Support NeoGAF

[Tagyhag]

As a person who lived through and saw the gaming industry change to a more mature and accepted hobby, especially by adults I'm confused by whats wrong and funny about his post?

The fact that we don't know if people who started playing on the Playstation would just be like "Oh well there's nothing in gaming that looks interesting, guess I'll never play video games ever". Also I'm pretty sure Playstation systems aren't the one with the oldest demographic in general.

Now if he meant Neogaf instead of the general gaming audience, that I might agree with.

 

[WillyFive]

how so? the deal fell through because nintendo brokered it, and the next year when it came closer to time, Yamauichi was uncomfortable with the control over their IPs that sony might exercise (nevermind royalty rates, which were historically in their favor). the public humiliation by announcing the Phillips partnership the day after sony spoke was a result.

Sony wanted in on the hardware game but enjoyed years of playing the background - sound chips for the SNES, imagesoft studio with Sega CD, etc. i'm not saying they naturally would've wanted to go past getting their feet wet without being spurned by nintendo (however likely), but that still doesn't create a reality where the SNES add on happens, much less is well regarded/flourishes. if anything, an ahead-of-its-time peripheral like that (see: Sega CD) might've underperformed enough to keep nintendo thinking carts next gen were still a good idea, leaving us right back with the mess that was the N64.

Yes, I know that Yamouchi did not like the Sony deal; we have Playstation today. But if we can imagine a world without Playstation, I think it's good to imagine the world where the deal worked, and the products that they were developing actually came out instead.

 

[IrishNinja]

Well, if sony never entered the console market it would've been because the deal with nintendo didn't fall through. Or are we assuming here that they didn't even begin a deal with nintendo at all?

well, from the OP i guess i'm not sure; i was just saying that even if they did keep the deal with nintendo, i don't think it's a given that it would've been well received or worked out for either party at that point in time.

Yes, I know that Yamouchi did not like the Sony deal; we have Playstation today. But if we can imagine a world without Playstation, I think it's good to imagine the world where the deal worked, and the products that they were developing actually came out instead.

sure, but again, i think it would've been ahead of its time & seen as an interesting experiment at best. we're talking what, '92 or so? your original post drew a lotta conclusions from this, i thought they were starting from a shaky ground, is the thing.

 

[Haint]

Well Nintendo probably never would have been desperate enough to make the Wii. That alone would be a seismic shift.

People will always want to play games, but without Sony would the industry be as big as it is today? Hard to say if Nintendo, MS or Sega would have filled Sony's shoes, but certainly less innovation would have been inspired.

Huh? Wii came and went and has had no long term effect on the industry. Motion controls are effectively abandoned on all 3 platforms at this point. It's as if it never existed.

 

[Synth]

Well, if sony never entered the console market it would've been because the deal with nintendo didn't fall through. Or are we assuming here that they didn't even begin a deal with nintendo at all?

In order for the deal to have gone through this alternate reality requires Nintendo to make a decision that they didn't make in ours. So why is it not also possible for Sony to make a different decision, and simply not follow through with the Playstation after Nintendo abandons the deal. I don't understand why you believe there's literally only one possible scenario where the Playstation isn't created.

Yes, I know that Yamouchi did not like the Sony deal; we have Playstation today. But if we can imagine a world without Playstation, I think it's good to imagine the world where the deal worked, and the products that they were developing actually came out instead.

Why? I quite like to imagine a reality where Sega kicked all sorts of ass and took names in the 32bit gen, because Nintendo still went with carts. Why is my fantasy reality not allowed?

Huh? Wii came and went and has had no long term effect on the industry. Motion controls are effectively abandoned on all 3 platforms at this point. It's as if it never existed.

The Wii altered the last 4 or so years of the Xbox 360, and made the Xbox One a completely different machine. Continued sales aren't the only way you can affect the industry.

 

[Trax]

All I know is that Sega would still have crashed and burned because of their HORRIFIC mismanagement. After reading a few articles a couple of years ago about their Genesis and onwards years I started wondering how they went that far.

 

[Ferrio]

Most of us wouldn't be gaming and adults gaming would be a rarity rather than the norm.

Think this is pretty close to the truth.

 

[terrisus]

Huh? Wii came and went and has had no long term effect on the industry. Motion controls are effectively abandoned on all 3 platforms at this point. It's as if it never existed.

I would say that the piles and piles (and piles) of money that Nintendo made off of it probably had some long-term effect on them.

