Support NeoGAF

[Geometric-Crusher]

I think the success of the PS1 begins with its partnership with Namco in 1993. Namco was the pioneer of polygons in arcades until it was challenged by Sega with the Model 1 arcade board in 1992. Realizing that the war for technology was favoring Sega, Namco decided to change its approach the idea was to use modest arcades and invest more R&D in games. In fact, more advanced games do not necessarily mean more fun games.

Despite being a System 22 game, Ridge Racer was to racing games in 1993 what VF1 was to fighting games, very popular its popularity precedes the PS1, of course.
System 11 (ps1 based) has its first success with Tekken 1994
But the PS1 initial library had other games that became hits like Arc the Lad, Battle Arena Toshinden, NFL Gameday, Ace Combat, Twisted Metal and Resident Evil.
All of this is the result of planning that precedes the launch of the console, obviously they don't have crystal balls they prepared themselves following the trend that VF1 started, making two 3D fighting games in the hope that one would be a success .

At a commercial level, they made the correct reading.

Sony's royalty policy was much more attractive to the developer
Sony's flexible quality control attracted more developers.
ease of programming GG.

This triad alone already gives a huge comparative advantage over the N64 and Saturn.

Looking back, Sega made a lot of mistakes. Some mistakes can even be justified, like releasing VF1 at the Japanese launch of the Saturn, after all, the game was still popular and championships were being held just a few months before. Tactically, it was a success, but strategically, it was a mistake, because new games would be released and would make the Saturn seem outdated. The ideal would have been to avoid VF1 and produce a racing game within the console's limitations instead of porting Daytona. These two games served as negative examples of technology. But the Saturn's defeat was certainly thanks to the chief engineer. Basically, the Saturn was more expensive to produce and harder to extract performance from. So, all the PS1 had to do was lower its price and the Saturn would disappear as a viable option.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

This analysis misses that many 3rd party publishers had been raked over the coals by Nintend during the SNES generation. That a big reason why Nintendo stuck with cartridges was because it planned to charge publishers an arm and a leg for them. You had a pretty much across the board exodus of support from Nintendo which was either going to go to Sega or Sony and Sega had already just miffed things with the Sega 32X and Sega CD and then further biffed things with the Saturn being over priced.

Sony had retailers and publishers on their side and they made major investments in deals and software publishing. Sega really couldn't keep up even with having more mature internal development.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Completely agree with yeh VF1 statement, while it played better than Toshinden and Tekken it looked like a complete dog's dinner by comparison.

I'd also argue that Daytona was the better playing game, but it can't be understated just how impressive Ridge Racer was at launch and the comparison did Sega no favours.



By the time Saturn caught up with its excellent Sega Rally conversion it was too late, the public had already made its mind up.

 

[drganon]

Sega and Nintendo spent that generation fucking up so much that all Sony had to do was be somewhat competent.

 

[daninthemix]

Console I go back to the most. It has an endless well of weird and wonderful experimental games.

 

[Crayon]

Sega and Nintendo spent that generation fucking up so much that all Sony had to do was be somewhat competent.

Maybe. But we'll never know because sony came out swinging.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Maybe. But we'll never know because sony came out swinging.

It's crazy when someone does a good job and they're reduced to "oh everyone else fucked up."

 

[SkylineRKR]

Namco is absolutely one of the key publishers of the Playstation success.

Sony needed prolific partners and IP in general. Namco, who were a well known brand, committed itself fully to Sony. Ofcourse this was fueled by their arcade rivalry with Sega, at least thats what I assume.

Their games, also a fighter and racer, competed directly against the Saturn. I think Tekken and RR showed the gaming world that the PSX should be taken seriously; they looked better than their Saturn rivals. I think Namco and Sony were smart with creating a board that was identical to the PSX; its essentially what Sega ended up doing with Naomi and DC. This way little to no compromises were made, System 11's Tekken was 1:1.

I remember walking through an arcade in 1997 or so. There was VF3 which was the most impressive game I had ever seen, and Tekken 3. Crowds gathered around Tekken 3. It isn't just about the graphics and never was. Gamers obviously found Tekken 3 to be more fun. And everyone knew the PSX version wouldn't be hit too hard.

