just calling the system the "Nintendo 64" in person. I think "PS" is a weird abbreviation because it's short and too ambiguous. I also don't like the abbreviation "PSX" because it's obviously inaccurate, and so I never used any abbreviation for the PlayStation until the PSone came out. True story.

PSX was widely used by (I thought) just about everyone. PS is weird. I've never heard anybody use that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkRyan

"PSX," in my experience, was mostly used in online chat and message boards since typing "PlayStation" is a pain in the ass

---

It was definately common but not everywhere. I think I saw it primarily on online message boards for exactly that reason.

Quote:

---

just like you'd type "N64" but probably wouldn't say "En Sixty-Four" instead of just calling the system the "Nintendo 64" in person.

---

I actually say "En 64" in real life and rarely say the whole thing. Maybe I'm just wierd like that but I find it easier.

Quote:

---

I also don't like the abbreviation "PSX" because it's obviously inaccurate, and so I never used any abbreviation for the PlayStation until the PSone came out. True story.

---

Same here.

The worst is definitely P2 though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MechDeus

I actually say "En 64" in real life and rarely say the whole thing.

---

Same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vasteel

The worst is definitely P2 though.

---

I've never even heard of that.

I prefer "annoyed". I liked the PSX and the PS2, but the combo of hype, lack of good titles for the moment, and price all have me putting the PS3 into the "when it's cheap" zone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

As for me, I have a burning hate for Sony's video game division. They killed 2D.

---

Unless you own every 2D PS1 and PS2 game, you did more to kill 2D than they ever did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dog$

Unless you own every 2D PS1 and PS2 game, you did more to kill 2D than they ever did.

---

Oh come on already. Sony from the very beginning of the PS1 trying to prevent most 2d games from being released in the US did alot more to kill 2D. There's no denying that Sony did everything they could to put the nail in 2d's coffin.

People acting like making 3d mainstream and bringing casual gamers to the table are actually good things are dopes. Plain and simple. To this day the playability of your average 3d game is shit to 2d games. Now we have casual shit bags who think Halo is the greatest thing ever that are now actually RUNNING the industry.

I remember Penny Arcade summing it up nicely that Sony sold out our gaming industry to the same shits who beat us up in Gym class, it's already been said here that Sony simply got lucky and while Sega and Nintendo were tripping on their own mistakes Sony had a chance to shove them under the money bus. Yoshi has it right as fuck.

Sony wasn't/isn't the best. They were just the richest and now that some one with more cash than them and with better drive to support the industry with good stuff they're failing. Hell even Nintendo seems to be making a comeback with their "Desperation Stunt" (what I like to call the DS now) trashing the PSP supposedly and the Wii still being tricky to find while buckets of PS3 are here, it looks like the vengance I've wanted since the DC days is finally here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dog$

Unless you own every 2D PS1 and PS2 game, you did more to kill 2D than they ever did.

---

In my collection:

In the Hunt
Gunner's Heaven
Metal SlugX
Strikers 1945
Castlevania SotN
Castlevania Chronicles
Alien Hominid
Contra Shattered Soldier
G.Darius
Sillohette Mirage
Thunderforce V
R-Types
R-Type Delta
R-Type Final
Gradius Gaiden
Gradius V
Metal Slug 4/5
Guilty Gear X2
Mobile Light Force 1
Mobile Light Force 2
ESP Galuda
Dodonpachi Dai-ou-jou
Street Fighter aniversary collection
Blowout


And that's off the top of my head. Why on Earth wouldn't I have bought the 2D PS games, and what gave you the impression I didn't?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bojack

People acting like making 3d mainstream and bringing casual gamers to the table are actually good things are dopes. Plain and simple. To this day the playability of your average 3d game is shit to 2d games. Now we have casual shit bags who think Halo is the greatest thing ever that are now actually RUNNING the industry.

---

Get off your high fucking horse. The entire industry is built on the backs of casual gamers and has been from the word go, and people thinking Halo is 100% pure sunshine and gumdrops doesn't strike me as any different from people thinking Battletoads was anything more than a mediocre TMNT cash-run with terrible game balance.

The game industry was never "more hardcore" than it is now, it was just smaller. Shitty overhyped games still sold, sports games were still a big deal, licensed titles still moved units no matter how they reviewed, and good titles slipped through the cracks. Nostalgia's a bitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Battletoads was anything more than a mediocre TMNT cash-run with terrible game balance.

