Cheap.
Stupidly easy SDK to work with.
Could pull off good looking 3D graphics without rendering it at a snails pace.
Excellent audio.
CD's allowed for large storage.
SEGA already had people disillusioned from TWO different upgrades with both the SegaCD and especially the 32X, and then they surprise-launched the Saturn with barely any software and with a higher MSRP than the PS1.
Nintendo burned just about every bridge with 3rd party developers, even longtime hit makers like Squaresoft and then insisted on still using carts when everyone else moved onto CDs.
This was on TOP of the fact that the PS1 was also a well designed system like
mentioned that further attracted devs and customers from the Saturn and N64.
So Sony was in the right place at the time time... mostly because all of their competition screwed up, but while they did get lucky, it wasn't pure luck, they also had a good system on top of Nintendo and SEGA screwing up.
Nintendo basically did the same thing in the 80s with the launch of the NES in the US.
Sony even still got lucky that everyone else fricked up again with the release of the PS2 and MS was an untrusted unknown, even though again, the PS2 was no slouch and had features people wanted like a DVD player... even if it was weaker than the GC or Xbox.
>Sony then went on to "Get lucky" again with the ps4, and super "lucky" with the ps5.
I never tried to state that all of Sony's successes were because they got lucky, just that they had a huge boubt of luck with the PS1 and PS2.
To a lesser extent they did get a bit lucky with the PS4 as well, very little interest in the Xbox One (especially when MS originally killed the hype with that no used/borrowed games nonsense and forced inclusion of Kinect that jacked up the price by $100) and Nintendo releasing the WiiU...
Ironically Microsoft was ultimately proven right seeing as basically no modern home electronics device functions without a wifi connection and everybody just accepts it now.
How is that "proven right"? The PS3 and Xbox360 before it had heavy internet connectivity, even the original Xbox. There is a difference between playing online and using it to download patches, and your console requiring online activation and physical games requiring online registration and being treated like a non-transferrable digital license.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yes, that’s what I’m saying. The Series X/S and PS5 are essentially giant paper weights without a constant internet connection.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>The Series X/S and PS5 are essentially giant paper weights without a constant internet connection.
But they're not, that's my point.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Are they not? I thought most games won’t launch unless you’re connected to the internet.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>I thought most games won’t launch unless you’re connected to the internet.
Only Xbox.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>I thought most games won’t launch unless you’re connected to the internet.
Only Xbox.
I believe both Series X/S and PS5 can both be played offline as long as it’s set as your primary console. If you have a secondary one, you’ll need to have an internet connection. Either way, a constant internet connection is practically a requirement these days since physical discs barely do anything.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Even Nintendo is pulling this shit now. The physical cartridge for the MGS Master Collection only contains the MSX and NES titles. You have to download the rest.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Are they not? I thought most games won’t launch unless you’re connected to the internet.
That's what they were TRYING to do with the Xbox One, and got massive backlash over it. You don't need to be online to launch a physical game, you don't even need to be online to launch a digital game as long as the system is set on your primary console and the account that has it set as primary is what purchased/downloaded the game.
Even Nintendo is pulling this shit now. The physical cartridge for the MGS Master Collection only contains the MSX and NES titles. You have to download the rest.
>Even Nintendo is pulling this shit now. The physical cartridge for the MGS Master Collection only contains the MSX and NES titles. You have to download the rest.
Actually, Nintendo is not. It's third parties that are doing it because they want to cheap out on using a smaller cartridge than one that can actually fit their game and expect you to download the rest. Practically no first party Switch games do this, it's 3rd parties pulling that stunt. Even that's not as bad as the nonsense MS was attempting though, because there is no activating/registering your physical Switch game, it just gets downloaded as if it was a patch. You can still buy a used game that pulled that stunt and have it download the needed data, you would not even be able to launch a new physical game on the Xbox One without an internet connection with what MS was planning, and definitely not a used or borrowed one.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>as long as the system is set on your primary console and the account that has it set as primary is what purchased/downloaded the game.
That still seems like bullshit. I think the worst part is just how much functionality you lose with modern consoles when playing offline. Like yeah, technically you can play PS5 or Xbox without an internet connection, but you’ll be getting the most barebones possible experience.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Like yeah, technically you can play PS5 or Xbox without an internet connection, but you’ll be getting the most barebones possible experience.
Depends on the game. Obviously an online-centric game yes you will miss out on a lot, an offline single player experience however unless the game is a DLC-fest or is a broken mess then not so much. I have many first party Switch games that never got a patch and are still on version 1.0, even some on my PS4 like that.
On top of that, cart/disk re-pressings happen. Kirby Star Allies on Switch had many many updates that added a lot of content, but newer carts had those updates on them. When I purchased the game a while after launch, the cart was at version 3.0.
Spyro also did the same on PS4 and Xbox, the game originally took up more space than the 50GB disk could hold and still needed an additional 10GB patch to basically download the rest of the third game.... but it got a 45GB "patch" that was basically the entire game patched up and recompressed. There are later pressings of the disk for PS4 and Xbox that have the updated entire 45GB game on them with no download needed. (Unfortunately, this is not true for any of the Switch versions... even though the Switch version is 15.1GB and definitely could fit on a 16GB cart, there have even been Switch games on 32GB carts before... well... I only know of two that didn't cheap out and used a 32GB cart, Dragon Quest Dragon Quest Heroes1+2 and Witcher 3... supposedly 64GB carts came out in 2020 but I have no idea if any game ever used one).
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yes, that’s what I’m saying. The Series X/S and PS5 are essentially giant paper weights without a constant internet connection.
By proven right, I mean Microsoft did accurately predict the future of electronics. I didn’t say it was a good thing.
It was also Sony's first attempt at cracking the games market. The fact it wasn't the massive success the Famicon was is neither here nor there. I don't even know why you are so mad, they learned from it and had lots of success using everyone else's chips in the MIPS Computer Systems Playstation 12 years later.
>Cheap.
For games prices in particular I never noticed until like a decade later just how much more fricking expensive Nintendo cart games cost compared to PS1 games but I wasn't the one buying them. Cart games often would be upwards of $100 easy adjusted for inflation. I think on average a PS1 game was around $30-40? NES,SNES,N64 games could easily be $50 or more.
>It changed the way we game
That's what people thought when they bought it but the truth is that 90% of games worth playing on it were 2D or possible in 2D (Crash)
First 3D console and released before the N64. Also extremely poverty friendly because you could find one everywhere and every idiot could burn PS1 games at home
Everyone knew at least one guy who could burn games for them, plus you also had street "vendors" (ie. a guy who sold burned discs). I still say hi to the guy who used to burn CDs for us 20+ years ago.
We also had a guy in town with a huge collection who made a living out of copying games and mp3s. I still have his lists from 2001. Dude had thousands of discs. He died a decade later in a drug overdose. I only ever bought two CDs from him, it was two subbed episodes of La Blue Girl Returns (we had others who could burn games for us, but nobody who had that sort of stuff).
>burned PS1 games from street markets
These weren't burned, Russian bootlegs were pressed CDs.
>These weren't burned, Russian bootlegs were pressed CDs.