 

[Rozart]

Don't let PC-GAF and Nintendo-GAF tell you this isn't true. Well, for the West. For the East not so much, but I've got way too many friends whose origins in gaming come from the PS1. I started on the SNES, but I would never have stuck with the hobby if FF7 and the J-RPG era of the PS1 wasn't a thing.

Same here. I had dabbled into gaming before the PS1 came about but it was FF9 on the PS1 that really stuck with me and consequently, made video games one of my biggest hobbies.

 

[IrishNinja]

Huh? Wii came and went and has had no long term effect on the industry. Motion controls are effectively abandoned on all 3 platforms at this point. It's as if it never existed.

even aside from nintendo's warchest, this feels like another vast oversimplifcation

 

[Dawg]

I wonder what this would have meant for the Metal Gear Solid series.

 

[Visvarupa]

hmmm, not sure about the "adult oriented games not expanding" assumptions, thou i will agree that it brought more pzazz to the industry with FMVs, games taking a big leap in presentation, sound tracks and so on...and i guess those things too brought in the older audience while making the kids go "wow, MATURE!!!"

I think it was inevitable that Sony was gonna jump in thou, it was destiny IMO. the nintendo deal could have gone through, Sony would have still clashed business wise with nintendo somehow, followed by a rift.

some say that nintendo would have learned a thing or two from sony, but history (up to present day) shows that they are not into pzazz at all, they are a couple that is NEVER MEANT TO BE.

to this day i can not say for sure which i would give up for the other. IMO both PSX and Ultra64 brought so much to the table in their own respective ways. i dont wanna think about a PSXless or N64less world

So to answer initial question... things would have taken longer to fall into the mainstream, and if sony had stayed out for good....is it too fart fetched to say taht someone else who have taken the hype torch of that era and shown nintendo how its done, was Sony really the lone dark horse?

 

[krae_man]

How so? Nintendo would've stuck with the sony deal and moved on to cdrom after the snes.

The alternate history where the PS1 never comes out isn't necessarily the one where the SNES CD ROM attachment comes out.

 

[Krejlooc]

Motion controls are effectively abandoned on all 3 platforms at this point. It's as if it never existed.

All 3 platforms come with motion controls built in. Also, LOL at this comment when VR is right around the corner. There is more research being done into positional tracking right now than there has ever been in the history of humanity.

 

[gelf]

All I know is that Sega would still have crashed and burned because of their HORRIFIC mismanagement. After reading a few articles a couple of years ago about their Genesis and onwards years I started wondering how they went that far.

While Sega horrendous management back then cannot be disputed I still think in a playstation-less world that they would have done much better despite that. No matter what was happening in the company the software side was still consistently good and those games would have got more attention without PlayStation obscuring the view so to speak.

 

[wolfhowwl]

..the world would be a better place.

How so?

 

[charsace]

Sega wouldn't have surprise launched the Saturn and the Saturn would have done way better. A proper US launch for Saturn with all the games Sony bought exclusive and exclusive windows for would have been a nightmare for Nintendo.

 

[Celine]

I don't think any of N64 or Saturn would have sold 100M however both would have sold more especially the N64.
The hype for N64 was really strong and was catching up with PS1 at the beginning.

Sega wouldn't have surprise launched the Saturn and the Saturn would have done way better. A proper US launch for Saturn with all the games Sony bought exclusive and exclusive windows for would have been a nightmare for Nintendo.

Saturn problem was that the architecture was so complex Sega could never reduce the price of the board fast enough.

 

[Atomski]

Do you know what PC gaming was like in 1994?
You think it would be like it is now without any of the consoles, ok

Uh.. you say this like PC gaming wasn't awesome in the mid 90s...

 

[WillyFive]

sure, but again, i think it would've been ahead of its time & seen as an interesting experiment at best. we're talking what, '92 or so? your original post drew a lotta conclusions from this, i thought they were starting from a shaky ground, is the thing.

I took for granted the idea that if the console was released, then Nintendo and other developers would support it and audiences would buy it. I don't imagine a whole new redesigned console would be pushed to the side like the GBA E-reader cards were.

Why? I quite like to imagine a reality where Sega kicked all sorts of ass and took names in the 32bit gen, because Nintendo still went with carts. Why is my fantasy reality not allowed?

That would be cool, but the premise was if the Playstation 1 never happened; not if Sega didn't become stupid and conflicted within itself. A sober Sega with momentum from the Genesis would have been a FANTASTIC competitor to Nintendo.

 

[terrisus]

Uh.. you say this like PC gaming wasn't awesome in the mid 90s...