I think Namco carried Sony throughout the maiden period. Signing Square sealed the deal in Japan. Konami was good get too. Sony's success was a factor of having actually good hardware, impressive visuals (for the time) and signing strong third parties obviously fed up by Nintendo and perhaps Sega's archaic policies.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

I remember walking through an arcade in 1997 or so. There was VF3 which was the most impressive game I had ever seen, and Tekken 3. Crowds gathered around Tekken 3. It isn't just about the graphics and never was. Gamers obviously found Tekken 3 to be more fun. And everyone knew the PSX version wouldn't be hit too hard.

Tekken 3 was huge in the arcades, I even remember an arcade where I was holidaying holding a Tekken 3 tournament with loads of people gathered around the machine.

Virtua Fighter 3 was stunning, but to most people in the west it was an alien franchise, most people didn't know how to play it because they didn't own a Saturn.

The last really popular Sega arcade game I recall was Sega Rally, really appealed to adults and unsurprisingly went on to be the best selling Saturn game in the UK.

 

[Digital-Aftertaste]

You forgot to mention the benefits of compact discs over cartridges when it came to space allocation and pricing. Resident Evil 2 was considered a near miracle when it was ported to the n64 because of how much memory they had to cram in and compress on the cartridge.

 

[SkylineRKR]

You forgot to mention the benefits of compact discs over cartridges when it came to space allocation and pricing. Resident Evil 2 was considered a near miracle when it was ported to the n64 because of how much memory they had to cram in and compress on the cartridge.

There were others who already offered CD storage, and failed regardless. Sony could deliver it at a more reasonable price, and better performance. And games that were more fun to play.

 

[Karim]

I think the success of the PS1 begins with its partnership with Namco in 1993. Namco was the pioneer of polygons in arcades until it was challenged by Sega with the Model 1 arcade board in 1992. Realizing that the war for technology was favoring Sega, Namco decided to change its approach the idea was to use modest arcades and invest more R&D in games. In fact, more advanced games do not necessarily mean more fun games.

Despite being a System 22 game, Ridge Racer was to racing games in 1993 what VF1 was to fighting games, very popular its popularity precedes the PS1, of course.
System 11 (ps1 based) has its first success with Tekken 1994
But the PS1 initial library had other games that became hits like Arc the Lad, Battle Arena Toshinden, NFL Gameday, Ace Combat, Twisted Metal and Resident Evil.
All of this is the result of planning that precedes the launch of the console, obviously they don't have crystal balls they prepared themselves following the trend that VF1 started, making two 3D fighting games in the hope that one would be a success .

At a commercial level, they made the correct reading.

Sony's royalty policy was much more attractive to the developer
Sony's flexible quality control attracted more developers.
ease of programming GG.

This triad alone already gives a huge comparative advantage over the N64 and Saturn.

Looking back, Sega made a lot of mistakes. Some mistakes can even be justified, like releasing VF1 at the Japanese launch of the Saturn, after all, the game was still popular and championships were being held just a few months before. Tactically, it was a success, but strategically, it was a mistake, because new games would be released and would make the Saturn seem outdated. The ideal would have been to avoid VF1 and produce a racing game within the console's limitations instead of porting Daytona. These two games served as negative examples of technology. But the Saturn's defeat was certainly thanks to the chief engineer. Basically, the Saturn was more expensive to produce and harder to extract performance from. So, all the PS1 had to do was lower its price and the Saturn would disappear as a viable option.

The Saturn was harder to push is an urban legend by the sega fanboy anyway. It was surely a beast in bitmap but the hardware was totally unequipped for 3d rendering. It used a "faked" 3d incredibly expensive and less effective compared the triangles.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

The Saturn was harder to push is an urban legend by the sega fanboy anyway. It was surely a beast in bitmap but the hardware was totally unequipped for 3d rendering. It used a "faked" 3d incredibly expensive and less effective compared the triangles.

Usually when Saturn had an impressive 3D game it made use of VDP2 to render a flat floor (think Mode 7's use in Mario Kart on the SNES).