No, you had people who burned stuff for you for a fee. You picked whatever you want from their list and then paid for it. Bootleg vendors were different, and in eastern europe in the 90s stores stocked both western original stuff and bootlegs equally, people couldn't afford original stuff so the knockoffs sold very well.
Why do I have to make hourly useless cope threads about how Playstation consoles have games or sold well? Why can't I move on and do something productive?
It's literally an insecure fat 40 year old who needs everyone to know how great his shitty toy from 20 years ago is >TELL ME MY PLAYSTATION IS THE BEST PLEASE
Playstation was so easy to develop for they sold amateur kits to the general public for that purpose.
A better question is, why did Sony stop being so friendly to gamers and developers after the PS1?
Coming from Sony I think added a lot of legitimacy, not being a "game" company >And no don't bring up NEC or Philips or whatever, no-one even knew what those consoles were
Due to the videogame crash Nintendo/Sega heavily advertised towards kids.
Sony took the playstation and advertised it to teenagers, pushing the 16+ and 18+ titles that Nintendo especially was too scared to have.
12 year olds fricking loved getting 16+ games and showing off how much more mature/cool they were. It's where the CoD players being 12yo came from.
Nintendo had 2 consoles and a handheld out before sony even entered the market. do you have the capacity to understand what being disingenuous means? That’s like saying Microsoft lost the 4th gen console wars.
Far from being limited to providing sound chips, they had their entire own system on the market before the Famicon even existed. Pretending this didn't happen isn't going to work.
Verification not required.
5 months ago
Anonymous
So Sony takes half sales for all systems that used its sound chips. That makes your chart from earlier obsolete. That’s only fair for numbers sake. You wanna start moving the goal post, that’s what you get.
5 months ago
Anonymous
No it doesn't, that's just some weird snoy cope to get over the fact that Sony entered the market long before Nintendo and still got absolutely shat on.
5 months ago
Anonymous
So Nintendo is in the Yakuza business just because they still make Hanafuda cards?
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Developed by ASCII Corporation using some parts built by Sony
That's like saying a Corvette built in Germany is a Volkswagen.
Are you moronic?
5 months ago
Anonymous
No, Sony built their own machine, hence why it is called the Sony MSX and why there an XBOX HUEG SONY logo right there on the front of it. Did your parents have any children who aren't moronic?
5 months ago
Anonymous
There was gonna be a Sony logo on the fricking SNES Playstation-X addon too, you dumb homosexual. It's there to show that they made the parts like any brand does.
Do you think "made in china" means your homosexual little iPhone is from a chinese electronics company too?
5 months ago
Anonymous
lol where's the MIPS Computer Systems logo on the PS? Where's the LSI Logic Corp logo? Where's the AMD logo on the PS5? The Sony logo is on the Sony MSX because... Sony made the Sony MSX, which is why it was brought to market in 1983 as the Sony MSX. >Nintendo had 2 consoles and a handheld out before sony even entered the market.
Still lolling at this 2bh.
5 months ago
Anonymous
The max was also made by nearly every single other electronics manufacturer of the time. The fact Sony had it's name on one, dies t mean they created it. It was created by Microsoft. You disingenuous piece of shit troll double Black person. Just like your first post, you got that sociopath inflection that all nintendrones use.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>The fact Sony had it's name on one, dies t mean they created it.
No, it actually does, hence why there is only a Sony logo on it and why all the other MSX's were branded by the company that manufactured them.
>where's the MIPS Computer Systems logo on the PS? Where's the LSI Logic Corp logo? Where's the AMD logo on the PS5?
Same place all the MSX's made by all of these companies >https://www.msx.org/wiki/Category:MSX_Companies
featuring their own logos on their own models went - up your moronic ass.
It wasn't even DESIGNED by Sony. Microsoft and ASCII came up with it and Sony was only supplying the parts for it. NEC and Panasonic were also involved in its development and the rest would build their own versions of it.
I reiterate that you're an illiterate imbecile with more chromossomes than neurons. End yourself with silica, Black person.
>https://www.msx.org/wiki/Category:MSX_Companies
Show me pictures of machines made by those companies with a big fat SONY logo on the front. Oh wait, you can't.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Show me pictures of machines made by those companies with a big fat SONY logo on the front. Oh wait, you can't.
That's literally the point. It's not Sony's console.
Fricking moron lmfao
5 months ago
Anonymous
That’s a home computer, not a console. Different market.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>he's now pretending ASCII built the MSX
Wrong.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Msx >Not a computer
Nintendrone revisionism is getting way out of hand. Pretty soon they'll have a whole imaginary history they refer to. It's fricking insanity.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I’m not pretending anything. The MSX was a Japanese home computer, not a console.
The reason he has to push this so hard. So get this if he doesn’t push the narrative of Nintendo winning on the macro, then he’ll have to accept the micro of generation by generation grading. Where Nintendo only wins a few, and of course a nintoddler can’t handle that.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>I won a few battles
You lost the war. We haven't even got into the fact that Sony loses money on every console it sells.
The key difference being that the PlayStation is a home console, not a home computer. Different markets.
Wrong. >Before the success of Nintendo's Family Computer, the MSX was the platform that major Japanese game studios such as Konami and Hudson Soft developed for. The Metal Gear series, for example, was first written for MSX hardware.
They worked with Microsoft, it’s a computer. You’re the only one that’s too shit faced moronic to understand, ohh, I mean you’re the only one pretending to not acknowledge the actual facts of the situation to try and save face for Nintendo like a fricking sociopathic bootlicker.
They worked on an architecture. They had absolutely zero input on the products that used that architecture. One of which was Sony's fledgling entry in the video game market.
Sony then went on to "Get lucky" again with the ps4, and super "lucky" with the ps5.
That was actually AMD who got lucky there. Chip manufacturers get all the credit round here pal.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Before the success of Nintendo's Family Computer, the MSX was the platform that major Japanese game studios such as Konami and Hudson Soft developed for. The Metal Gear series, for example, was first written for MSX hardware
Okay? That still doesn’t make it a console. It was a home computer platform that also played games.
5 months ago
Anonymous
And that still doesn't make the Playstation Sony's entry to video games.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yes, but it was Sony’s entry into the console market. Also, it’s PlayStation, not Playstation.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Sony won
5 months ago
Anonymous
Damn, shockingly small compared to Microsoft.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I guess we know who really won, kek. The American people and the people in this thread. Thank you Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo, for making us like this
5 months ago
Anonymous
I’m more talking about how much Sony had its lunch eaten in the electronics market by the likes of Apple and Samsung compared to their 80s/90s prime.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Ohh, yeah. I listened to my disman while playing SNES in 1999-2002. Who did t have at least one Sony product l. Speakers, tv, vcr, CD player, stereo system, walkman, discman.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Discman* wait Sony didn't make speakers I'm thinking pioneer
5 months ago
Anonymous
>shrinking market cap >loses money on every console >clinging onto obsolete media formats for dear life
ITS OVER
It’s not over until that new Sony handheld piece of shit fails. I miss when corporations weren’t completely soulless, they used to have a small part of creativity
5 months ago
Anonymous
Sony is a huge Japanese megacorp. Video games is one of their worst performing divisions.
