Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Will playstation be first to be "KING" 3 TIMES???

Last response: in Home Theatre Legacy
Share
Anonymous
April 4, 2005 12:22:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

I think it would be the first time, wouldn't it?

Atari was King once (2600).

Nintendo was king twice (NES and Super NES). Even this is debatable.

Sega was also king for a while with the Genesis. They were both on top
of the game, neck and neck.

And then there's Sony... the Playstation was DEFINITELY King. The new
NES. I had my doubts about the Playstation 2 for a while, but it has
proven to be a MORE than adequate worthy successor to the Playstation.
The playstation 2 is DEFINITELY the current King. No doubt about it. I
would almost say it's the new SNES, to draw a parallel, but it is even
just SO far beyond that..

SO... what are your predictions? Will the Playstation 3 continue in the
tradition of the PS2 and PS1? I say, if it is 100% backward compatable,
it's got a really good chance.

More about : playstation king times

Anonymous
April 5, 2005 5:47:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

Rik wrote:
> How about adding Portables to the list? Sure, you can always say
> Gameboy has been king there, but it's also been Queen, jester and the
> entire court when you think abou it... :)  (Not much competition)
>
> PSP stands a good chance of de-throning the Gameboy franchise (not
> killing it or anything, but it's looking like the PSP will sell more
> than the DS by December.)
>
> Just a thought...
>
> On 3 Apr 2005 20:22:23 -0700, "The Space Boss" <drsmith666@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I think it would be the first time, wouldn't it?
> >
> >Atari was King once (2600).
> >
> >Nintendo was king twice (NES and Super NES). Even this is debatable.
> >
> >Sega was also king for a while with the Genesis. They were both on
top
> >of the game, neck and neck.
> >
> >And then there's Sony... the Playstation was DEFINITELY King. The
new
> >NES. I had my doubts about the Playstation 2 for a while, but it has
> >proven to be a MORE than adequate worthy successor to the
Playstation.
> >The playstation 2 is DEFINITELY the current King. No doubt about it.
I
> >would almost say it's the new SNES, to draw a parallel, but it is
even
> >just SO far beyond that..
> >
> >SO... what are your predictions? Will the Playstation 3 continue in
the
> >tradition of the PS2 and PS1? I say, if it is 100% backward
compatable,
> >it's got a really good chance.

THe original Game Boys was damn near a portable NES (minus color). I
think the main prolem with the Lynx and Game gear was the investment in
batteries. I remember my friend who had a game gear once commented to
me that he could take dead batteries out of the Game Gear and put them
in his game boy and play on and on.

My take, personally? Pitting the DS against the PSP is like pitting the
N64 against the PS2. My main problem with the N64 is that I was shocked
that a company would make a cartridge based system this late in the
game. By 1996, the cartridge format was already obsolete - with the
exception of the handhelds.

And now, it seems the PSP has brought digital optical media to the
handheld marketplace, at last making the cartridge format obsolete for
handhelds, too.

I did NOT like the Nintendo 64. Yeah, yeah it probably has a LOT to do
with the fact that it's a cartridge based system. But had the N64 been
CD-Rom based, I think it could have been a much more impressive system,
and perhaps it wouldn't have gotten it's ass kicked so badly by the
Playstation.

Since I did not - and to date still really don't care for the N64 (Even
though I have a half a dozen systems..), then why on earth would I turn
around and buy what is similer to being a "handheld N64"? - I LOVED THE
SUPER NES, and the GBA is very similer to a portable SNES, so yes I
really love that system.

Sony "leapfrogged" Nintendo with the PSP. Instead of giving the PSP the
power of a PS1, it's got the power of a PS2. Perhaps if Nintendo had
released the "Gamecube portable", where you could play actual gamecube
discs, it would have not only competed with the PSP, but boosted
Nintendo's home console market.