Indeed, mid-90s PC gaming was - and still is - the best.

 

[Rich!]

That's what I thought, but it wasn't Sony that beat Nintendo to the punch with the PS1 using CD-ROM. Nintendo dropped it themselves by choice. Would they retroactively go back and decide to use CD-ROMS if PS1 never happened what they're trying to say? Wasn't Nintendo's decision to not use them afterall the impetus for the creation of the PS1 in the first place?

That's why I'm confused by the quote.

I don't think you're looking at the right thing here.

The SPC700 sound chip in the SNES was designed by Sony - specifically created by Ken Kuturagi, the designer of PlayStation. Every single SNES console has the SONY logo imprinted on that chip.

If Sony and Nintendo had never fallen out, that partnership in tech would have continued - they likely would have designed significant parts of future Nintendo consoles too.

 

[gelf]

I don't think any of N64 or Saturn would have sold 100M however both would have sold more especially the N64.
The hype for N64 was really strong and was catching up with PS1 initially.


Saturn problem was that the architecture was so complex Sega could never reduce the price of the board fast enough.

They may not have been so stupid and rushed out that hastily cobbled together hardware if it where not for the imminent PS1 either so who knows really what the Saturn would have ended up being.

 

[pinkurocket]

again, as a huge sega fan, you're quite right that they were going after older groups even in the Kalinske era...however, you gotta admit, gaming broke a great deal more into the mainstream during sony's PSX/PS2 era. they actively put in work to cater to that demographic, and reaped the benefits - i don't see how it's then illogical to say without them, that might not have been quite as well fostered.

Well, looking at Nintendo's track record. When the gaming industry was very stagnant, they were able to think outside the box and release the Wii which appealed to an even bigger amount of people. It's probably a weird example because their vision was to steer away from the hardcore gamers into a casual market, but if they didn't have to do that, perhaps Nintendo would be way more 'hardcore' right now.

 

[billy beane]

The first game console I owned wasn't a PS1, but it was definitely the one that made me a care about games.

 

[Celine]

Most of us wouldn't be gaming and adults gaming would be a rarity rather than the norm.

What many who began with Playstation don't realize is that Sega already targeted an older audience in the hope to escape Nintendo influence.
The need to attract an older demographic was due to the children of the Atari 2600 and NES growing up more than a marketing scheme.

They may not have been so stupid and rushed out that hastily cobbled together hardware if it where not for the imminent PS1 either so who knows really what the Saturn would have ended up being.

Really hard to say.
It's clear Sega envisioned a future where the Saturn would have been the leading machine for 2D games whereas their (expensive) arcade boards would have been the cutting edge 3D solution.

 

[entremet]

As a person who lived through and saw the gaming industry change to a more mature and accepted hobby, especially by adults I'm confused by whats wrong and funny about his post?



Do you know what PC gaming was like in 1994?
You think it would be like it is now without any of the consoles, ok


I completely agree 👍
It's better to explain why it is instead of just saying it is, because you're not contributing any better, you're just being disrespectful to both the poster and the impact the original PlayStation had on the industry you love so much.
the industry wouldn't be as big, a lot of adults would still see gaming as a child's thing, some still do and a lot of older gamers return to gaming with the PSX and that's why it was successful, it removed the aged cap.
Yeah someone would have done it eventually, evidently not Nintendo until Wii
And thats only if the Wii would have existed without Playstation, but I don't think it would have, but we don't know that for sure so his post is correct in that respect.

PC Gaming was pretty awesome in the mid 90s. The current AAA market is basically PC heritage with less diversity.

 

[Synth]

That would be cool, but the premise was if the Playstation 1 never happened; not if Sega didn't become stupid and conflicted within itself. A sober Sega with momentum from the Genesis would have been a FANTASTIC competitor to Nintendo.

The Saturn shared a lot of software with the Playstation (Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, Toshinden etc), but those games were essentially seen as PlayStation exclusives due to them being superior on the platform. As mentioned before Namco still would have made stuff like Tekken and Ridge Racer, and they would likely have just become Saturn games as a result of Nintendo simply not being around at the time (think similar to year one of the 360). Sega could have remained stupid as hell, and third-parties alone would have kept them in the game. Their biggest arcade releases would also have made significantly more impact if they weren't stuck on the console with almost no userbase (whilst being inferior ports compared to the biggest arcade releases on the PlayStation).