Nintendo exclusively makes video games.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Sony is still a large company, but nowhere near what they were at their peak. Apple and Samsung took over most of the electronics products that Sony used to be the industry leader in. Sony smartphones aren’t even sold by the major U.S. cellular carriers.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Certainly. Their best division now is insurance.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I thought it was Camera Lens
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Video games is one of their worst performing divisions.
moron.
5 months ago
Anonymous
People also forget that the reason Sony was so insistent on pushing their custom shit in the PS2 and PS3 was because they had plans to license out the Emotion Engine and Cell technology for other uses beyond video game consoles.
5 months ago
Anonymous
they were used beyond game consoles. It throws Ganker into a tizzy when you tell them the cell was a success. Even as far back as 2009. Then there's the GSCube.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yep, the Cell ended up being used in a bunch of different things.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Jesus, Nintendo is worth half of all of Sony?
that's crazy considering they only do games
5 months ago
Anonymous
>One of which was Sony's fledgling entry in the video game market.
msx is a computer.
>” MSX is a standardized home computer architecture, announced by ASCII Corporation on June 16, 1983. It was initially conceived by Microsoft as a product for the Eastern sector, and jointly marketed by Kazuhiko Nishi, the director at ASCII Corporation. Microsoft and Nishi conceived the project as an attempt to create unified standards among various home computing system manufacturers of the period, in the same fashion as the VHS standard for home video tape machines. The first MSX computer sold to the public was a Mitsubishi ML-8000, released on October 21, 1983, thus marking its official release date.”
Notice how it states “ among various home computing system manufacturers”? That’s because sony was a computer manufacturer, before it manufactured the msx COMPUTER.
5 months ago
Anonymous
And Nintendo made playing cards before they wiped the floor with Sony.
5 months ago
Anonymous
I’m not pretending anything. The MSX was a Japanese home computer, not a console.
5 months ago
Anonymous
It was also Sony's first attempt at cracking the games market. The fact it wasn't the massive success the Famicon was is neither here nor there. I don't even know why you are so mad, they learned from it and had lots of success using everyone else's chips in the MIPS Computer Systems Playstation 12 years later.
5 months ago
Anonymous
The key difference being that the PlayStation is a home console, not a home computer. Different markets.
5 months ago
Anonymous
They worked with Microsoft, it’s a computer. You’re the only one that’s too shit faced moronic to understand, ohh, I mean you’re the only one pretending to not acknowledge the actual facts of the situation to try and save face for Nintendo like a fricking sociopathic bootlicker.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Hitachi made the Saturn's CPU and made their own Saturn models with the Hitachi branding. Does that mean Hitachi actually made the Saturn and not Sega?
5 months ago
Anonymous
Yes. Hitachi, per their deal with Sega, made that Saturn. Says so right there on the shell. I'm not sure what you are trying to prove with that image, but it definitely isn't a picture of an MSX that was manufactured by say Toshiba, yet inexplicably had nothing but a Sony logo on it. Let me know when you find such an image and I will eat an entire fat PS2 on live stream.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Wait, I’m confused. I understand that MSX was just a general platform that other companies could license, but did Sony actually manufacture all the parts that went into their branded MSX variant?
5 months ago
Anonymous
No, I don't think Sony manufactured any of the parts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSX#History
5 months ago
Anonymous
So the idiot talking about Sony sound chips was just lying?
5 months ago
Anonymous
For SNES? Those are real.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Wtf has a SNES got to do with a conversation about MSX?
5 months ago
Anonymous
The MSX was an open platform moronic, any manufacturer could license the design, its more akin to the 3DO than anything else
This is like saying Panasonic is a game console manufacturer because they released a 3DO model
5 months ago
Anonymous
Are you trying to pretend that Sony isn't a games console manufacturer? Sony did manufacture the MSX. The MSX was the most popular games platform in Japan. The MSX was Sony's entry into the games market. Denying any of this just makes you look like a butthurt fanboy.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>where's the MIPS Computer Systems logo on the PS? Where's the LSI Logic Corp logo? Where's the AMD logo on the PS5?
Same place all the MSX's made by all of these companies >https://www.msx.org/wiki/Category:MSX_Companies
featuring their own logos on their own models went - up your moronic ass.
It wasn't even DESIGNED by Sony. Microsoft and ASCII came up with it and Sony was only supplying the parts for it. NEC and Panasonic were also involved in its development and the rest would build their own versions of it.
I reiterate that you're an illiterate imbecile with more chromossomes than neurons. End yourself with silica, Black person.
>Because reasons
It's been explained to you multiple times, you're just a sociopath who gets off to lying about videogames on the internet
5 months ago
Anonymous
No it hasn't. We had one moron pretending there's a Sony logo on the Sony MSX just because there's a Sony chip inside, despite the fact that every other MSX has precisely ZERO Sony branding. And then there was some autistic noises about Microsoft. LOL. Lots of cope, zero explanations though.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>despite the fact that every other MSX has precisely ZERO Sony branding
There's a Sony logo on the Sony MSX because Sony manufactured ONE of the MANY MSXs that MULTIPLE companies were manufacturing and putting their OWN logos on.
You dumb fricking Black person.
5 months ago
Anonymous
Correct. I'm glad we can finally agree that Sony entered the market in 1983.
5 months ago
Anonymous
>Developed by ASCII Corporation using some parts built by Sony
That's like saying a Corvette built in Germany is a Volkswagen.
Are you moronic?
5 months ago
Anonymous
He's a sociopath stop feeding his ego. This is the mind of a nintendrone on oot-aid. It's not a fricking joke
It was one of first CD-based game consoles next to the PC-Engine CD to actually get it right. It was also incredibly easy to develop for and it was cheap to buy. Really no wonder it was super successful.
With Nintendo, you had to guess how many titles you'd sell, and spend half your budget on carts which took months to produce. If you guessed too high, you'd end up with millions of dollars wasted on carts you can't sell. If you guessed too low, you massively undersold the game and by the time you make a 2nd run of carts, everyone already forgot about your game and at best you can sell it as a budget title. Because of this, even a critically acclaimed game that sells super fast can end up losing money for the publisher.
With Sony, making CDs cost an insignificant amount of the budget, and they can manufacture CDs at every part of the world. If you need to order a 2nd print run for whatever reason, it can be on the market by the end of the week. Worldwide. The only thing faster than that is online platforms.
The Playstation could've had the shittiest hardware on the market and it still would've won the generation by a giant margin simply because it was the most economical for publishers to publish games on.
>Nintendo had shitty business practices, but also had a strict quality procedure which resulted in less shovelware, but also less publishers using their console. Including publishers that were previously 2 generation loyalists.
>Sony was great with business, but didn't really care that much about quality control, which resulted in tons of shovelware, but also the ability for smaller developers to shine and established developers to branch into new paths without big brother butt fricking them.
Imagine if the Nintendo PlayStation was a thing, a mix of Sony business and Nintendo quality control. If would have been amazing, but now, look at us. We were once brothers, the snes used a Sony sound chip, that's how Mommy and daddy met
That's horseshit, Nintendo consoles were also full of jank shovelware, you just tune it out because you only remember Mario / Zelda / Metroid. And their business practices actively burned away all third parties they had.
Don't exaggerated what I said. I said less shovelware and I was mainly referring to the N64. If you couldn't infer, I was talking about the N64 and PS1.