Any word on whether Nintendo is even going to TRY to compete with the
PS3 or Xbox 2???? If the DS can't compete with the PSP, I predict
Nintendo will go the way of Sega, and we'll be seeing "Super Mario
PSP", and Mario's next console adventure will be on the Playstation 3.
Anonymous
April 5, 2005 12:11:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

How about adding Portables to the list? Sure, you can always say
Gameboy has been king there, but it's also been Queen, jester and the
entire court when you think abou it... :)  (Not much competition)

PSP stands a good chance of de-throning the Gameboy franchise (not
killing it or anything, but it's looking like the PSP will sell more
than the DS by December.)

Just a thought...

On 3 Apr 2005 20:22:23 -0700, "The Space Boss" <drsmith666@aol.com>
wrote:

>I think it would be the first time, wouldn't it?
>
>Atari was King once (2600).
>
>Nintendo was king twice (NES and Super NES). Even this is debatable.
>
>Sega was also king for a while with the Genesis. They were both on top
>of the game, neck and neck.
>
>And then there's Sony... the Playstation was DEFINITELY King. The new
>NES. I had my doubts about the Playstation 2 for a while, but it has
>proven to be a MORE than adequate worthy successor to the Playstation.
>The playstation 2 is DEFINITELY the current King. No doubt about it. I
>would almost say it's the new SNES, to draw a parallel, but it is even
>just SO far beyond that..
>
>SO... what are your predictions? Will the Playstation 3 continue in the
>tradition of the PS2 and PS1? I say, if it is 100% backward compatable,
>it's got a really good chance.
Related resources
Anonymous
April 30, 2005 5:35:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

The Space Boss <drsmith666@aol.com> wrote:

> And now, it seems the PSP has brought digital optical media to the
> handheld marketplace, at last making the cartridge format obsolete for
> handhelds, too.

> I did NOT like the Nintendo 64. Yeah, yeah it probably has a LOT to do
> with the fact that it's a cartridge based system. But had the N64 been
> CD-Rom based, I think it could have been a much more impressive system,
> and perhaps it wouldn't have gotten it's ass kicked so badly by the
> Playstation.

I think it's more because PSX was first to market and then got the
demographic perception (teen vs preteen). The carts hurt with stuff like
Square, and maybe with perception, but when I finally went to disc based
systems, I was like "Load times...WTF"

N64 was more powerful than the PSX, had Nintendo's first party games, and
had many more 4 player games for the obvious reason.

> Sony "leapfrogged" Nintendo with the PSP. Instead of giving the PSP the
> power of a PS1, it's got the power of a PS2. Perhaps if Nintendo had
> released the "Gamecube portable", where you could play actual gamecube
> discs, it would have not only competed with the PSP, but boosted
> Nintendo's home console market.

Looks more like a PS1 to me. The small screen (big for a handhold, small
for a console) makes fewer polygons do more.

--
QUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal
There is no god and Murphy is his prophet
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 12:08:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

> I think it's more because PSX was first to market and then got the
> demographic perception (teen vs preteen). The carts hurt with stuff
like
> Square, and maybe with perception, but when I finally went to disc
based
> systems, I was like "Load times...WTF"

A system lives or dies by its games. People get caught up in the
hardware aspects, but at the end of the day its the software. [of
course better hardware may allow you to make more interesting
software.. ]

Starting with the 32x Sega started making blunders. They shipped the
Saturn too early with buggy software. Sega also underestimated the 3D
effect with the Saturn originally being a primarily 2D machine, adding
a 3D component later in production thus producing a complicated dual
processor machine that was hard to program for.

Sony hit hard with a much better launch lineup and was able to secure
better third party support. Once they took out Sega, they were easily
able to keep a solid lead over Nintendo who has been in the middle of
its own 'bad idea' freefall for the better part of a decade. Unlike
other companies Sony managed to retain that lead into the PS2 mostly by
not making any major mistakes. Right now they're so far ahead I can't
imagine the PS3 not dominating the next generation. Nintendo is now in
a 3rd place at best seat and we've got evil corporation #2 (Microsoft)
with the only hope at directly challenging them. And even then I can't
imagine the XBOX is tearing up the Japanese market so all this is
totally a NA observation.

