• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sony: 21.3 Million PS3's sold Worldwide

Redd

Member
stuburns said:
It also didn't have a perception of bad games. People were shitting their pants to get MGS2, FFX and GT3 at the time.

Thank you. I don't know where he got that from. Everybody was ready to crown the PS2 the champ well before it came out.
 

AniHawk

Member
stuburns said:
It also didn't have a perception of bad games. People were shitting their pants to get MGS2, FFX and GT3 at the time.

What, versus the Dreamcast?

...What was the point of the Dreamcast being brought into this?
 

StuBurns

Banned
AniHawk said:
What, versus the Dreamcast?

...What was the point of the Dreamcast being brought into this?
I think the guy's point was he thinks the PS3 and the 360 are in the same position as the PS2 and Dreamcast were.

I really disagree.

I was just saying, the PS2 did not have a perception of crap games at that time.
 

AniHawk

Member
stuburns said:
I was just saying, the PS2 did not have a perception of crap games at that time.

In 2000-2001? Yes it did. Or, it had the perception of having pretty much no games at the time. Onimusha was the first big hit, and that was it for a while until Gran Turismo 3 and that shitfest called Dark Cloud that everyone bought up because there was nothing on the system. Of course, the awesomeness that was Klonoa 2 also came out in that time, but it was ignored, unfortunately.

That first year (October 2000-October 2001, or March 2000-March 2001 if you want to get really technical) was pretty empty.
 

mattfabb

Banned
AniHawk said:
What, versus the Dreamcast?

...What was the point of the Dreamcast being brought into this?

I saw that comparison earlier in this thread,


The point was, people take for granted that the PS2 was going to destroy the Dreamcast, even if on paper the DC was a better proposition (sorry about the price mistake).

Much in the same way that on paper, the 360 had the very same advantage, but it was always going to be tough to beat Sony. But beat they did.

My point is, you cannot diminish MS accomplisment, because they won where Sega failed, they won against Sony marketing machine (this is living, emotion engine, North Korea nuclear missilles etc..)
 

Yagharek

Member
I distinctly remember a lot of shovelware on Dreamcast, especially during the months between good first party releases, and this was in the 2000-01 period. Might have been due to local distributors, but the net result was the same. PS2 then had a similar period from launch until GT3 A Spec, and again from that game until MGS2 release. I'm not going anywhere with this observation though, just adding my own perspective.
 

StuBurns

Banned
AniHawk said:
In 2000-2001? Yes it did. Or, it had the perception of having pretty much no games at the time. Onimusha was the first big hit, and that was it for a while until Gran Turismo 3 and that shitfest called Dark Cloud that everyone bought up because there was nothing on the system. Of course, the awesomeness that was Klonoa 2 also came out in that time, but it was ignored, unfortunately.

That first year (October 2000-October 2001, or March 2000-March 2001 if you want to get really technical) was pretty empty, especially compared to the Dreamcast's.
What? In 2001 the PS2 had MGS2, GT3, Ico, FFX, Silent Hill 2, Devil May Cry, and GTA3.

It's probably the best exclusive line up in a year of all time.

But the word 'perception' made me think he meant nothing good coming up, not currently out. No console could possibly compete with one that's been out a year before at launch. Seems a stupid comment to make if he didn't mean future games.
 

mattfabb

Banned
stuburns said:
What? In 2001 the PS2 had MGS2, GT3, Ico, FFX, Silent Hill 2, Devil May Cry, and GTA3.

It's probably the best exclusive line up in a year of all time.

But the word 'perception' made me think he meant nothing good coming up, not currently out. No console could possibly compete with one that's been out a year before at launch. Seems a stupid comment to make if he didn't mean future games.


Yeah, I agree, but the point is, even before the DC came out, developers were already set that those game would not be made for the DC.

Much in the same way that FF13 was not supposed to come out for the 360. Or DMC4. So it's not just Sony making mistakes, it's also about MS doing well in my opinion.
 

StuBurns

Banned
mattfabb said:
Yeah, I agree, but the point is, even before the DC came out, developers were already set that those game would not be made for the DC.

Much i the same way that FF13 was not supposed to come out for the 360. Or DMC4. So it's not just Sony making mistakes, it's also about MS doing well in my opinion.
I think Microsoft have done an amazing job. They're an awesome first party.