>Imagine if the Nintendo PlayStation was a thing, a mix of Sony business and Nintendo quality control. If would have been amazing, but now, look at us. We were once brothers, the snes used a Sony sound chip, that's how Mommy and daddy met
The SNES's CD drive would have just been a CD drive in place of a cartridge, nothing more. I was disappointed when that proto was found and BIOS/specs dumped and found out that's all it was. I was expecting it to be more like the SegaCD which did add additional hardware and features to the Genesis beyond just giving it a CD drive, even the FDS did that to the Famicom, but no, the SNES CD/Play Station/whatever you want to call it was nothing more than just being able to access a CD in place of a cartridge.
Which means it would have actually held the system back in many ways. Sure, you would have gotten considerably more storage space, and FMVs or CD audio if that matters to you in a SNES era game, but the SNES carts had more enhancement chips in them than any other cartridge-based system, it had so many that not even any flashcart or the MiSTer can support every single one. A CD drive would have not helped there, if anything, it would have held it back, or been pointless as those games would have had to release on a cart anyway.
>Which means it would have actually held the system back in many ways. Sure, you would have gotten considerably more storage space, and FMVs or CD audio if that matters to you in a SNES era game,
That matters a frick ton. Using CD Audio means you have the SPC chip completely freed up from music, so it can now do either 4 times higher quality voices or 4 times more sound effects. Or it can stream voices like that one game (Star Ocean?) did, allowing games to have full voice acting. The shit ton of extra space is already a big deal too, games can be released at whatever size they can make them, without publishers israeliteing on the cartridge size forcing developers to squeeze everything into 1/4th sized LoROM cart.
And who is to say that they can't release upgraded SNES CD carts that have a FX2 chip inside, or something even more advanced that takes advantage of the CD. So not a generic "faster cpu" but something like a dedicated data decompressor for 10x quality FMVs or faster game loading, lots of extra memory, etc. Unlike the Sega CD, the SNES can actually be expanded this way.
>That matters a frick ton. Using CD Audio means you have the SPC chip completely freed up from music, so it can now do either 4 times higher quality voices or 4 times more sound effects.
This was the 16 bit era, we didn't need audio that advanced for the games. The SegaCD didn't do ham on the audio like that just because some of it's sound chip was free from playing CD audio.
>The shit ton of extra space is already a big deal too, games can be released at whatever size they can make them, without publishers israeliteing on the cartridge size forcing developers to squeeze everything into 1/4th sized LoROM cart.
Again, games weren't memory-hogs as much back then. Yes you hit space limitations in some games, but very few utterly packed the ROM to the brim unless they were intentionally wasting space because they had it left over. You definitely didn't need 750MB of space when most games were fine being 4MB or less back then.
The loss of expansion chips was a much bigger problem than the loss of a sound channel or CD space.
>And who is to say that they can't release upgraded SNES CD carts that have a FX2 chip inside, or something even more advanced that takes advantage of the CD.
SEGA tried that, pic related. We all know how well that went. And now you want Nintendo to attempt what were basically SegaCD32X games? Do you have any idea how poorly the games that required both a SegaCD and 32X did?
29 years old as December 3th, fav console with a crap ton of great games, only problem where 2D games with only vampire Savior EX and the Street Fighter Alpha games worth a shit, besides that it had everything.
Cheers.
Old gaming magazines came with demo discs. I remember playing a bunch of games and getting hyped for what was coming out because of these free samples.
Here the possibility to pirate games for 1 dollar sold the console , i personally have better memories about the n64, like the games were higher quality, (parents were rich had 2 consoles (yes, thats considered rich here))
It did everything NES, SNES and Genesis had done right, while the companies behind them failed to replicate their own success.
It came out early, like the Genesis did, it was a cheaper console than the Saturn, had the full multiplatform support like NES/SNES did, all genres were well represented, including sports, so once again it did SEGA's strategy better than them, and it got JRPGs from Nintendo.
It just did everything right while Nintendo and SEGA did a bunch of things wrong.
Sony was a MASSIVE brand when the PS1 launched. They were known for producing quality electronics, and people associated them with good products. Buying a game console made by them was almost a no-brainer. Sony just did everything right with the PS1 when it came to distribution. Their consoles at games were front and centre, and basically pushed Sega out of the market whether or not the Saturn was a meme console. The PS2 was a pain in the ass for devs by comparison, but it still moved units. Where they went wrong was with the PS3, and subsequent corporate restructuring after it's failed launch years. Sony's creative leadership moved from Japan to the U.S, and the age of corporate judaism reigned from then on.
this thread again? >cheap console >cheap games >cheap to publish for (practically subsidized publisihing and marketing) >easy to develop for >came out when its competitors either fumbled or were stagnating >made console gaming mainstream in previously neglected markets (europe, australia) >great games in pretty much all genres, (even invented some new ones on its own)
There you can stop making this thread now
>cheap to publish for (practically subsidized publisihing and marketing)
I remember going to a game dev recruitment fair and a dev from driver told me it cost them like 2 pounds for the box manual and cd. They said it would cost 20-30 for an N64 package depending on the size of the cart.
I had a half dozen demo disks and can confirm I could basically just play those.
As an adult with one of those China handhelds I've been going back and playing those games from the demo disks.
Sony got pretty much every 3rd party developer to work for them. The N64 and Saturn are great consoles, but they didn't have the games the PS1 had, not to mention that they had great hardware and for the price, it was cheaper than the Saturn and the games were cheaper than a N64 cartridge.
Also, both Sega and Nintendo made huge mistakes during that generation and Sony capitalized on that.
Design/accessibility and willingness to try bad/experimental games and release those more than other consoles allowing people a wider range to choose from compared to anything else
N64 is the most normie console ever. Games about jumping plushies, secret agents, action heroes and other safe premises. Almost no wacky games, almost no arty games, almost no weeb games, almost no games with a focus on atmosphere or narrative, always looking for the broadest appeal and the family audiences... Konami and Treasure were pretty much the only companies that tried to offer something that didn't feel designed by a committee, but we're talking about a tiny handful of games.
It beat the Saturn because it was US$100 cheaper, did 3D better and stronger IPs early on, while SEGA butchered the Saturn's US launch in many ways.
It beat the N64 because it used CDs instead of cartridges and had more 3rd party support, also came out way earlier.
Cheap.
Stupidly easy SDK to work with.
Could pull off good looking 3D graphics without rendering it at a snails pace.
Excellent audio.
CD's allowed for large storage.
Oh forgot to add, it also had a really good controller design.
Both SEGA and Nintendo fricked up royal that gen.
SEGA already had people disillusioned from TWO different upgrades with both the SegaCD and especially the 32X, and then they surprise-launched the Saturn with barely any software and with a higher MSRP than the PS1.
Nintendo burned just about every bridge with 3rd party developers, even longtime hit makers like Squaresoft and then insisted on still using carts when everyone else moved onto CDs.
This was on TOP of the fact that the PS1 was also a well designed system like
mentioned that further attracted devs and customers from the Saturn and N64.
So Sony was in the right place at the time time... mostly because all of their competition screwed up, but while they did get lucky, it wasn't pure luck, they also had a good system on top of Nintendo and SEGA screwing up.