---

...

Did you even play that game past level 2? It's a fucking showcase of gameplay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bojack

Sony sold out our gaming industry to the same shits who beat us up in Gym class

---

I never got beat up in gym class. Its not Sony's fault you're a bitter nerd.

It was never "our" gaming industry, and gaming now isn't all that different from before Sony's dominance - there are still companies churning out great games at fast paces, slow paces, and companies that are simply incapable of attaching their names to anything worth playing. The biggest differences now are having more types of games to play, as we've got the technology for incredible 2D and 3D gaming, and the games themselves being released at lower prices (and having those prices fall faster than ever before as well).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StriderKyo

Not arguing quality, just that the Playstation wasn't built by Square. I'm pretty sure Sony releases more games a year than MS or Nintendo, and they have alot of very successful franchises like Socom or ATV Offroad - it's just that people here don't care about many of them. Sony also doesn't go out of their way to emphasize first party games in the same way the others do.

---

I understand. BUT, how many copies of SOCOM sell if FFVII-XII went to Nintendo or Sega? Hell, we're about to find out what a Sony console without third party exclusives looks like, and even now that they have the branding established, it's not pretty.

The situation with Sony is perfect. 360 and PS3 will have 99% the same libraries over time - porting is too cheap and production costs too high to have lots of exclusives. Sony will hopefully make a comeback at a lower price point. Factoring in five years of Live, the PS3 price doesn't look so bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkRyan

Everyone called the PlayStation the "PSX" back in the day, not just some gaming magazines. "PS" is still a weird abbreviation, and "PSone" is most commonly used now--of course, pre-1999, "PSone" didn't make sense.

---

I thought that, back then, PSX referred to the Playstation line. The X could refer to any number. So the PS1 was a PSX, but a PS2 would also be a PSX. Evidently that was wrong, or no longer is true; the PSX moniker isn't used for PS2 and PS3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nirvana

I prefer "annoyed". I liked the PSX and the PS2, but the combo of hype, lack of good titles for the moment, and price all have me putting the PS3 into the "when it's cheap" zone.

---

From what ive been reading, it going to be a VERY long time, if ever for the ps3 to see a price drop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoleTroll

I thought that, back then, PSX referred to the Playstation line. The X could refer to any number. So the PS1 was a PSX, but a PS2 would also be a PSX. Evidently that was wrong, or no longer is true; the PSX moniker isn't used for PS2 and PS3.

---

PlayStation X was the codename of the original playstation, hence PSX. They dropped the X but the Internet didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

Why on Earth wouldn't I have bought the 2D PS games

---

I donno, something about you hating Sony or some shit.

Quote:

---

and what gave you the impression I didn't?

---

Just from how you spoke about the death of 2D.

It seems to me that a lot of people cry about Sony killing 2D but turn around to only have bought sprite based games for the fucking GBA since 2000. Your list even supports my point to an extent; some of those games aren't pure sprite based 2D games, that number of titles alone is a fraction of the 2D games available for the PS1/2 library, and none of those games sold well at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bbobb

Sony from the very beginning of the PS1 trying to prevent most 2d games from being released in the US

---

explains why one of the first SCEA published games for the PS1 was fucking Raiden Project. Which nobody bought.

Quote:

---

There's no denying that Sony did everything they could to put the nail in 2d's coffin.

---

Likewise, there's no denying that the consumers wielded the hammer.

Sony's just been riding mostly on hype since PS1, it's just that with PS3 they've finally broken the barrier of insane hubris that jolts everyone into actually realizing it. "You're going to want to work a second job for the PS3"? No, I'm not. Fuck off.

<3 the Mcshig.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethsez

Get off your high fucking horse. The entire industry is built on the backs of casual gamers and has been from the word go, and people thinking Halo is 100% pure sunshine and gumdrops doesn't strike me as any different from people thinking Battletoads was anything more than a mediocre TMNT cash-run with terrible game balance.

The game industry was never "more hardcore" than it is now, it was just smaller. Shitty overhyped games still sold, sports games were still a big deal, licensed titles still moved units no matter how they reviewed, and good titles slipped through the cracks. Nostalgia's a bitch.

---

This needs repeating despite it being such common sense to anyone who has been gaming through multiple generations.