Some impressive looking games that made use of this…

Virtua Fighter 2
Last Bronx
Panzer Dragoon Zwei
Virtual On
Virtua Cop 2


When it came to games that were more fully 3D (Quake, Tomb Raider, Burning Rangers) the result was often frame rate issues. Racing games almost always suffered, in fact the ports of Sega Rally and Daytona CCE (ported by the same team) were the only decent looking racing games that ran well.

 

[drganon]

It's crazy when someone does a good job and they're reduced to "oh everyone else fucked up."

To be fair, I do agree Sony did a great job. Sega and Nintendo's screw ups just made things easier.

 

[tusharngf]

I think this game still holds no 1 place in ps1 library.

 

[awwr999999]

The Memory Card save system for PS1 and PS2 is in many ways superior to the storage space based save system (PC style) that PlayStation's used since PS3.
The Memory Card save extras that Team Silent baked into the PS2 SH games is something that hasn't be done post-Memory card (post-PS2).

 

[Karim]

Usually when Saturn had an impressive 3D game it made use of VDP2 to render a flat floor (think Mode 7's use in Mario Kart on the SNES).

Some impressive looking games that made use of this…

Virtua Fighter 2
Last Bronx
Panzer Dragoon Zwei
Virtual On
Virtua Cop 2


When it came to games that were more fully 3D (Quake, Tomb Raider, Burning Rangers) the result was often frame rate issues. Racing games almost always suffered, in fact the ports of Sega Rally and Daytona CCE (ported by the same team) were the only racing games that ran well.

Just imagine try to fake the 3d with a proper amount of 2d bitmap layers; of course 3d games runs badly on saturn.

 

[awwr999999]

I think this game still holds no 1 place in ps1 library.

I'll never understand why Konami didn't just bring Castlevania games to PS2 as 2D games with better visual effects.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

To be fair, I do agree Sony did a great job. Sega and Nintendo's screw ups just made things easier.

Sometimes you force your competition to make mistakes, you turn their strengths to weaknesses, and their weaknesses into failures.

The N64 had significantly better loading times, but Sony leaned heavily into cinematics and cutscenes, something that would shape them historically even during their recovery on PS3 and then PS4.

Sega and Nintendo had strong mascot characters and what did Sony do? They nullified some of that with Crash Bandicoot and Spyro the Dragon. Sony isn't the first company to try to match Nintendo and Sega with mascot characters, but they're the first to do it successfully. That took tremendous advertising budgets. Even when they couldn't make more of them they put money into Jak and Daxter and Ratchet and Clank and added Sly Cooper.

RPGs were huge in the 90s and what did Sony do? They invested in RPGs like Arc the Lad, Alundra, Legend of Legaia, Wild Arms, and Legend of Dragoon on top of courting Square (Final Fantasy), Enix (Dragon Quest and Star Ocean), and Namco (Tales) to ensure they had the top RPGs. They also tried producing their own sports games.

Out of the three big manufacturers, Sony's controller most closely resembled the snes controller while N64 and Saturn proved less than perfect for sports games.

They leaned in racing games with Gran Turismo, Wipeout, and JetMoto on top of partnerships with Namco with Ridge Racer.

They sold the PS1 for a loss and had extremely slim margins even as market leader. They focused on market share over profitability. They undercut the Saturn on price.

With the advent of CDs they put out demo discs something Nintendo never could have done with cartridges. This let people test out games before buying them. But no one really recalls the downside of discs, it wasn't a sure bet. They were more easily damaged and the load times were awful.

I think this game still holds no 1 place in ps1 library.

Hoping that the new god of war metroidvania is the first true successor to this game. I don't think they've made a better metroidvania since, though maybe some people would give that to Hollow Knight.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Sega and Nintendo had strong mascot characters and what did Sony do? They nullified some of that with Crash Bandicoot and Spyro the Dragon. Sony isn't the first company to try to match Nintendo and Sega with mascot characters, but they're the first to do it successfully. That took tremendous advertising budgets. Even when they couldn't make more of them they put money into Jak and Daxter and Ratchet and Clank and added Sly Cooper.