I thought the your point with the Dreamcast/PS2 to 360/PS3 thing was to suggest that Sony will crush the 360 like they did with the Dreamcast. I gather I misunderstood.
 

AniHawk

Member
stuburns said:
What? In 2001 the PS2 had MGS2, GT3, Ico, FFX, Silent Hill 2, Devil May Cry, and GTA3.

It's probably the best exclusive line up in a year of all time.

You forgot Klonoa 2. Why does everyone forget Klonoa 2?

Anyway, I hadn't realized that Ico, DMC, and SH2 came out within a month of each other.

stuburns said:
I think Microsoft have done an amazing job. They're an awesome first party.

Their first-party games could be better though. They're like a more successful Sega. Awesome publisher, so-so developer. That's my only gripe with them this gen (aside from the "launch it over $300" thing).
 

Redd

Member
mattfabb said:
Yeah, I agree, but the point is, even before the DC came out, developers were already set that those game would not be made for the DC.

Much in the same way that FF13 was not supposed to come out for the 360. Or DMC4. So it's not just Sony making mistakes, it's also about MS doing well in my opinion.

I can agree with this. No matter what happens this gen Microsoft has done very well for itself taking former exclusives and making many of them multiplat.
 

StuBurns

Banned
AniHawk said:
You forgot Klonoa 2. Why does everyone forget Klonoa 2?

Anyway, I hadn't realized that Ico, DMC, and SH2 came out within a month of each other.
I love Klonoa 2, I thought it was 2000 outside of Europe for some reason.

AniHawk said:
Their first-party games could be better though. They're like a more successful Sega. Awesome publisher, so-so developer.

Yeah true, but as much as I love Sony's first party titles, they are in a bad place, Microsoft care more about their third parties, they're really about amazing support and they release games around their third parties.

Nintendo don't give a fuck because it's only their games that matter, they allow crap quality games on the system because it just makes their stuff look better.

Sony are actually competing with their licensees, not a good position to be in.
 
bmf said:
Or at the time, the TG-CD or the Saturn? I owned a TG-16 and the CD add-on fairly early on - shortly after it came out. It did nothing to promote optical media as a good medium for gaming. It had games that I didn't like - Sherlock Holmes for example - that were really just a bunch of low budget boring cutscenes that did a poor job of building a game. It also had games I did like - like Street Fighter, Ys Book 1+2, and Monster Lair that were lessened by the loading times inherent in the format, but were only marginally improved by the additional storage capacity.

Now, looking back, I *know* that Sony did some things that were very crucial to bringing gaming forward as a medium. Specifically they broadened the audience and brought in many new casual gamers. They also changed the business model by introducing the first CD based system that was reasonable for gaming - lessening the manufacturing costs and risks involved in publishing a game.

They also changed gaming in ways that I didn't like. An example was their insistence that games published for their system had to take significant advantage of the 3D hardware to do things that couldn't be done on the SNES. A prime example of where this went wrong was with the Contra games on the system.

What's interesting to me now is that all of this is coming full circle. Nintendo has re-invented itself and now the positions are reversed. Nintendo is doing things that are bringing new casual gamers into the fold, and are purposely keeping their system capability and capacity down to try and keep development costs from inflating beyond what's sustainable as a business model. Hopefully in 10 years some of you will be able to look back at what's happening now, and see it as a good thing.

The funniest bit will be that in about 10 years, somebody else will be introducing something new that brings in new casual gamers, and changes the business model for the better. Those who began gaming with Wii Sports, Wii Play, and Wii Fit, will be complaining about how gaming is being ruined.

What kind of bullshit it's this?

Now 3D has the fault that untalented programers fucks games? There're are great shooters in the playstation era which are in 3D, great plataformers which are in 3D, great action games which are in 3D. And there were some great games that were in 2D. Damn Shin & Punishment is in 3D and it's the best Treasure made in his fucking history. IMO.

So, you are wrong sir, and what Sony did is not even close at what Nintendo it's doing, for the better or the worst.
 
AniHawk said:
In 2000-2001? Yes it did. Or, it had the perception of having pretty much no games at the time. Onimusha was the first big hit, and that was it for a while until Gran Turismo 3 and that shitfest called Dark Cloud that everyone bought up because there was nothing on the system. Of course, the awesomeness that was Klonoa 2 also came out in that time, but it was ignored, unfortunately.