Nintendo basically did the same thing in the 80s with the launch of the NES in the US.
Sony even still got lucky that everyone else fricked up again with the release of the PS2 and MS was an untrusted unknown, even though again, the PS2 was no slouch and had features people wanted like a DVD player... even if it was weaker than the GC or Xbox.
Sony then went on to "Get lucky" again with the ps4, and super "lucky" with the ps5.
>Sony then went on to "Get lucky" again with the ps4, and super "lucky" with the ps5.
I never tried to state that all of Sony's successes were because they got lucky, just that they had a huge boubt of luck with the PS1 and PS2.
To a lesser extent they did get a bit lucky with the PS4 as well, very little interest in the Xbox One (especially when MS originally killed the hype with that no used/borrowed games nonsense and forced inclusion of Kinect that jacked up the price by $100) and Nintendo releasing the WiiU...
Ironically Microsoft was ultimately proven right seeing as basically no modern home electronics device functions without a wifi connection and everybody just accepts it now.
That's so fricking depressing
How is that "proven right"? The PS3 and Xbox360 before it had heavy internet connectivity, even the original Xbox. There is a difference between playing online and using it to download patches, and your console requiring online activation and physical games requiring online registration and being treated like a non-transferrable digital license.
Yes, that’s what I’m saying. The Series X/S and PS5 are essentially giant paper weights without a constant internet connection.
>The Series X/S and PS5 are essentially giant paper weights without a constant internet connection.
But they're not, that's my point.
Are they not? I thought most games won’t launch unless you’re connected to the internet.
>I thought most games won’t launch unless you’re connected to the internet.
Only Xbox.
I believe both Series X/S and PS5 can both be played offline as long as it’s set as your primary console. If you have a secondary one, you’ll need to have an internet connection. Either way, a constant internet connection is practically a requirement these days since physical discs barely do anything.
Even Nintendo is pulling this shit now. The physical cartridge for the MGS Master Collection only contains the MSX and NES titles. You have to download the rest.
>Are they not? I thought most games won’t launch unless you’re connected to the internet.
That's what they were TRYING to do with the Xbox One, and got massive backlash over it. You don't need to be online to launch a physical game, you don't even need to be online to launch a digital game as long as the system is set on your primary console and the account that has it set as primary is what purchased/downloaded the game.
>Even Nintendo is pulling this shit now. The physical cartridge for the MGS Master Collection only contains the MSX and NES titles. You have to download the rest.
Actually, Nintendo is not. It's third parties that are doing it because they want to cheap out on using a smaller cartridge than one that can actually fit their game and expect you to download the rest. Practically no first party Switch games do this, it's 3rd parties pulling that stunt. Even that's not as bad as the nonsense MS was attempting though, because there is no activating/registering your physical Switch game, it just gets downloaded as if it was a patch. You can still buy a used game that pulled that stunt and have it download the needed data, you would not even be able to launch a new physical game on the Xbox One without an internet connection with what MS was planning, and definitely not a used or borrowed one.
>as long as the system is set on your primary console and the account that has it set as primary is what purchased/downloaded the game.
That still seems like bullshit. I think the worst part is just how much functionality you lose with modern consoles when playing offline. Like yeah, technically you can play PS5 or Xbox without an internet connection, but you’ll be getting the most barebones possible experience.
>Like yeah, technically you can play PS5 or Xbox without an internet connection, but you’ll be getting the most barebones possible experience.
Depends on the game. Obviously an online-centric game yes you will miss out on a lot, an offline single player experience however unless the game is a DLC-fest or is a broken mess then not so much. I have many first party Switch games that never got a patch and are still on version 1.0, even some on my PS4 like that.
On top of that, cart/disk re-pressings happen. Kirby Star Allies on Switch had many many updates that added a lot of content, but newer carts had those updates on them. When I purchased the game a while after launch, the cart was at version 3.0.
Spyro also did the same on PS4 and Xbox, the game originally took up more space than the 50GB disk could hold and still needed an additional 10GB patch to basically download the rest of the third game.... but it got a 45GB "patch" that was basically the entire game patched up and recompressed. There are later pressings of the disk for PS4 and Xbox that have the updated entire 45GB game on them with no download needed. (Unfortunately, this is not true for any of the Switch versions... even though the Switch version is 15.1GB and definitely could fit on a 16GB cart, there have even been Switch games on 32GB carts before... well... I only know of two that didn't cheap out and used a 32GB cart, Dragon Quest Dragon Quest Heroes1+2 and Witcher 3... supposedly 64GB carts came out in 2020 but I have no idea if any game ever used one).
By proven right, I mean Microsoft did accurately predict the future of electronics. I didn’t say it was a good thing.
You forgot to mention that Sony was also extremely cooperative with 3rd party devs
Also:
Nintendo burned bridges with companies like square which joined playstation
If this board starts snoy yellow face posting it’s over
the only reason the psy-q exists was because despite sony buying psygnosis, they still wouldnt give them a dev kit, so they had to make their own
Came here to post this, we can forget every other post
>Cheap.
For games prices in particular I never noticed until like a decade later just how much more fricking expensive Nintendo cart games cost compared to PS1 games but I wasn't the one buying them. Cart games often would be upwards of $100 easy adjusted for inflation. I think on average a PS1 game was around $30-40? NES,SNES,N64 games could easily be $50 or more.
It changed the way we game
Now if only ODEs and pico PSUs weren't so expensive
>It changed the way we game
That's what people thought when they bought it but the truth is that 90% of games worth playing on it were 2D or possible in 2D (Crash)
Yeah but I'm racist and am not fond of Black folk.
Why do you assume the change was limited to 3d, which the majority of the time was janky in the 90s?
First 3D console and released before the N64. Also extremely poverty friendly because you could find one everywhere and every idiot could burn PS1 games at home
No one had CD burners anon
I hate gen Z
Third worlders bought burned PS1 games from street markets and such.
>burned PS1 games from street markets
These weren't burned, Russian bootlegs were pressed CDs.
not until around 1998 at least
t. had one
>No one had CD burners anon
Everyone knew at least one guy who could burn games for them, plus you also had street "vendors" (ie. a guy who sold burned discs). I still say hi to the guy who used to burn CDs for us 20+ years ago.
We also had a guy in town with a huge collection who made a living out of copying games and mp3s. I still have his lists from 2001. Dude had thousands of discs. He died a decade later in a drug overdose. I only ever bought two CDs from him, it was two subbed episodes of La Blue Girl Returns (we had others who could burn games for us, but nobody who had that sort of stuff).
>These weren't burned, Russian bootlegs were pressed CDs.
No, you had people who burned stuff for you for a fee. You picked whatever you want from their list and then paid for it. Bootleg vendors were different, and in eastern europe in the 90s stores stocked both western original stuff and bootlegs equally, people couldn't afford original stuff so the knockoffs sold very well.
everyone had CD burners
And everyone had a Blockbuster
>First 3D console and released before the N64.
False.
Lurk more.
You needed the moon chip
Final fantasy 7 and gran tourismo
Why do I have to make hourly useless cope threads about how Playstation consoles have games or sold well? Why can't I move on and do something productive?