Sega being stupid only mattered because Sony was there to make it count. Much like how Sony being stupid with the PS3 only mattered because of MS. And MS this gen only matters because of Sony again. Nintendo would have let all three succeed despite their stupidity.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I dunno about this. I feel that the technological advances were always going to lead to more adult themed games as time passed. Sony definitely helped to speed things along, but I don't think the market overall would actually be that different in terms of the games produced. Square was still going to make FF7 anyway (it would have been somewhat different, but they were always going to make it). Namco would have still made Tekken to combat Virtua Fighter, and Ridge Racer to combat Daytona USA. Toshiden would have still happened. Out of the launch line up it's only really Wipeout and Crash that I really see disappearing, and Crash was basically just another Sonic anyway.

People like myself would have still become adults, and likely still played games. That would have served as incentive for developers to create content for us anyway. The possibilities of gaming as an entertainment medium was always too large and varied to remain in the "toy" category once the tech stopped holding us back.

Also, Sega would probably still be making hardware (and would also have probably managed to stunt home console growth enough to give arcades a few more years). So I'd be all for this alternate reality!

Making the games was only part of that puzzle. Sony's marketing was a major reason why FF7 became what it did. Sony's marketing in general during that period was a big reason why you saw shift and why the industry grew so much over that one generation. I think people are just being way too dismissive of what Sony did in changing how things were. They weren't just going to change without someone pushing for that change.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

I think that Nintendo would still be the top dog.

I truly believe that the Dreamcast would've been more of a success and that Sega would also still be in the hardware game.

MS may have never entered the game, as their introduction was helped greatly by some of the greatest minds from Sega after the fall of their hardware division.

Hrmm...I would say the Saturn would've taken up the majority of that; the Saturn COULD do PS1 titles, and more valuably, had the storage space for it. There would've been no DC.

MS? Dunno, but their desire for the living room was real. I'd need more info on their longterm corporate goals circa 1996 without a Sony temptation first.

 

[Liquidsnake]

 

[Projectjustice]

This could of happened!

 

[Etnos]

Someone else would have fill that market

 

[Concept17]

Given Nintendo's lack of building new studios and expanding, the industry would have likely remained less mainstream, and not nearly as big.

 

[Synth]

Making the games was only part of that puzzle. Sony's marketing was a major reason why FF7 became what it did. Sony's marketing in general during that period was a big reason why you saw shift and why the industry grew so much over that one generation. I think people are just being way too dismissive of what Sony did in changing how things were. They weren't just going to change without someone pushing for that change.

I understand that, which is why I mentioned that Sony definitely sped this process up (especially with Wipeout). But you're essentially saying that despite their being all these games studios readily preparing the content required to take gaming to the next level, nobody other than Sony would have the vision to actually sell them? I find that to be ridiculously unlikely.

Gaming was going to overlap with Hollywood at some point regardless, and the way it was presented was always going to change to reflect that. Sony just actually did it properly first.

 

[Celine]

All those CD games would have been put on here instead.

Initially a good chunk of third party games were shared between Saturn and PS1.
That didn't help Sega.

I feel like a lot of those would have gone to the Saturn instead, particularly FFVII. As such, the Saturn would probably have been a lot more successful.

Think about it.
In reality Squaresoft never considered the Saturn for FFVII.
Everything from SNES, N64 and PSX but not Sega.

 

[veritassin]

In order for the deal to have gone through this alternate reality requires Nintendo to make a decision that they didn't make in ours. So why is it not also possible for Sony to make a different decision, and simply not follow through with the Playstation after Nintendo abandons the deal. I don't understand why you believe there's literally only one possible scenario where the Playstation isn't created.

I never said there was only one possibility, but am I required to come up with all possible scenarios in a hypothetical timeline? I just think that the simplest reason for Sony not creating its own console would be that Nintendo and Sony worked out a better deal for both of them and went forward with the SNES cd add-on. This to me would mean that Nintendo would stick with CD-ROM for its next console. Nintendo wouldn't have lost third party support and probably would've gained more, basically whatever Playstation got would've gone to Nintendo instead. I think MS would've entered the console market in this possible universe still.

 

[Leafhopper]

Uh.. you say this like PC gaming wasn't awesome in the mid 90s...

Im with this post.

 

[ReBurn]

At those prices back then? I guess as long as we are talking alternate realities this thing could have become affordable.

 

[Krejlooc]

At those prices back then? I guess as long as we are talking alternate realities this thing could have become affordable.

It did become affordable. By the time the Panasonic FZ-10 dropped, it was a normal console price.