That first year (October 2000-October 2001, or March 2000-March 2001 if you want to get really technical) was pretty empty.

First year from the Japanese release was indeed a barren wasteland. However, I think folks tend to underrate that Fall 2000/Spring 2001 PS2 lineup. No big hits outside of the ones you mentioned, but SSX, Kessen, Dynasty Warriors 2, Ring Of Red, Sky Odyssey, Shadow Of Destiny and Twisted Metal Black were all solid.
 

AniHawk

Member
Red Blaster said:
First year from the Japanese release was indeed a barren wasteland. However, I think folks tend to underrate that Fall 2000/Spring 2001 PS2 lineup. No big hits outside of the ones you mentioned, but SSX, Kessen, Dynasty Warriors 2, Ring Of Red, Sky Odyssey, Shadow Of Destiny and Twisted Metal Black were all solid.

Ah yes, Twisted Metal Black.

I should really pick that one up. Twisted Metal was the first PSX game I played, way back in the mid 90s when I was 9 or 10 and I had no idea what a Playstation was. The game was fun, and I have never touched the series since then.
 

Redd

Member
AniHawk said:
In 2000-2001? Yes it did. Or, it had the perception of having pretty much no games at the time. Onimusha was the first big hit,

QFT, I only used my PS2 for dvd movies,PSX games, and Tekken Tag Tournament until Onimusha Warlords hit. I was really considering trading it in for a Dreamcast until I played Onimusha.
 

mattfabb

Banned
Red Blaster said:
First year from the Japanese release was indeed a barren wasteland. However, I think folks tend to underrate that Fall 2000/Spring 2001 PS2 lineup. No big hits outside of the ones you mentioned, but SSX, Kessen, Dynasty Warriors 2, Ring Of Red, Sky Odyssey, Shadow Of Destiny and Twisted Metal Black were all solid.


This makes me wonder what are the Japanese developers up to? No new games from Konami, Sega and the others for a long time...at least Capcom is still with us lol.
 

AniHawk

Member
mattfabb said:
This makes me wonder what are the Japanese developers up to? No new games from Konami, Sega and the others for a long time...at least Capcom is still with us lol.

Konami's now putting all their teams on softdrink development.
 
mattfabb said:
Dreamcast
+ year head start with no next-gen competition
+ perception of better games and online
+ cheaper price
+ couple of blockbusters out in that time

PS2
- $400 shock and always more expensive
- perception of no games
- bad press
- negative perception with gamers

Dreamcast sales fell off a cliff after their first Christmas; it was already doing poorly in the market before the PS2 even actually launched to finish it off, and it never had anything you could consider a serious "blockbuster." The PS2 was $299 at launch and it lived up to its reputation of inevitability by selling a fuckload of systems after launch even before the good software came out.

Seriously, there isn't anything remotely comparable here.
 

truly101

I got grudge sucked!
Did I just read that someone tried to blame Sony for the horrible PS1 Contra games? WTF, That was Konami's fault handing the series over to apalooza and Apalooza turning Contra into pure grade A shit. That has nothing to do with Sony's "NO 2D policy", which seems to get waived around anytime some hardcore idiot wants to blame Sony for the death of old school gaming and teh cazhuyals!!!!!
 

Kuramu

Member
I'd just like to add this point. Mention was made of the transition from in-the-moment games to cinematic games. There is a missing landmark. Games with endings, which all but killed prior gen Atari/80s arcade style games. At first I didn't like games ending (Pitfall II, a game I love, let me down at first for being short in a world of unending games). After that, "beating" the game, not playing the game, became the objective.

Wii seems to have brought us full circle, and with it, people like my dad, who isn't interested in pretending to be a hero in a great quest. He just wants to have fun.
 
Relaxed Muscle said:
What kind of bullshit it's this?

Now 3D has the fault that untalented programers fucks games? There're are great shooters in the playstation era which are in 3D, great plataformers which are in 3D, great action games which are in 3D. And there were some great games that were in 2D. Damn Shin & Punishment is in 3D and it's the best Treasure made in his fucking history. IMO.