While Sony had some excellent 3D platformers (Ape Escape being the best) I'd argue that they didn't need a cartoon mascot character.

Sony were far more focused on the 20 something market, in a way it was actually Lara Croft who became the face of PlayStation, especially in the UK.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

While Sony had some excellent 3D platformers (Ape Escape being the best) I'd argue that they didn't need a cartoon mascot character.

Sony were far more focused on the 20 something market, in a way it was actually Lara Croft who became the face of PlayStation, especially in the UK.

Crash Bandicoot was a huge advertising element even for people who didn't buy those games.

Everyone remembers Crash going to Nintendo HQ with a megaphone and calling them out.

Shit like that drove PlayStation sales.

 

[cartman414]

Hoping that the new god of war metroidvania is the first true successor to this game. I don't think they've made a better metroidvania since, though maybe some people would give that to Hollow Knight.

I preferred the Sorrow games personally.

There were others who already offered CD storage, and failed regardless. Sony could deliver it at a more reasonable price, and better performance. And games that were more fun to play.

Many of Saturn's best games were left in Japan.

 

[Plies]

 

[Mibu no ookami]

While Sony had some excellent 3D platformers (Ape Escape being the best) I'd argue that they didn't need a cartoon mascot character.

Sony were far more focused on the 20 something market, in a way it was actually Lara Croft who became the face of PlayStation, especially in the UK.

Tomb Raider actually hit Saturn before it hit PS1...

 

[SkylineRKR]

TR being a timed Saturn exclusive (for 6 weeks?) is actually even more telling how commercially irrelevant the Saturn was. Sony got the same game and made it synonymous with Playstation by securing it and marketing the shit out of it.

Sony actively went against the idea of a mascot. They didn't want it.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Crash Bandicoot was a huge advertising element even for people who didn't buy those games.

Everyone remembers Crash going to Nintendo HQ with a megaphone and calling them out.

Shit like that drove PlayStation sales.

Marketing was completely different here in the UK (see below) where it was targeted at people in their 20s.

As for the PS1 vs N64 rivalry, that didn't happen here either, N64 was delayed until March 97 and by then Sony had already won, N64 was a bit of a flop over here.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Tomb Raider actually hit Saturn before it hit PS1...

Didn't matter, magazines were keen to point out that did didn't run well on Saturn and people rushed out to get it on PlayStation instead only weeks after.

I remember playing Tomb Raider on a friend's PS1 having owned it on Saturn and being impressed by how much better it was. The sequel being announced as a PS1 console exclusive was pretty gutting as a Saturn owner back in 1997.

 

[bad guy]

I thought piracy played a large role in PS1s success.

 

[Plies]

I thought piracy played a large role in PS1s success.

Only in Brazil.

 

[Karim]

TR being a timed Saturn exclusive (for 6 weeks?) is actually even more telling how commercially irrelevant the Saturn was. Sony got the same game and made it synonymous with Playstation by securing it and marketing the shit out of it.

Sony actively went against the idea of a mascot. They didn't want it.

I beg to disagree.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

Namco was a cornerstone of PlayStation's success, even in the early days. This is unquestionable.
But the system's success relies on so many factors.

- aggressive pricing in the US (two ninety nine *mic drop*)
- Sega screwing up almost everything in the west
- Nintendo being very late to the party with the N64 and having cultivated bad relationships with most of the industry
- CDs reaching maturity as data storage, with everything that comes with the format (no cartridge tax, ease of reprinting and distribution)
- Sony's phenomenal know-how in sales and advertising being used to the max, with extremely effective ads and exceptional PR campaigns that, for example, turned Lara Croft into a gaming icon and made her the face of PlayStation, even if TR was never exclusive.
- all major third parties on board, including western ones, resulting in wild experimentation and one of the most extensive game libraries ever. Western games were tremendously important for PS
- constant price drops and clever hardware revisions
- older, but still good games being reprinted and sold at half price
- Psygnosis. Just as pivotal as Namco in the early days, especially among the European audience
- easy-as-pie piracy. As I always say, I knew several people who had quite a few games, and not a single original one. Piracy was as important in selling PS1s as R4 and other similar cards were in selling DSes.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

- Psygnosis. Just as pivotal as Namco in the early days, especially among the European audience

Psychosis seemed to come out of nowhere that generation, their WipEout and Formula 1 games were excellent

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

The Memory Card save system for PS1 and PS2 is in many ways superior to the storage space based save system (PC style) that PlayStation's used since PS3.
The Memory Card save extras that Team Silent baked into the PS2 SH games is something that hasn't be done post-Memory card (post-PS2).