 

[pixlexic]

maybe the NEC FUTURE ENGINE Console would be out now?

 

[Jamix012]

Huh? Wii came and went and has had no long term effect on the industry. Motion controls are effectively abandoned on all 3 platforms at this point. It's as if it never existed.

This is a joke post right? Holy shit. Wii had a huge effect on consoles and gaming in general. Similar to that of the PS1 I'd argue.

 

[Anarki]

Junior member or not, I'm ashamed so far from what I've read, being a massive gamer myself.

How soon history is forgotten. Nintendo fucked Sony in 1992 at the CES fair. They had agreed Sony would make a CD addon for the SNES, Sony had built their hopes up on that fact and announced it.

1 day later Nintendo said, nope, Phillips are making our CD addon leaving Sony with their pants down.

Sony took all the knowledge they had learnt and a couple of years later created the Playstation. The rest is history.

Learn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nk-rxAArGd0&list=UUGAW_bqcFm33_N2ZmygvQsQ

 

[Synth]

I never said there was only one possibility, but am I required to come up with all possible scenarios in a hypothetical timeline? I just think that the simplest reason for Sony not creating its own console would be that Nintendo and Sony worked out a better deal for both of them and went forward with the SNES cd add-on. This to me would mean that Nintendo would stick with CD-ROM for its next console. Nintendo wouldn't have lost third party support and probably would've gained more, basically whatever Playstation got would've gone to Nintendo instead. I think MS would've entered the console market in this possible universe still.

The reason I questioned you is because in multiple posts (one even directly asking how you come to this conclusion) you've stated that this is what "would" have happened in a definitive manner. You didn't say it was simply a scenario you created, but that if the PS1 didn't exist it would be because of this specific event happening. Sony simply saying "fuck it" and going back to focus on their many other business aspects hardly seems like a hyper unrealistic scenario.

As for third-party support, it's hardly that simple, even if they went with CD. Nintendo had spent a long time pissing off a lot of people, which is a large part in why the Genesis saw as much support as it did. Once Nintendo was prevented from blackballing any dev that dared make a game for a non-Nintendo console many were very keen to exercise that right. It's very unlikely that Namco would have sided with Nintendo for example, and EA and Sega were BFFs at that time. This isn't even taking into consideration that it would be very unlikely that Nintendo would have released their next machine at a time similar to Sega, so many of the earlier games I mentioned before would probably have landed as Saturn exclusives simply due to there being no other option (as happened with the Genesis before, and the 360 later). Your scenario relies on far more variables being altered in Nintendo's favour when compared to what was actually happening at the time.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

Given Nintendo's lack of building new studios and expanding, the industry would have likely remained less mainstream, and not nearly as big.

....
I don't see how anyone can jump to this conclusion seeing as Nintendo and SEGA were both aiming for the same late teen-young adult male market that Sony was aiming at in the mid-90s.
It's very possible that without a PlayStation the N64 or Saturn (unlikely for Saturn due to SEGA's 32X/CD mistakes and their horrible management) would have grabbed it's niche, and ran with it.
It's also very possible that it might have taken longer to entice older male gamers, but it would have eventually happened seeing as both Nintendo and SEGA were banking on it (for some reason) at that point in time.

I don't think Sony was entirely necessary for bringing in an older male audience in the same way that the US-based Xbox division was necessary for creating the current AAA western focused PC-rooted console market.


Edit:

Huh? Wii came and went and has had no long term effect on the industry. Motion controls are effectively abandoned on all 3 platforms at this point. It's as if it never existed.

Are you serious gurl?

 

[SolidSnakex]

I understand that, which is why I mentioned that Sony definitely sped this process up (especially with Wipeout). But you're essentially saying that despite their being all these games studios readily preparing the content required to take gaming to the next level, nobody other than Sony would have the vision to actually sell them? I find that to be ridiculously unlikely.

Gaming was going to overlap with Hollywood at some point regardless, and the way it was presented was always going to change to reflect that. Sony just actually did it properly first.

You should watch G4's history of Playstation where Yoshida talks about how hard it was to convince third party developers to even start making 3D games. They were super nervous about it. The stories about how third party developers felt about Nintendo are nothing new. So Sony in many ways was a breath of fresh air for them and it showed by the ridiculous amount of support that they received. Sony was also thinking outside the box at the time as their game development studio was sorta mixed with their music studio. That apparently played a big role in Parappa's creation.

