So Sony is pretty much the super villain created by the good guys.
There are many "funny" stories about the hardware makers.
Like how Sega turned down what became the N64, or a deal between Sega and Matushita/3DO to license the M2 to Sega for its next system.
Or how Atari was given the rights to distribute the NES in US but in the end they turned down the offer.
It's easy to shun a big company that is very successful in another business which want a [big] piece of your cake.
I do remember reading that at one point, there was a 3-way deal between Sony/Sega/Nintendo on a CD-ROM unit, though that also went nowhere fast.
So Sony is pretty much the super villain created by the good guys.
This is funny, because in the 32/64-bit gen Nintendo was the console to go if you wanted FPS, Racing, and the best versions of (american) football games.
ill agree about FPS's cause bond was that game, and there were others
but Racing....you have to account for Gran Turismo somehow not being considered a big part of "racing" and Sony had the more popular football game title in those days where multiple devs could have NFL licenses.
Y'know, I really don't like the implication that any of Sega, Sony or Nintendo were really "villains" here. All three had impressive put-out that generation (most of Sega's being stuck in Japan, but nevertheless).or the good knight who rose against vilains to offer gamers what we needed and what we derserved
even if you ignore GT (and you really can't) PS had need for speed: hot pursuit and ridge racer type 4.
the N64 got it's ass kicked by PS racers. not even close.
Sega Japan really did screw the pooch on things. If they had listened to their American division more often and given them more decision making authority, the company would probably still be in the hardware business.
Wipeout as well.
So Sony is pretty much the super villain created by the good guys.
Success breeds complacency.Weird thing through. Now it seems like Sony's western and western influenced branch is now leading things after its traditional Japanese leaders screwed up this Generation.
I doubt it took that long for them to start asking that. They were already in a panic mode in 1995 when Sony announced the price of the PSone.
Can you please provide some links to those stories? I love reading about this stuff.
Is essentially what i said. And it was about money, Nintendo reneged on their deal with Sony because Sony wanted to keep the money made from CD sales. Kutaragi as well as a few others at Sony saw the potential to make money in the industry so they pursued it, they partnered with CBS and formed CSG a 3rd party publishing company which is now SCEA long before kutaragi thought of PlayStation. Of course being rejected and humiliated added fuel to the fire but that is not why they got into the gaming industry.
This is really probably more like some Game of Thrones political maneuvering. There's some good guys but a lot of the players are assholes.or the good knight who rose against vilains to offer gamers what we needed and what we derserved
That's just a holdover from their output on the Saturn, really. It was top-notch for both.
Only Shenmue and Sonic Adventure. And Shenmue was only 5 months in development.
Most things that people loved about the Dreamcast were the result of breaking up their devs to individual studios prior to the Dreamcast release and giving it all for a international audience as opposed to Saturn, with innovative releases like Rez, Jet Set etc.
The Saturn output was inferior to the Genesis and Dreamcast (also early Xbox) output. Sonic was absent, huge japanese focus with Sakura Taisen, mediocore 2d action games with Clockwork Knights, Astal and Shinobi Legions, and imperfect Arcade ports in comparision to Dreamcast. Or maybe I just wasn't that big a fan of Nights, Burning Rangers and Panzer Dragoon, they were pretty good, but not fantastic. Saga was the only game I would call that.
That's an incredible over simplification of what actually happened. In 1988 when Nintendo and Sony were working together on the sound chip for the SNES, Sony approached Nintendo with the idea for a CD-ROM add on. Sony had just finished it CD-XA patent that allowed for redbook and digital data on the same disc. At that time, they came to the agreement.
While it is true that Sony wanted the rights on the CD-Based software, Nintendo had agreed to it, they had the contract in place. Realize that in 1988, CD-ROM was both incredibly expensive, and not on the market yet. NECs CDROM2 add on was not even on the market until December that year. IMO, Nintendo thought the CD tech would go nowhere.
By 1991, it was a different story, the CDROM2 had been a huge success for their main competitor in Japan, NEC and Sony had been moving along with their Play Station and Super CD add ons. Now with the contract in place and Nintendo not happy with it, there were several different things they could have done. Nintendo picked the worst one, they publically humiliated Sony at the summer CES, and partnered with their biggest foreign rival when it came to CD technology.
Yamauchi played hardball with Sony and lost. Flat out. And Nintendo payed for it.