Because just one more post and at long last nintendo 64 will win the console war
So I should stop making PS1 cope threads? I don't understand
>good Sony consoles have flat tops and are stackable
>bad ones have moronic curves
Hmmm
>bad ones
The slim models are far more reliable than the boxy ones.
what does that have to do with my post at all
FIFA and piracy
signed: EUROPA
Didn't europeans pirate Winning Eleven 4 to 7 like we did in Brazil?
Winning Eleven was way better than FIFA
Well, it was called "PRO" in late 90s and early 2000s, in mids 2000s changed to PES.
But we piracy almost everything.
No real competition so people put all their games on it
your threads stick out like a blind cobblers thumb, fatty
It's literally an insecure fat 40 year old who needs everyone to know how great his shitty toy from 20 years ago is
>TELL ME MY PLAYSTATION IS THE BEST PLEASE
An amazing library
This is a console I have only experienced through emulation and has become one of my favorite consoles of all time
What game? Is that the first Armored Corps?
You could hack it and buy games for a few shekels.
Playstation was so easy to develop for they sold amateur kits to the general public for that purpose.
A better question is, why did Sony stop being so friendly to gamers and developers after the PS1?
Coming from Sony I think added a lot of legitimacy, not being a "game" company
>And no don't bring up NEC or Philips or whatever, no-one even knew what those consoles were
I forget how many third worlders post here until threads like this.
Due to the videogame crash Nintendo/Sega heavily advertised towards kids.
Sony took the playstation and advertised it to teenagers, pushing the 16+ and 18+ titles that Nintendo especially was too scared to have.
12 year olds fricking loved getting 16+ games and showing off how much more mature/cool they were. It's where the CoD players being 12yo came from.
Psygnosis and Namco.
Why does the ps1 mog this board so hard, is it because Sega or Nintendo “deserved” to win
Nintendo won.
Nintendo had 2 consoles and a handheld out before sony even entered the market. do you have the capacity to understand what being disingenuous means? That’s like saying Microsoft lost the 4th gen console wars.
>we're just going to pretend Sony had no involvement in the MSX because reasons
Sony had involvement in a lot of fricking consoles due to their sound chips, moron.
Including the snes, so we should chalk up half the snes sales for Sony using this morons logic.
Far from being limited to providing sound chips, they had their entire own system on the market before the Famicon even existed. Pretending this didn't happen isn't going to work.
Verification not required.
So Sony takes half sales for all systems that used its sound chips. That makes your chart from earlier obsolete. That’s only fair for numbers sake. You wanna start moving the goal post, that’s what you get.
No it doesn't, that's just some weird snoy cope to get over the fact that Sony entered the market long before Nintendo and still got absolutely shat on.
So Nintendo is in the Yakuza business just because they still make Hanafuda cards?
>Developed by ASCII Corporation using some parts built by Sony
That's like saying a Corvette built in Germany is a Volkswagen.
Are you moronic?
No, Sony built their own machine, hence why it is called the Sony MSX and why there an XBOX HUEG SONY logo right there on the front of it. Did your parents have any children who aren't moronic?
There was gonna be a Sony logo on the fricking SNES Playstation-X addon too, you dumb homosexual. It's there to show that they made the parts like any brand does.
Do you think "made in china" means your homosexual little iPhone is from a chinese electronics company too?
lol where's the MIPS Computer Systems logo on the PS? Where's the LSI Logic Corp logo? Where's the AMD logo on the PS5? The Sony logo is on the Sony MSX because... Sony made the Sony MSX, which is why it was brought to market in 1983 as the Sony MSX.
>Nintendo had 2 consoles and a handheld out before sony even entered the market.
Still lolling at this 2bh.
The max was also made by nearly every single other electronics manufacturer of the time. The fact Sony had it's name on one, dies t mean they created it. It was created by Microsoft. You disingenuous piece of shit troll double Black person. Just like your first post, you got that sociopath inflection that all nintendrones use.
>The fact Sony had it's name on one, dies t mean they created it.
No, it actually does, hence why there is only a Sony logo on it and why all the other MSX's were branded by the company that manufactured them.
>https://www.msx.org/wiki/Category:MSX_Companies
Show me pictures of machines made by those companies with a big fat SONY logo on the front. Oh wait, you can't.
>Show me pictures of machines made by those companies with a big fat SONY logo on the front. Oh wait, you can't.
That's literally the point. It's not Sony's console.
Fricking moron lmfao
That’s a home computer, not a console. Different market.
>he's now pretending ASCII built the MSX
Wrong.
>Msx
>Not a computer
Nintendrone revisionism is getting way out of hand. Pretty soon they'll have a whole imaginary history they refer to. It's fricking insanity.
The reason he has to push this so hard. So get this if he doesn’t push the narrative of Nintendo winning on the macro, then he’ll have to accept the micro of generation by generation grading. Where Nintendo only wins a few, and of course a nintoddler can’t handle that.
>I won a few battles
You lost the war. We haven't even got into the fact that Sony loses money on every console it sells.
Wrong.
>Before the success of Nintendo's Family Computer, the MSX was the platform that major Japanese game studios such as Konami and Hudson Soft developed for. The Metal Gear series, for example, was first written for MSX hardware.
They worked on an architecture. They had absolutely zero input on the products that used that architecture. One of which was Sony's fledgling entry in the video game market.
That was actually AMD who got lucky there. Chip manufacturers get all the credit round here pal.
>Before the success of Nintendo's Family Computer, the MSX was the platform that major Japanese game studios such as Konami and Hudson Soft developed for. The Metal Gear series, for example, was first written for MSX hardware
Okay? That still doesn’t make it a console. It was a home computer platform that also played games.
And that still doesn't make the Playstation Sony's entry to video games.
Yes, but it was Sony’s entry into the console market. Also, it’s PlayStation, not Playstation.
Sony won
Damn, shockingly small compared to Microsoft.
I guess we know who really won, kek. The American people and the people in this thread. Thank you Microsoft and Sony and Nintendo, for making us like this
I’m more talking about how much Sony had its lunch eaten in the electronics market by the likes of Apple and Samsung compared to their 80s/90s prime.
Ohh, yeah. I listened to my disman while playing SNES in 1999-2002. Who did t have at least one Sony product l. Speakers, tv, vcr, CD player, stereo system, walkman, discman.
Discman* wait Sony didn't make speakers I'm thinking pioneer
It’s not over until that new Sony handheld piece of shit fails. I miss when corporations weren’t completely soulless, they used to have a small part of creativity
Sony is a huge Japanese megacorp. Video games is one of their worst performing divisions.
Nintendo exclusively makes video games.
Sony is still a large company, but nowhere near what they were at their peak. Apple and Samsung took over most of the electronics products that Sony used to be the industry leader in. Sony smartphones aren’t even sold by the major U.S. cellular carriers.
Certainly. Their best division now is insurance.
I thought it was Camera Lens
>Video games is one of their worst performing divisions.
moron.
People also forget that the reason Sony was so insistent on pushing their custom shit in the PS2 and PS3 was because they had plans to license out the Emotion Engine and Cell technology for other uses beyond video game consoles.
they were used beyond game consoles. It throws Ganker into a tizzy when you tell them the cell was a success. Even as far back as 2009. Then there's the GSCube.