Do I think that Sony were the only ones that could've made that shift? Nope, that's not what i'm saying at all. But I sure as hell don't think that Nintendo was going to do it. So it would've been Sega or someone else. And who knows how long it would've taken them to get the industry to where it is right now.

 

[Muffdraul]

It was only after I finally realized that the Playstation wasn't going to follow in that dog's footsteps that I finally took an interest. After the 3DO and the CDi, I paid no attention when Sony announced they were doing their own CD based console. "Yeah, good luck with that guys." It took demos of Wipeout and Jumping Flash to open my eyes and realize that it wasn't another bum horse being dragged into a losing race.

 

[Celine]

3DO business model was so screw up it could never survive.
None of the hardware manufacturer to whom 3DO licensed the hardware really believed in the console.
3DO as a company only survived on royalty fees on hardware and small royalty fee on software ($3) .
Too bad no ones was really pushing the platform because it was never a priority for Panasonic and the other companies and the software sales were anemic due to the low install base.
Still remember how happy Trip Hawkins was when Panasonic bought the M2 project for 100M.
The rumor about the fate of the Panasonic manager who signed the deal is really funny.

It did become affordable. By the time the Panasonic FZ-10 dropped, it was a normal console price.

A normal console which struggled to sell between 1 and 2 million units.

 

[IrishNinja]

Well, looking at Nintendo's track record. When the gaming industry was very stagnant, they were able to think outside the box and release the Wii which appealed to an even bigger amount of people. It's probably a weird example because their vision was to steer away from the hardcore gamers into a casual market, but if they didn't have to do that, perhaps Nintendo would be way more 'hardcore' right now.

i'd love to see that, but it's hard to imagine; that demographic is almost part of their identity.
i think the closest we got to seeing a nintendo effective at pandering to that older age group was infact the N64, and a great deal of that i'd put on Rare knocking it outta the park in that era. i was leaving for college around then & it was crazy seeing the N64 turn into a dudebro shooter box, heh

....
I don't see how anyone can jump to this conclusion seeing as Nintendo and SEGA were both aiming for the same late teen-young adult male market that Sony was aiming at in the mid-90s.
It's very possible that without a PlayStation the N64 or Saturn (unlikely for Saturn due to SEGA's Genesis mistakes and their horrible management) would have grabbed it's niche, and ran with it.
It's also very possible that it might have taken longer to entice older male gamers, but it would have eventually happened seeing as both Nintendo and SEGA were banking on it.

I don't think Sony was entirely necessary for bringing in an older male audience in the same way that MS was necessary for creating the current AAA western focused PC-rooted console market.

sure, nintendo (less so than sega) wouldve picked up the pieces but i still think you guys are kidding yourselves by denying the work Sony put in going after & homogenizing that demographic and, again, pushing gaming out into the mainstream. look at the sales #'s of the most successful hardware alone before and after the PS1, it's incredible.

this is all before even getting into how many small studios grew because their ease of development/royalty rates/freedom of disc vs cart etc etc

The rumor about the fate of the Panasonic manager who signed the deal is really funny.

haha, do tell - most of what i know from the 3DO was from Trip's many interviews in old Next Gen mags

 

[Synth]

You should watch G4's history of Playstation where Yoshida talks about how hard it was to convince third party developers to even start making 3D games. They were super nervous about it. The stories about how third party developers felt about Nintendo are nothing new. So Sony in many ways was a breath of fresh air for them and it showed by the ridiculous amount of support that they received. Sony was also thinking outside the box at the time as their game development studio was sorta mixed with their music studio. That apparently played a big role in Parappa's creation.

Do I think that Sony were the only ones that could've made that shift? Nope, that's not what i'm saying at all. But I sure as hell don't think that Nintendo was going to do it. So it would've been Sega or someone else. And who knows how long it would've taken them to get the industry to where it is right now.

I don't really disagree with you. I'm just saying that I think these things would have still happened, even if on a drastically altered timeline. Sega was accidentally Sony's 3D inspiration in the first place, so its not like we weren't going to transition to 3D games being the norm. The arcades back then always told you what was coming up next in the home. It's not like Sega would be putting these games out and everyone else would be reluctant to make any of their own.

I know it sounds like I'm downplaying Sony's role, and I want to make it clear that it's not my intention (even just shoving Sega out the door changes all sorts of shit). My post was mainly taking issue with the idea that we'd be at Xbox One and PS4 level hardware, but games would still simply be seen as kids toys today, and adults would largely avoid them. That just seems silly when the PC was already showing how to produce content for older audiences, and many of its IPs and studios are directly responsible for our market today.