So, you are wrong sir, and what Sony did is not even close at what Nintendo it's doing, for the better or the worst.
My particular gripe there was that Sony disallowed games that *didn't* make use of those features, and a lot of established franchises - like Contra - had to include those things in order to be even published on the system. It was a learning experience for all involved, and in some cases - like Contra - the results were spectacularly bad.

My supposition is that if that same team had been allowed to make a game that was a more direct descendant to the games earlier in the series, they would have been likely to create something good.

I won't attribute this behavior to Sony exclusively either. Nintendo insisted on stylus use in some for on early DS games. I'm sure other can provide other examples.

Also, to be fair, Sony lessened these restrictions in some cases, and maybe more so later in that first generation - we can see this in titles like Symphony of the Night, and I think the story on Megaman 8 was that they allowed it because they added some feature or another over the already published Sega Saturn version.
 
truly101 said:
Did I just read that someone tried to blame Sony for the horrible PS1 Contra games? WTF, That was Konami's fault handing the series over to apalooza and Apalooza turning Contra into pure grade A shit. That has nothing to do with Sony's "NO 2D policy", which seems to get waived around anytime some hardcore idiot wants to blame Sony for the death of old school gaming and teh cazhuyals!!!!!
If I have the story wrong on that one, then I have the story wrong on that one.
 

truly101

I got grudge sucked!
Kuramu said:
I'd just like to add this point. Mention was made of the transition from in-the-moment games to cinematic games. There is a missing landmark. Games with endings, which all but killed prior gen Atari/80s arcade style games. At first I didn't like games ending (Pitfall II, a game I love, let me down at first for being short in a world of unending games). After that, "beating" the game, not playing the game, became the objective.

Wii seems to have brought us full circle, and with it, people like my dad.

See, the NES, not the PS1, killed gaming dead. Sony helped pitch more dirt on the corpse :D
 
bmf said:
My particular gripe there was that Sony disallowed games that *didn't* make use of those features, and a lot of established franchises - like Contra - had to include those things in order to be even published on the system. It was a learning experience for all involved, and in some cases - like Contra - the results were spectacularly bad.

One thing people fail to remember is, Sony HAD to push 3D on many of the game developers of that era. At the time of of the PS1 many Game developers were reluctant to away from 2D to 3D. They thought it was too expensive for not enough gain. Sony had and Ken Kutaragi had knew that real time 3d graphics in video games were the future. So Sony put it in their TCR's. If they didn't realtime 3d graphics on consoles wouldn't be where they are today.
 

Vargas

Member
bmf said:
My particular gripe there was that Sony disallowed games that *didn't* make use of those features, and a lot of established franchises - like Contra - had to include those things in order to be even published on the system. It was a learning experience for all involved, and in some cases - like Contra - the results were spectacularly bad.

I think that those Contra games sucked because of who made them not anything that Sony did. The games were doomed to failure as soon as they were farmed out to Appaloosa Interactive.

Edit: Damn beaten.
 
Trailblazer said:
One thing people fail to remember is, Sony HAD to push 3D on many of the game developers of that era. At the time of of the PS1 many Game developers were reluctant to away from 2D to 3D. They thought it was too expensive for not enough gain. Sony had and Ken Kutaragi had knew that real time 3d graphics in video games were the future. So Sony put it in their TCR's. If they didn't realtime 3d graphics on consoles wouldn't be where they are today.
You and I will have to disagree on this point. Developers who wanted to develop something in 3D would have whether Sony insisted on it or not. I don't think that a lack of Sony's 3d insistence would have resulted in our loss of Resident Evil, FF7, or Metal Gear Solid. Both styles would have been in concert for a while before 3D took the majority.
 
bmf said:
As a real gamer, I want Nintendo in 1st place. Sony all but killed gaming when they started putting games on CDs and made it about cinematic cutscenes and voice acting. Because of them we no longer play video games, we watch them.

11ietr6.gif
 

mujun

Member
why doesn't someone make an official defence thread, a thread sanctioned by the mods dedicated to defending your system of choice (if you really feel the need to do it) rather than turning every sales, new game announcement, etc thread into one?
 
bmf said:
As a real gamer, I want Nintendo in 1st place. Sony all but killed gaming when they started putting games on CDs and made it about cinematic cutscenes and voice acting. Because of them we no longer play video games, we watch them.

don't blame other companies because nintendo decided to stick with carts and square left them because of it
 

ZeoVGM

Banned
Dumb Person said:
As a real gamer, I want Nintendo in 1st place. Sony all but killed gaming when they started putting games on CDs and made it about cinematic cutscenes and voice acting. Because of them we no longer play video games, we watch them.