When used correctly, it was good and allowed for very original stuff (but nothing that can't be done with HDD storage).

But then you had games taking up several slots for no reason at all. I remember dropping Alone in the Dark 2 like a stone as soon as I found out that the game needed the whole damn card to save.

Only in Brazil.

No, man. In Italy you were treated like a fool if you said you bought original PS games. Some people made a side business copying PS games. It was an absolutely unprecedented moment for video games in Italy, and it wouldn't have been possible without piracy.

 

[SkylineRKR]

Namco was a cornerstone of PlayStation's success, even in the early days. This is unquestionable.
But the system's success relies on so many factors.

- aggressive pricing in the US (two ninety nine *mic drop*)
- Sega screwing up almost everything in the west
- Nintendo being very late to the party with the N64 and having cultivated bad relationships with most of the industry
- CDs reaching maturity as data storage, with everything that comes with the format (no cartridge tax, ease of reprinting and distribution)
- Sony's phenomenal know-how in sales and advertising being used to the max, with extremely effective ads and exceptional PR campaigns that, for example, turned Lara Croft into a gaming icon and made her the face of PlayStation, even if TR was never exclusive.
- all major third parties on board, including western ones, resulting in wild experimentation and one of the most extensive game libraries ever. Western games were tremendously important for PS
- constant price drops and clever hardware revisions
- older, but still good games being reprinted and sold at half price
- Psygnosis. Just as pivotal as Namco in the early days, especially among the European audience
- easy-as-pie piracy. As I always say, I knew several people who had quite a few games, and not a single original one. Piracy was as important in selling PS1s as R4 and other similar cards were in selling DSes.

Many things are true but Piracy is always a bit of a we don't know for sure situation.

Piracy was just as easy on Saturn as was the swap trick. But no one cared because Saturn itself was less interesting to the average consumer. Hell, piracy was even free on DC ie. not needing any sort of modchip. It didn't really boost console sales afaik. Did it tank software sales? probably to a degree. But it didn't propel DC to higher levels.

I dabbled with piracy too since it was ofcourse very attractive getting games at 5% of the retail price as a poor student, its true it was rampant in high school though just as many people bought games. If you erase the amount of pirates, there were still many, many more PS users than Saturn and N64 users.

 

[Plies]

No, man. In Italy you were treated like a fool if you said you bought original PS games. Some people made a side business copying PS games. It was an absolutely unprecedented moment for video games in Italy, and it wouldn't have been possible without piracy.

Based Italians.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

Many things are true but Piracy is always a bit of a we don't know for sure situation.

Piracy was just as easy on Saturn as was the swap trick. But no one cared because Saturn itself was less interesting to the average consumer. Hell, piracy was even free on DC ie. not needing any sort of modchip. It didn't really boost console sales afaik. Did it tank software sales? probably to a degree. But it didn't propel DC to higher levels.

I dabbled with piracy too since it was ofcourse very attractive getting games at 5% of the retail price as a poor student, its true it was rampant in high school though just as many people bought games. If you erase the amount of pirates, there were still many, many more PS users than Saturn and N64 users.

Yes, but it's just a consequence of the PS being the hottest thing around. Everyone was talking about it, but most people not used to gaming wanted to sate their curiosity without having to buy the software. It is no coincidence that PS exploded in my country around the end of '96 and the first half of '97. The games that really made the system a sensation all came out in 1996, and by then modding the console was pretty easy and so was burning your own games, or finding someone who'd do that for you.