I'm not buying the argument that the Playstation was the specific point gaming went mainstream anyway. There were millions of arcade gamers, millions that owned Atari/Commodore/Nintendo/Sega systems. The Playstation was another step in popularity in an already huge industry. Apparently when Nintendo increases gaming popularity they're a savior, when Sony does it, they have ruined the industry. Nice logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bojack

People acting like making 3d mainstream and bringing casual gamers to the table are actually good things are dopes. Plain and simple. To this day the playability of your average 3d game is shit to 2d games. Now we have casual shit bags who think Halo is the greatest thing ever that are now actually RUNNING the industry.

I remember Penny Arcade summing it up nicely that Sony sold out our gaming industry to the same shits who beat us up in Gym class, it's already been said here that Sony simply got lucky and while Sega and Nintendo were tripping on their own mistakes Sony had a chance to shove them under the money bus. Yoshi has it right as fuck.

Sony wasn't/isn't the best. They were just the richest and now that some one with more cash than them and with better drive to support the industry with good stuff they're failing. Hell even Nintendo seems to be making a comeback with their "Desperation Stunt" (what I like to call the DS now) trashing the PSP supposedly and the Wii still being tricky to find while buckets of PS3 are here, it looks like the vengance I've wanted since the DC days is finally here.

---

I'm going to go ahead and blame this post on GameFan magazine.

Quote:

---

Now we have casual shit bags who think Halo is the greatest thing ever that are now actually RUNNING the industry.

---

They're no worse than people who think every 2D game in existence is the second coming of Christ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dog$

explains why one of the first SCEA published games for the PS1 was fucking Raiden Project. Which nobody bought.

---

I bought it. And for $50 no less. Still have it, too, in the old-style oversized case.

Compass = 2D's knight in shining armor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dog$

Likewise, there's no denying that the consumers wielded the hammer.

---

I think the attitudes of developers also played a significant role.
When the PS1 came out, it gave them a chance to really try new things, and publishers were willing to take more risks because they didn't have to worry about cart costs. The result was a lot of really fresh and innovative ideas, even if they weren't as polished and refined as the 2D games we were used to.
It's also worth noting that sprites are kind of a bitch to work with, really.
You want to change a character's hat? Go modify every single frame of that character's animation. You want the character to be bigger (and not be a pixelated mess)? Same. How about having them right-handed all the time? Hope you like doing twice as much work.

To me, the PS1/Saturn/N64 was to 3D what the NES/SMS was to 2D. The graphics were glitchy and unpolished, but over the course of their lifecycles, those consoles brought us some really great new gameplay paradigms that would be perfected in the following generation of consoles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by outRider

Sony kicked off consumer 3D video games.

---

Atari Jaguar says "hi." Although its quality can be debated, you can't deny it was the first console to actively push 3D. 3DO as well. Both of which hit before Sony got into the ring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vasteel

The worst is definitely P2 though.

---

People in Buffalo say that all the time. "you got any P2s?" "no, I don't carry old computer parts". That usually leaves them looking dazed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

Apparently when Nintendo increases gaming popularity they're a savior, when Sony does it, they have ruined the industry.

---

Personally, I'm not sure it's a good thing that Nintendo will do well this generation. But I firmly believe it will happen, and I blame Sony.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

I'm not buying the argument that the Playstation was the specific point gaming went mainstream anyway. There were millions of arcade gamers, millions that owned Atari/Commodore/Nintendo/Sega systems. The Playstation was another step in popularity in an already huge industry.

---

I think the point people are trying to make is that the Playstation was the point when gaming became seen as a fit for the coveted 18-35 demographic. Previously, gaming had been regarded as a kid's toy. Now, it was more than that.

I was not a fan of the PSone, owned about equal numbers of games my PSone, Saturn, and N64. Truthfully I played alot more Saturn and N64 though the system had it's moments. When the PS2 hit I was severely pissed that the general public was waiting for the goods to materialize and ignoring a selection of triple A games in what would be Dreamcast's final year.

That little phase passed and I grew to love the PS2, and it's decent selection of 2D titles (Cave shooters alone for example) and decent 3D. I still think SoTC and Okami are beautiful games even stacked against the next gen. Don't own a PSP yet but I will give Sony credit for a overall higher quality mark for it's portable library. Nintendo seems to hand out quality seals like someone handing out flyers in front of a strip club.