Yep, the Cell ended up being used in a bunch of different things.
Jesus, Nintendo is worth half of all of Sony?
that's crazy considering they only do games
>One of which was Sony's fledgling entry in the video game market.
msx is a computer.
>” MSX is a standardized home computer architecture, announced by ASCII Corporation on June 16, 1983. It was initially conceived by Microsoft as a product for the Eastern sector, and jointly marketed by Kazuhiko Nishi, the director at ASCII Corporation. Microsoft and Nishi conceived the project as an attempt to create unified standards among various home computing system manufacturers of the period, in the same fashion as the VHS standard for home video tape machines. The first MSX computer sold to the public was a Mitsubishi ML-8000, released on October 21, 1983, thus marking its official release date.”
Notice how it states “ among various home computing system manufacturers”? That’s because sony was a computer manufacturer, before it manufactured the msx COMPUTER.
And Nintendo made playing cards before they wiped the floor with Sony.
I’m not pretending anything. The MSX was a Japanese home computer, not a console.
It was also Sony's first attempt at cracking the games market. The fact it wasn't the massive success the Famicon was is neither here nor there. I don't even know why you are so mad, they learned from it and had lots of success using everyone else's chips in the MIPS Computer Systems Playstation 12 years later.
The key difference being that the PlayStation is a home console, not a home computer. Different markets.
They worked with Microsoft, it’s a computer. You’re the only one that’s too shit faced moronic to understand, ohh, I mean you’re the only one pretending to not acknowledge the actual facts of the situation to try and save face for Nintendo like a fricking sociopathic bootlicker.
Hitachi made the Saturn's CPU and made their own Saturn models with the Hitachi branding. Does that mean Hitachi actually made the Saturn and not Sega?
Yes. Hitachi, per their deal with Sega, made that Saturn. Says so right there on the shell. I'm not sure what you are trying to prove with that image, but it definitely isn't a picture of an MSX that was manufactured by say Toshiba, yet inexplicably had nothing but a Sony logo on it. Let me know when you find such an image and I will eat an entire fat PS2 on live stream.
Wait, I’m confused. I understand that MSX was just a general platform that other companies could license, but did Sony actually manufacture all the parts that went into their branded MSX variant?
No, I don't think Sony manufactured any of the parts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSX#History
So the idiot talking about Sony sound chips was just lying?
For SNES? Those are real.
Wtf has a SNES got to do with a conversation about MSX?
The MSX was an open platform moronic, any manufacturer could license the design, its more akin to the 3DO than anything else
This is like saying Panasonic is a game console manufacturer because they released a 3DO model
Are you trying to pretend that Sony isn't a games console manufacturer? Sony did manufacture the MSX. The MSX was the most popular games platform in Japan. The MSX was Sony's entry into the games market. Denying any of this just makes you look like a butthurt fanboy.
>where's the MIPS Computer Systems logo on the PS? Where's the LSI Logic Corp logo? Where's the AMD logo on the PS5?
Same place all the MSX's made by all of these companies
>https://www.msx.org/wiki/Category:MSX_Companies
featuring their own logos on their own models went - up your moronic ass.
It wasn't even DESIGNED by Sony. Microsoft and ASCII came up with it and Sony was only supplying the parts for it. NEC and Panasonic were also involved in its development and the rest would build their own versions of it.
I reiterate that you're an illiterate imbecile with more chromossomes than neurons. End yourself with silica, Black person.
It just took this one dumb bait to derail the thread. Well meme'd sir
Nintendo only had 2 successful consoles ever since Sony was on the market (Wii and Switch). What Nintendo really had was their handhelds.
Sony done been in the market since 1983 bro.
>Sony has been making consoles since 1983
moron.
>the Sony MSX doesn't count bro cuz reasons!
>Because reasons
It's been explained to you multiple times, you're just a sociopath who gets off to lying about videogames on the internet
No it hasn't. We had one moron pretending there's a Sony logo on the Sony MSX just because there's a Sony chip inside, despite the fact that every other MSX has precisely ZERO Sony branding. And then there was some autistic noises about Microsoft. LOL. Lots of cope, zero explanations though.
>despite the fact that every other MSX has precisely ZERO Sony branding
There's a Sony logo on the Sony MSX because Sony manufactured ONE of the MANY MSXs that MULTIPLE companies were manufacturing and putting their OWN logos on.
You dumb fricking Black person.
Correct. I'm glad we can finally agree that Sony entered the market in 1983.
He's a sociopath stop feeding his ego. This is the mind of a nintendrone on oot-aid. It's not a fricking joke
soul
Because the average IQ is 100
Large marketing budget
It was one of first CD-based game consoles next to the PC-Engine CD to actually get it right. It was also incredibly easy to develop for and it was cheap to buy. Really no wonder it was super successful.
Because Eiffel 65 wrote a song about it, how can you possibly not be successful after something like that?
Can't believe I've never heard of this song before now.
With Nintendo, you had to guess how many titles you'd sell, and spend half your budget on carts which took months to produce. If you guessed too high, you'd end up with millions of dollars wasted on carts you can't sell. If you guessed too low, you massively undersold the game and by the time you make a 2nd run of carts, everyone already forgot about your game and at best you can sell it as a budget title. Because of this, even a critically acclaimed game that sells super fast can end up losing money for the publisher.
With Sony, making CDs cost an insignificant amount of the budget, and they can manufacture CDs at every part of the world. If you need to order a 2nd print run for whatever reason, it can be on the market by the end of the week. Worldwide. The only thing faster than that is online platforms.
The Playstation could've had the shittiest hardware on the market and it still would've won the generation by a giant margin simply because it was the most economical for publishers to publish games on.
>Nintendo had shitty business practices, but also had a strict quality procedure which resulted in less shovelware, but also less publishers using their console. Including publishers that were previously 2 generation loyalists.
>Sony was great with business, but didn't really care that much about quality control, which resulted in tons of shovelware, but also the ability for smaller developers to shine and established developers to branch into new paths without big brother butt fricking them.
Imagine if the Nintendo PlayStation was a thing, a mix of Sony business and Nintendo quality control. If would have been amazing, but now, look at us. We were once brothers, the snes used a Sony sound chip, that's how Mommy and daddy met
That's horseshit, Nintendo consoles were also full of jank shovelware, you just tune it out because you only remember Mario / Zelda / Metroid. And their business practices actively burned away all third parties they had.
Don't exaggerated what I said. I said less shovelware and I was mainly referring to the N64. If you couldn't infer, I was talking about the N64 and PS1.
>their business practices actively burned away all third parties they had.
I Iiterally said that. You fricking moronic parrot
>Imagine if the Nintendo PlayStation was a thing, a mix of Sony business and Nintendo quality control. If would have been amazing, but now, look at us. We were once brothers, the snes used a Sony sound chip, that's how Mommy and daddy met
The SNES's CD drive would have just been a CD drive in place of a cartridge, nothing more. I was disappointed when that proto was found and BIOS/specs dumped and found out that's all it was. I was expecting it to be more like the SegaCD which did add additional hardware and features to the Genesis beyond just giving it a CD drive, even the FDS did that to the Famicom, but no, the SNES CD/Play Station/whatever you want to call it was nothing more than just being able to access a CD in place of a cartridge.