It's no question that piracy contributed a lot to the system's sales, because a lot of people bought it that wouldn't have otherwise, and hardware sales picked up when piracy became easy and widespread. Of course, it was essential that the system was interesting in the first place, and by the end of '96, everyone was curious about PlayStation. One year prior, it was just another video game system. By 1997, even family members who I never even thought would spare a minute watching a video game reel had bought a PS and had a pirated copy of Tomb Raider.

Bringing up the Dreamcast only makes this more evident. The average Joe didn't want a Dreamcast and didn't even know what it was.
The DS, on the other hand? Girls and moms who'd berate you for playing your PlayStation wanted to play that thing, so again, you had rampant piracy for the system.

 

[Windle Poons]

Sony didn't have the ridiculous rules that Sega or Nintendo did.

If you develop a game for Nintendo, you can't make it for Sega BS that you got from Nintendo.
We'll decide how many cartridges you can have and you'll pay in advance. Order to many tough shit, order to few, tough shit.
CD medium 600mb cart 4/8/ or if you were lucky 16mb max - but we'll decide.

I think all that contributed to its success.

 

[PeteBull]

I can tell u early on it was literaly sony/namco on psx vs saturn's sega arcade games, ofc later sony kept making all the right moves, sega kept making all the wrong ones.
Here 3h long vid where ppl can see all namco psx games, fuck we dont get as many games from whole first party studios alltogether current gen both xbox/playstation combined.

 

[Ozzie666]

Sony did a lot right that's for sure, but they also ran into bumbling idiotic decisions from Sega and Nintendo. Both made some dire choices that sunk them. Saturn was the victim of Sega Japan and USA relationship inploding and not being on the same page. Saturn design was trouble from the start and no true Sonic for americans. Cartridges for the N64 and complex hardware, the loss of Square.

It was a storm of events that went Sony's way and allowed them to the drop the $299 comment. Sega's panic shadow drop with not much out there.

It's like Microsoft beneifting from PS3 Sony's epic meltdown.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

It's like Microsoft beneifting from PS3 Sony's epic meltdown.

Consequences were different though.

PS3 outsold the 360 and Microsoft threw away the marketshare they gained the following generations.

PS1 outsold Saturn by 10:1 and lead to them exiting hardware and ruined Nintendo's position in the home console space.

 

[SkylineRKR]

I can tell u early on it was literaly sony/namco on psx vs saturn's sega arcade games, ofc later sony kept making all the right moves, sega kept making all the wrong ones.
Here 3h long vid where ppl can see all namco psx games, fuck we dont get as many games from whole first party studios alltogether current gen both xbox/playstation combined.

Namco was absolutely mental. In 1995 the PSX launched here with Tekken and RR. Then they rapidly continued with Air Combat and RRR. Then Tekken 2, Smash Court, Soul Edge, Rage Racer, Time Crisis and Ace Combat 2. This is not counting their lesser games such as Cyber Sled. The console was 2 years old at this point.

Yeah games were shorter and all but its not like I didn't sink dozens of hours into Soul Edge or Tekken 2.

 

[RAIDEN1]

By 1994/95 it was all too easy for Sony, Sega was battling it out with its own civil war, Nintendo kept delaying Ultra 64...Atari, 3DO couldn't make a confident step forward....(big blunder on 3DO's part in selling their M2 to Panasonic) and the summit was there for Sony's taking..

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

Completely agree with yeh VF1 statement, while it played better than Toshinden and Tekken it looked like a complete dog's dinner by comparison.

If you like Saturn, you might like fighting games. Tekken 1 is like any other Tekken it doesn't have ring out, it uses 4 buttons and runs at 60 fps. Why would VF1 be better in your opinion?

 

[Horseganador]

They released the perfect machine (easy to program, dedicated to 3D, good price, CD, etc.) at the perfect time. Sega released a machine that was incredibly difficult to program, and Nintendo took a long time to release it, and with cartridges.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

If you like Saturn, you might like fighting games. Tekken 1 is like any other Tekken it doesn't have ring out, it uses 4 buttons and runs at 60 fps. Why would VF1 be better in your opinion?

I just about own and have played every Tekken game, in fact Tekken 3 is probably one of my top 5 most played games of all time.