As far as the PS3, yeah it looks great and will be great. I'm not spending $600, I'll buy a Wii and pick up the PS3 games I want on clearance til the day it's more affordable. Sony has a quality product, I respect that but am cheap. Sorry. *-neo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portnoyd

I think the point people are trying to make is that the Playstation was the point when gaming became seen as a fit for the coveted 18-35 demographic. Previously, gaming had been regarded as a kid's toy. Now, it was more than that.

---

I had a 2600 when I was two years old, an NES in elementary school, a Genesis/SNES in middle school, and a PS/Saturn/N64 in high school. A lot of people that grew up with gaming would be the proper ages for who gaming was thought appropiate for at the time for each generation. As gaming matured it gained more people as time went on, but that's not really surprising in any way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melf

In my opinion, Sega should have pushed 2D more. The games you mentioned are great, and the Saturn's 3D has aged horribly. I love Burning Rangers, for example, but I can barely tolerate looking at it. Astal, on the other hand, still looks wonderful.

---

I agree with all that, but I'd like to add something. All the 3D games from that generation look like ass now. But at the time, the Saturn pulled off some of the best 3D from that gen with Panzer Dragoon 2 and RPG, Daytona CE, Sega Rally, Virtua Fighter 2, and Virtua Cop. I firmly believe that if Sega got better 3rd party backing, we would have seen the Saturn truely sing at 3D. Hell, Radient Silvergun is one of the best looking games from the 32bit era.

I'd also like to point out that the Saturn's 3D was more stable than the PS1. Saturn had less warping and less seems showing between the polys. Was the PS1 easier to make shine? No question. But in the right hands, the Saturn could out perform the PS1. Too bad there were only a few of those hands.

The Saturn was just a monster to program for, and apparently Sega didn't go out of it's way to make it easier. The fighting between SOJ and SOA didn't help either.

Wow. I haven't seen a fanboy war like this in ages. Since PS1 vs Saturn days. God this brings me back. Here let me get a shot in....Sony sucks Sega rulez! No wait, that wasn't even true back then. Sony rulez Sega sucks! No that wasn't right either. Oh I know...Hey look everyone, Nintendo is still stuck in the past, lets all point and laugh! There we go. It only took them 3 consoles to get their shit together again, but they are apparently back. Lets see if Sony can do the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

...

Did you even play that game past level 2? It's a fucking showcase of gameplay.

---

Indeed I did. I played the shit out of the game, in fact, because I was a stupid kid who believed the hype and thought I was missing something when I didn't enjoy it.

I wasn't. There are a ton of styles of gameplay, but most of them sucked, and no game should ever be that reliant on rote memorization. Even R-Type wasn't that ridiculous about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Error

Sony sucks Sega rulez!

---

Considering the Genesis Collection put more good games on the PS2 in one disc than Sony did in 5 years, I'd say you nailed it at this point.

Nintendo wasn't any different with their gestapo business practices in the 90s (Console exclusives, monopoly practices).

I'm not a fan of what Sony's doing with the PS3 either, but I have faith that it will deliver, but only in the next 1 1/2 years when the big games come out. (Especially the JRPGs, which won't be as plentiful on the 360).

I'm not a full-fledged sony hater - there've been some really good games on the PS2 lately (Okami, Yakuza, Guitar Hero II, Bully).

Most of what has been keeping me busy lately has been on the DS/Wii (Warioware Smooth Moves, Wii Sports, Final Fantasy V, Tetris DS)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefy Hits

I'm not a full-fledged sony hater - there've been some really good games on the PS2 lately (Okami, Yakuza, Guitar Hero II, Bully).

---

The second part of your sentence has nothing to do with the first. You listed third-party software that had nothing to do with Sony nor anything specific to the PS2, three of which would've been better on other consoles and the other is being done better on another console. That's like praising Toshiba because Pirates of the Carribean came out on DVD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MechDeus

The second part of your sentence has nothing to do with the first. You listed third-party software that had nothing to do with Sony nor anything specific to the PS2, three of which would've been better on other consoles and the other is being done better on another console. That's like praising Toshiba because Pirates of the Carribean came out on DVD.

---

What are you talking about? Your comparison about DVDs means nothing here. He likes games on the PS2, meaning he doesn't fully hate Sony. Doesn't matter if the Game Gear could do them better, the context is the PS2 only and only right now. If he hated Sony full-on, he wouldn't have touched any of those games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portnoyd

What are you talking about? Your comparison about DVDs means nothing here.

---

They both manufacture devices that play media they had no part whatsoever in. Please explain how that doesn't correlate.