I do remember reading that at one point, there was a 3-way deal between Sony/Sega/Nintendo on a CD-ROM unit, though that also went nowhere fast. This story speaks of the arrogance at Sega at the time though, the Japanese branch simply would not admit to needing partnerships outside of their small circle. The history of the Sega Saturn is a tragic one indeed.
This right here, it was a very well done game. Especially compared to some of the other drek with that label.Sony Imagesoft's best game will forever be HOOK for SNES.
So Sony is pretty much the super villain created by the good guys.
When I first saw the PS1 in EGM I just had a gut feeling that unlike CD-i or 3DO the PlayStation would actually truly matter. Maybe it's because they're Sony and carried ENOUGH clout then, or because what was being shown actually looked more interesting, but I was dissuaded from asking for it for Christmas that year primarily because I made some really, really bad choices when I got to rent the system more than thinking it was no good period, and to be honest it probably wasn't a WRONG call: the library was mostly bad at launch and what gems there were were literally displaced by superior sequels the following year. Especially with the price drop that hit then.I really didn't like Sony when they came on the scene with the PS1, it's amazing how they've grown over the years. The level of dedication they have to gaming is commendable. I can't imagine what gaming would be like without them.
It makes sense that both Nintendo and SEGA refused a deal with Sony, they had the cake and they didn't want to share it with anyone.
I'm not sure that Sony ever officially approached Nintendo with their CD plans, or if Nintendo ever specifically signed a contract for the original Play Station.
Remember, the SNES launched in Japan at the end of 1990. Nintendo's betrayalton of Sony at CES happened even before the American launch in 1991. And Kutaragi was making the SNES sound chip in secret, intending to tell his bosses about his activities only when Nintendo was ready to make a purchase for launch.
1988 (the year that the contract in question was reportedly signed) seems like a perfect year for Nintendo to have signed a contract for Sony to make a sound chip. It does not seem like a good time for Nintendo to have been shopping around for a CD drive, and signing contracts without going over little details like who gets to own it.
If you ask me, I'd say that it's very likely that Nintendo gave Sony (in the sound chip contract) permission to make Sony-branded for-profit SNES hardware. Nintendo gave that exact same right to Panasonic when they helped design the GameCube. But I think Nintendo gave Sony some blanket permission to innovate within the SNES design.
Sony built a rear access door into their own Sony-branded SNES variant, a superior door, put their own locks on it, and then they refused to hand Nintendo the keys. Why does Nintendo need the keys? Sony built that door. Sony built the lock. Nintendo even has their own locked front door, and Nintendo doesn't share the keys to that with Sony.
This would also explain why Sony was unable to legally prevent Nintendo from working with Phillips, despite Sony's protests about the "exclusive right" granted to them by the contract. If Sony honestly had the "exclusive right" to make a CD drive for Nintendo, how is it possible that Phillips just walked in and made one?
On the other hand, if Sony had the "exclusive right" to make and sell SNES variants, then it's easy to see how Nintendo could legally hire Phillips to make a CD drive for Nintendo to sell.
Basically, I think this mess was born out of some grey area in the SNES's sound chip contract.
When I first saw the PS1 in EGM I just had a gut feeling that unlike CD-i or 3DO the PlayStation would actually truly matter. Maybe it's because they're Sony and carried ENOUGH clout then, or because what was being shown actually looked more interesting, but I was dissuaded from asking for it for Christmas that year primarily because I made some really, really bad choices when I got to rent the system more than thinking it was no good period, and to be honest it probably wasn't a WRONG call: the library was mostly bad at launch and what gems there were were literally displaced by superior sequels the following year. Especially with the price drop that hit then.
Although given the bundle deals the Saturn saw and the replacement of that misguided controller with the Japanese controller colored black I guess both were rotten choices at the end of 1995 specifically. At least Virtua Fighter 2 was out and it was a time I could still really get into fighters.
I remember reading about the Atari/Nintendo deal for the NES on a magazine, but couldn't find much on it on any website, all i could find is references to that deal,; but not really much about the story behind it
Man, if I could make any game company act differently at an early period of their life (as a game company anyway) it'd definitely be Sony. NEVER develop those notions in the first place, ensure button layouts were consistent between all three regions so there'd never be issues with game localizations mixing up buttons in ways that aren't exactly ideal, and possibly get some of the games we missed out on.It's also kind of funny to consider that Kalinske got the axe shortly thereafter, and was replaced with Bernie Stolar... who helped launch the PS1, but was axed when Sony started to feel his anti-RPG, pro-sports policy was hurting more than helping.