As a Nintendo fan, I'd like to say you're fucking embarrassing.

You're 100% factually incorrect with that statement.

And this is coming from someone who thinks the PS3 has the worst lineup this gen.

PS1 and PS2 are two of the BEST consoles of all time. Saying Sony killed gaming is a joke.
 

jett

D-Member
truly101 said:
Did I just read that someone tried to blame Sony for the horrible PS1 Contra games? WTF, That was Konami's fault handing the series over to apalooza and Apalooza turning Contra into pure grade A shit. That has nothing to do with Sony's "NO 2D policy", which seems to get waived around anytime some hardcore idiot wants to blame Sony for the death of old school gaming and teh cazhuyals!!!!!

And in any case the PS2 had a totally awesome 2.5D Contra.

This bmf guy has got to be a joke character, either that or pretty much one of the most delluded nintendo fanboys I've encountered in the 10 years I've been visiting this forum.
 

ZeoVGM

Banned
jett said:
And in any case the PS2 had a totally awesome 2.5D Contra.

At first that's the game I thought he was talking about. I thought he was calling Shattered Soldier, one of the best Contras, a bad game.
 
Yeah I dunno how I manage. This place just gets weirder and weirder everytime I visit.
Next week I'll read something like "Capcom has never made a good game".
 

jrricky

Banned
Holy shit...opinions. And stuburns thinks he sits on the highest pedestal with his.:lol

Another day, another console wars thread...
 
PepsimanVsJoe said:
Yeah I dunno how I manage. This place just gets weirder and weirder everytime I visit.
Next week I'll read something like "Capcom has never made a good game".
lol no.

Atlus, on the other hand...
 

jett

D-Member
bmf said:
If I have the story wrong on that one, then I have the story wrong on that one.

No no no no no, how can you have the story wrong with that one? It's clear and obvious to everyone with a functioning brain that ze evil Sony continually forced publishers to pick shit-ass developers to produce garbage games on their system. Clearly, Sony's to blame here. It's too obvious. No 2D games on the PS1 at all. Alundra, Mega Man 8, X4, X5, X6, SFA1, SFA2, SFA3...I think they just fucking disappeared from my games collection.

Also, protip: MM8 on the Sega Saturn has MORE content than the PS1 port.
 

ZeoVGM

Banned
bmf said:
How in the hell did you three fall so many posts back?

Edit: Oh shit, I got tagged. What the hell does smh mean anyway?

It means you said multiple stupid and factually incorrect things and a lot of people laughed at you.
 

Concept17

Member
AniHawk said:
Ah yes, Twisted Metal Black.

I should really pick that one up. Twisted Metal was the first PSX game I played, way back in the mid 90s when I was 9 or 10 and I had no idea what a Playstation was. The game was fun, and I have never touched the series since then.

So... you never played TM2? I'm deeply saddened by this.
 
stuburns said:
Innovation and creativity? Nintendo? Are you high?
Nall . . . and no, I don't want what your having. >_<

Lets take a second to think about what you're suggesting, here are the bigger Nintendo games this geneation:
Huuum, Im not going to get into some pissy debate with you over how fucked up and wrong your list is. :lol

If you really think that than w/e, theres no changing your mind I guess.

I'm over simplifying it for effect of course,
Maybe thats why its soo wrong . . . no maybe not >_>

For the leader of this generation to be the most conservative is terrible.

Ya know, I could list a ton of things to combat this . . . but Im just soo amazed people think this way in 09.

Wow . . . I got nothing done in this post. o_O
Wish you had talked about something in my post other than bitching about Nintendo's innovation.

Really, this is about the Wii . . . I see no reason to go all "Bu bu but, SSBB aint innovative! Its just like SSBM!!!111!!1!one!! >_<". If you want to debate off topic about how innovative Nintendo is in a PS3 thread than at least focus on the console and don't pull the BS "but X Y Z game . . ." list wars.
 
Top Bottom