Quote:

---

He likes games on the PS2, meaning he doesn't fully hate Sony. Doesn't matter if the Game Gear could do them better, the context is the PS2 only and only right now. If he hated Sony full-on, he wouldn't have touched any of those games.

---

So you don't know anyone that plays games on PC and hates Windows? Liking Counterstrike =/= liking Microsoft. Tons of people vehemently hate the player but love the media that's used on it, the two are not in any way related.

You would like Sony if you specifically liked the hardware or a service it performs. Offering Tekken 5 through the PS3 store and creating browser software for the PSP are examples of things that you would like Sony for. Capcom developing a game is not. XBL and courting developers to develop modified older games with online play are examples of things to praise Microsoft for. When people say they love the games on a console it's because of its software lineup and not because the company that developed it did something. There's a difference, which is what I'm pointing out.

Why I hate Sony and/or PS line:
1.) PS3 right now is not delivering and Sony is pretending it is.
2.) Sony is too big and bloated to care about their customers when their hardware fails (PS2 disc read error)
3.) Sony discourages 2D.

What keeps me from not entirely hating Sony:
1.) Recent crop of games like those previously listed are excellent
2.) The PS2 isn't abandonware like Xbox and GC have been. (New, great games are coming out for PS2 late in its life.)
3.) Supports JRPGs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefy Hits

3.) Sony discourages 2D.

---

I'm pretty sure we've been over this point as false a number of times in this thread alone.

Quote:

---

1.) Recent crop of games like those previously listed are excellent

---

*sigh*

Number 1 on your first list and number 2 on your second list are related. If one changed for the better, the other would change for the worse. Sony wouldn't be allowing shit in the PS2 if they were confident in the PS3 right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

Number 1 on your first list and number 2 on your second list are related. If one changed for the better, the other would change for the worse. Sony wouldn't be allowing shit in the PS2 if they were confident in the PS3 right now.

---

its called a transition, just like they did with the PSone to PS2 change. They didnt completely drop it and launch the new console. Why drop the console when its still making money? Ease the change. Theyre losing loads on each PS3 sold, can you really blame them for trying to offset the loss by milking the PS2 as dry as it could be?

I don't recall anywhere near as many non-budget PS1 releases after the PS2 came out.

Yes, I blame them. I don't want old ass tech holding us back. That's why I am angry that GoW2 is on PS2 and that's why I am angry that the Wii is allowed to exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefy Hits

Nintendo wasn't any different with their gestapo business practices in the 90s (Console exclusives, monopoly practices)

---

but what they did was save the industry. had they not strong armed companies there would have been a second crash......or even more extreme, not have revitalized the industry in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nirvana

I prefer "annoyed". I liked the PSX and the PS2, but the combo of hype, lack of good titles for the moment, and price all have me putting the PS3 into the "when it's cheap" zone.

---

Same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dragonmaster Dyne

but what they did was save the industry. had they not strong armed companies there would have been a second crash......or even more extreme, not have revitalized the industry in the first place.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater

Apparently when Nintendo increases gaming popularity they're a savior, when Sony does it, they have ruined the industry. Nice logic.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefy Hits

What keeps me from not entirely hating Sony:
1.) Recent crop of games like those previously listed are excellent
2.) The PS2 isn't abandonware like Xbox and GC have been. (New, great games are coming out for PS2 late in its life.)
3.) Supports JRPGs

---

Yep. The PS2 will be my primary console for 2007, and maybe beyond. I don't want three systems, don't want a PS3 at these prices, and don't want to throw away my PS1/2 library. I suspect many others will be doing the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoleTroll

Yep. The PS2 will be my primary console for 2007, and maybe beyond. I don't want three systems, don't want a PS3 at these prices, and don't want to throw away my PS1/2 library. I suspect many others will be doing the same.

---

Substitute that for a 360 and your dead on correct. Not being a fanboy here, but that looks like what's happening. The haters need to face it, the 360 is delivering on all fronts and the momentum is still building, even after the mighty PS3 launch.

Maybe PS3 will have it's shit together sometime, but for now (and at least the next year) it doesn't. And by shit together, I mean having a competitive advantage against the competition.

i cant quote nash's post but Nintendo DID save the industry weather you want to admit it or not.

No, they didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dragonmaster Dyne

i cant quote nash's post but Nintendo DID save the industry weather

---

http://www.playfuls.com/images/news/Wii-weather_01.jpg

lol