Yeah, that was annoying, but it seemed to me like a system I'd really want to have, and once FFVII was announced for PS1 it was sealed: I had to have the system.My biggest beef with the PS1 was the blocky, constantly shifting textures. They drove me mad and still do. I ended up buying a N64 and I didn't regret it because even if the graphics were blurry as hell, it didn't have that nasty texture issue. I ended up picking up a PS1 years later to play a few of the exclusives I missed out on. MGS1 in particular was a revelation and pretty much made sure that I bought a PS2 when MGS2 came out. Ever since then I've grown to really like Sony, especially with their commitment to 1st party games that try to break new ground.
Man, if I could make any game company act differently at an early period of their life (as a game company anyway) it'd definitely be Sony. NEVER develop those notions in the first place, ensure button layouts were consistent between all three regions so there'd never be issues with game localizations mixing up buttons in ways that aren't exactly ideal, and possibly get some of the games we missed out on.
Granted, there's other points that'd probably be more deserving of a huge change such as trying to make sure Sega actually thrived or the PS3 was truly competitive with the 360, but that probably would have the fewest unintended side effects, gets us more games, and addresses one of my bigger nitpicks.
No, because as I said, I don't think Sony officially offered a CD drive to Nintendo.You're making out Sony to be the 'villain' here when it's not the case.
If anything both companies did shit that was probably a bit underhanded. 1988 is when the deal was done, remember the SFC was in development for years, and came out late with reports of Nintendo basically sitting on finished hardware until they time was right for them. The deal for the CDROM unit was done at the same time as the sound chip deal, but it was not the same contract. Or at least they were two parts of the same. Part of that deal was Sony having control over the CDs.
See here for more
Essentially yes, they had a contract, Sony believed it was broken, and the reason the suit never came about was because of both continued negotiations and the fact that Sony was still providing the sound chip for the SFC.
I don't think that means that IGN has seen the contract, and they can confirm what it states, I think that IGN merely read how David Sheff wroteSony was to be the "sole worldwide licenser," as stated in the contract.
and they're rephrasing it as their own work.Sony emphasized that it was the sole worldwide licenser of the Super Disc format,
Here's some pretty specific stuff from 1983 on the Atari/Nintendo deal.
It's also kind of funny to consider that Kalinske got the axe shortly thereafter, and was replaced with Bernie Stolar... who helped launch the PS1, but was axed when Sony started to feel his anti-RPG, pro-sports policy was hurting more than helping.
Not sure what that has to do with my post that you quoted, but personally I'd go to Sega from this era and do everything in my power to reveal to Sega of Japan that their arrogance and jealousy of the American branch would doom the entire company. I'd thought I would just tell them to woo Square as soon as possible and make Final Fantasy VII a Saturn exclusive, but the idea of going back slightly further and making a Sega PlayStation (PlayStation hardware, Saturn controller) is just too good.Man, if I could make any game company act differently at an early period of their life (as a game company anyway) it'd definitely be Sony. NEVER develop those notions in the first place, ensure button layouts were consistent between all three regions so there'd never be issues with game localizations mixing up buttons in ways that aren't exactly ideal, and possibly get some of the games we missed out on.
True. On the other hand the designer's purpose with the buttons WAS explicit: O was to be confirm, X was to be cancel. It seemed to me half that there wasn't clear enough communication between regions or someone wasn't willing to just stomp the foot down and ensure it went a certain way.Hindsight is 20/20. I doubt you could have done a better job without knowing.
More that anti-RPG/pro-sports bit made me think about how early SCEA was. But yeah, Sega of America really should've been trusted more then, though I do wonder to some degree if Sega's fate was inevitable: Sony and Microsoft got HUGE and Nintendo survived mainly by being very smart with their money. With the Sony partnership I suspect they would've eventually been absorbed into Sony anyway, perhaps that was another fear they had but didn't speak up on?Not sure what that has to do with my post that you quoted, but personally I'd go to Sega from this era and do everything in my power to reveal to Sega of Japan that their arrogance and jealousy of the American branch would doom the entire company. I'd thought I would just tell them to woo Square as soon as possible and make Final Fantasy VII a Saturn exclusive, but the idea of going back slightly further and making a Sega PlayStation (PlayStation hardware, Saturn controller) is just too good.