Which means it would have actually held the system back in many ways. Sure, you would have gotten considerably more storage space, and FMVs or CD audio if that matters to you in a SNES era game, but the SNES carts had more enhancement chips in them than any other cartridge-based system, it had so many that not even any flashcart or the MiSTer can support every single one. A CD drive would have not helped there, if anything, it would have held it back, or been pointless as those games would have had to release on a cart anyway.
>and FMVs or CD audio if that matters to you in a SNES era game
It would have been perfect for jarpigs
Imagine comfy 90s anime cutscenes in secret of mana or ffvi
>Which means it would have actually held the system back in many ways. Sure, you would have gotten considerably more storage space, and FMVs or CD audio if that matters to you in a SNES era game,
That matters a frick ton. Using CD Audio means you have the SPC chip completely freed up from music, so it can now do either 4 times higher quality voices or 4 times more sound effects. Or it can stream voices like that one game (Star Ocean?) did, allowing games to have full voice acting. The shit ton of extra space is already a big deal too, games can be released at whatever size they can make them, without publishers israeliteing on the cartridge size forcing developers to squeeze everything into 1/4th sized LoROM cart.
And who is to say that they can't release upgraded SNES CD carts that have a FX2 chip inside, or something even more advanced that takes advantage of the CD. So not a generic "faster cpu" but something like a dedicated data decompressor for 10x quality FMVs or faster game loading, lots of extra memory, etc. Unlike the Sega CD, the SNES can actually be expanded this way.
>That matters a frick ton. Using CD Audio means you have the SPC chip completely freed up from music, so it can now do either 4 times higher quality voices or 4 times more sound effects.
This was the 16 bit era, we didn't need audio that advanced for the games. The SegaCD didn't do ham on the audio like that just because some of it's sound chip was free from playing CD audio.
>The shit ton of extra space is already a big deal too, games can be released at whatever size they can make them, without publishers israeliteing on the cartridge size forcing developers to squeeze everything into 1/4th sized LoROM cart.
Again, games weren't memory-hogs as much back then. Yes you hit space limitations in some games, but very few utterly packed the ROM to the brim unless they were intentionally wasting space because they had it left over. You definitely didn't need 750MB of space when most games were fine being 4MB or less back then.
The loss of expansion chips was a much bigger problem than the loss of a sound channel or CD space.
>And who is to say that they can't release upgraded SNES CD carts that have a FX2 chip inside, or something even more advanced that takes advantage of the CD.
SEGA tried that, pic related. We all know how well that went. And now you want Nintendo to attempt what were basically SegaCD32X games? Do you have any idea how poorly the games that required both a SegaCD and 32X did?
>the Sony MSX, manufactured and marketed exclusively by Sony does not belong to Sony
lol lmao even
>shrinking market cap
>loses money on every console
>clinging onto obsolete media formats for dear life
ITS OVER
29 years old as December 3th, fav console with a crap ton of great games, only problem where 2D games with only vampire Savior EX and the Street Fighter Alpha games worth a shit, besides that it had everything.
Cheers.
Old gaming magazines came with demo discs. I remember playing a bunch of games and getting hyped for what was coming out because of these free samples.
Here the possibility to pirate games for 1 dollar sold the console , i personally have better memories about the n64, like the games were higher quality, (parents were rich had 2 consoles (yes, thats considered rich here))
It did everything NES, SNES and Genesis had done right, while the companies behind them failed to replicate their own success.
It came out early, like the Genesis did, it was a cheaper console than the Saturn, had the full multiplatform support like NES/SNES did, all genres were well represented, including sports, so once again it did SEGA's strategy better than them, and it got JRPGs from Nintendo.
It just did everything right while Nintendo and SEGA did a bunch of things wrong.
Sony was a MASSIVE brand when the PS1 launched. They were known for producing quality electronics, and people associated them with good products. Buying a game console made by them was almost a no-brainer. Sony just did everything right with the PS1 when it came to distribution. Their consoles at games were front and centre, and basically pushed Sega out of the market whether or not the Saturn was a meme console. The PS2 was a pain in the ass for devs by comparison, but it still moved units. Where they went wrong was with the PS3, and subsequent corporate restructuring after it's failed launch years. Sony's creative leadership moved from Japan to the U.S, and the age of corporate judaism reigned from then on.
CD. 3D. Massive company with a brand that was trusted. Learned from working with Nintendo.
this thread again?
>cheap console
>cheap games
>cheap to publish for (practically subsidized publisihing and marketing)
>easy to develop for
>came out when its competitors either fumbled or were stagnating
>made console gaming mainstream in previously neglected markets (europe, australia)
>great games in pretty much all genres, (even invented some new ones on its own)
There you can stop making this thread now
Nes and Snes were plenty popular in Australia
>cheap to publish for (practically subsidized publisihing and marketing)
I remember going to a game dev recruitment fair and a dev from driver told me it cost them like 2 pounds for the box manual and cd. They said it would cost 20-30 for an N64 package depending on the size of the cart.
Ah yes, the famous Sony Microsoft Extended computer. The true precursor to the Playstation.
>MSXtard is still getting BTFO
lmao
Sony joined the market with the PSX
with the NES you mean
I went to one of their concerts with my PlayStation...
Why the open mouth? Are you waiting for his wiener to go in there?
>thinking about wieners this early in the morning
I think your playstation might be worth less now because of this, still funny though.
whodat
Saturn was shit.
N64 was absolute garbage.
Sony were the only ones who made something not awful that generation.
Simple as.
So many games you could probably entertain yourself with just free demo discs back then.
I had a half dozen demo disks and can confirm I could basically just play those.
As an adult with one of those China handhelds I've been going back and playing those games from the demo disks.
Sony got pretty much every 3rd party developer to work for them. The N64 and Saturn are great consoles, but they didn't have the games the PS1 had, not to mention that they had great hardware and for the price, it was cheaper than the Saturn and the games were cheaper than a N64 cartridge.
Also, both Sega and Nintendo made huge mistakes during that generation and Sony capitalized on that.
>Why was the PlayStation so successful?
It was more of an NES/SNES and Genesis successor than the actual successors of those consoles.
Design/accessibility and willingness to try bad/experimental games and release those more than other consoles allowing people a wider range to choose from compared to anything else
Normie appeal, N64 and Saturn are for more interesting.
N64 is the most normie console ever. Games about jumping plushies, secret agents, action heroes and other safe premises. Almost no wacky games, almost no arty games, almost no weeb games, almost no games with a focus on atmosphere or narrative, always looking for the broadest appeal and the family audiences... Konami and Treasure were pretty much the only companies that tried to offer something that didn't feel designed by a committee, but we're talking about a tiny handful of games.
It beat the Saturn because it was US$100 cheaper, did 3D better and stronger IPs early on, while SEGA butchered the Saturn's US launch in many ways.
It beat the N64 because it used CDs instead of cartridges and had more 3rd party support, also came out way earlier.
FIFA
piracy
car games
sport games
that is and was reality. but this anime board would never wanted to accept this true.
>FIFA
Here in Brazil, Winning Eleven was everyone's favorite
Better games, piracy, CDs instead of cartridges
it had a lot of games