Compared to Virtua Fighter, the first couple of Tekken games just felt sluggish and clunky. While Tekken 1 was technically impressive for 1995 Virtua Fighter 2 just blew it out of the water and Tekken 2 did little to improve on it.

Tekken 3 just felt so much smoother and responsive compared to the first two, and the side step was implemented almost perfectly for me.

 

[Karim]

Sony did a lot right that's for sure, but they also ran into bumbling idiotic decisions from Sega and Nintendo. Both made some dire choices that sunk them. Saturn was the victim of Sega Japan and USA relationship inploding and not being on the same page. Saturn design was trouble from the start and no true Sonic for americans. Cartridges for the N64 and complex hardware, the loss of Square.

It was a storm of events that went Sony's way and allowed them to the drop the $299 comment. Sega's panic shadow drop with not much out there.

It's like Microsoft beneifting from PS3 Sony's epic meltdown.

I don't think the Sega and Nintendo bad decisions were a bigger factor for the sony success. More the way how sony handled the console marketing. The perception that built around the console, they practically destroyed the cursed nerd dimension which surrounded the videogame industry and for the first time to be gamers appear "cool" somehow and not a niche hobby. Could appear a minor factor but I think it was the more fundamental.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

This analysis misses that many 3rd party publishers had been raked over the coals by Nintend during the SNES generation.

Sony had retailers and publishers on their side and they made major investments in deals and software publishing. Sega really couldn't keep up even with having more mature internal development.

That's because the analysis focused only on the decisions made during the development stage in 1993 and how the results came in February 1996. Any subsequent developments are related to Sony's condition as market leader, among them the conquest of Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, many people don't know but Sega's plan was to have at least Dragon Quest but since both were released on the PS1 then unofficially the Saturn was dead.

 

[CrimsonTide]

Console I go back to the most. It has an endless well of weird and wonderful experimental games.

Yes this! Back when 3D games was being experimented with and new genre's were coming out. Weird and wacky games coming. I loved it. The triangle polygons everywhere and warping and to me it adds to the charm now days. It's why many indie devs making PSX style games today.

I loved N64, but you dont see many, if any, N64 "style" games today. graphically.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

That's because the analysis focused only on the decisions made during the development stage in 1993 and how the results came in February 1996. Any subsequent developments are related to Sony's condition as market leader, among them the conquest of Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, many people don't know but Sega's plan was to have at least Dragon Quest but since both were released on the PS1 then unofficially the Saturn was dead.

Not sure how much of the pre-development played that much of a factor.

Out of the gates the Saturn was somewhat keeping up with the PS1. Especially given the price difference. The things that made the biggest difference pre-release weren't mentioned in the analysis or were glossed over.

Just think if you're going to make this topic go into depth.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

Namco was a cornerstone of PlayStation's success, even in the early days. This is unquestionable.
But the system's success relies on so many factors.

- aggressive pricing in the US (two ninety nine *mic drop*)
- Sega screwing up almost everything in the west
- Nintendo being very late to the party with the N64 and having cultivated bad relationships with most of the industry
- CDs reaching maturity as data storage, with everything that comes with the format (no cartridge tax, ease of reprinting and distribution)
- Sony's phenomenal know-how in sales and advertising being used to the max, with extremely effective ads and exceptional PR campaigns that, for example, turned Lara Croft into a gaming icon and made her the face of PlayStation, even if TR was never exclusive.
- all major third parties on board, including western ones, resulting in wild experimentation and one of the most extensive game libraries ever. Western games were tremendously important for PS
- constant price drops and clever hardware revisions
- older, but still good games being reprinted and sold at half price
- Psygnosis. Just as pivotal as Namco in the early days, especially among the European audience
- easy-as-pie piracy. As I always say, I knew several people who had quite a few games, and not a single original one. Piracy was as important in selling PS1s as R4 and other similar cards were in selling DSes.

Psygnosis was very important, Sony bought the company in 1993, they are responsible for the PS1 development kit in C language. However some mistakes by Sega and Nintendo aren't actually mistakes, they are just the usual way they conducted their business, so Sony's strategy of charging a lower royalty was a very strong blow that changed the power dynamics between all the companies.