It's rather sad, if I was pulling for a company soley based on how I
felt about them I guess I'd be pulling for Nintendo. Of course they
were fairly evil themselves back in the NES days with their draconian
licensing deals. I guess it doesn't really matter, i'll end up buying
all the major systems as usual.. all I hope is that we continue to have
a viable multi-system landscape and that Sony doesn't become the only
player.

= numsix
= http://www.villagebbs.com
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 10:16:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

I heard today that the DS is outselling the PSP in Japan because of
some new pet sim where you raise dogs.
Anonymous
May 2, 2005 10:21:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

It's going to be between PS3 and Xbox360 (or whatever the hell they
name it). Whichever has the best games will reign supreme. Revolution
(the code name for Nintendo's next console) will probably come in third
place unless a miracle happens.
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 12:10:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

> > Starting with the 32x Sega started making blunders.
>
> Interesting. I've always thought that it was the SegaCD that marked
> the beginning of Sega's chain of blunders. However, I could see why
> you might want to start with the 32X... it was an even bigger
screwup.

Many people consider the SegaCD to have been a failure, but I have to
disagree. It's the most succesful 'add-on' ever. Now, that may -not- be
saying much, but think of another add-on that managed to last several
years and over 100 titles. Plus if nothing else the SegaCD managed to
single handedly spawn and then just about bury the FMV console genre,
saving future systems a lot of time and worry. Anyway, the SegaCD has
some good titles and I wouldn't call it a total loss.. the 32x, eh.. I
mean there were worse systems sure, but overall it wasn't a good idea
and really showed the Sega was out of touch at the time.

> > Sony hit hard with a much better launch lineup and was able to
secure
> > better third party support. Once they took out Sega, they were
easily
> > able to keep a solid lead over Nintendo
>
> Sony had damn good timing. They released their system at a time when

> they could crush Sega, and Nintendo was determined to compete with
the
> SNES until the N64 was finished. They really were the only game in
town
> for several years. I really don't think the Playstation would have
done
> nearly as well if Nintendo had a viable system to compete with it at
> launch- carts or no carts.

Well, Nintendo had at least recieved a bloody nose from Sega. And now
their blunder which spawned the PSX in the first place is legendary. I
don't think they were necessarily counting on the SNES lasting, that
was their NES mistake -- it just took them too long to get the N64 to
market. They also shot themselves in the foot with the cartridge format
(although I'm sure Bung et al was OK with it). The expense of producing
a cartridge just about ensured third parties would go elsewhere and it
didn't exactly make companies like Square happy who were making 3 and 4
disc RPGs at the time. If Nintendo had brought its 'A' game and if Sega
had even brought its 'B' game.. things maybe different. But since they
both just fumbled as much as they could Sony was smart enough to take
advantage.. and I don't think Sony is going to make the same mistakes.

> > who has been in the middle of
> > its own 'bad idea' freefall for the better part of a decade.
>
> I think some of Nintendo's best stuff came out between 1992-1998, but

> even I'm not going to deny they made some bad calls around then.
Most
> of it happened early on, and we only saw the ramifications later...
kind
> of like how we're only now seeing Nintendo correct the mistakes they
> made with the N64.

Don't mistake N's corporate hardware mistakes with its software
divisions. First Party Nintendo stuff remains one of the best out
there. It's all that has kept the company afloat for awhile now.
Nintendo has and continues to make great games.. but its not going to
rise out of 3rd place by itself.

> >Unlike
> > other companies Sony managed to retain that lead into the PS2
mostly
> by
> > not making any major mistakes. Right now they're so far ahead I
can't
> > imagine the PS3 not dominating the next generation.
>
> Oh, I can. They've got nowhere to go but down, and both Nintendo and

> Microsoft are ready to challenge them. My personal hypothesis (which

> admittedly means nothing) is that you'll see the systems more evenly
> spread out.

Microsoft can't compete in Japan, but it has a chance here. Nintendo
hasn't had its act together in a decade. I'm hoping this may change,
but for Sony to get unseated something amazing needs to happen, or sony
would need to make a huge mistake.. I realistically don't expect
either, but i'm always open to a surprise.

We shall see..

= numsix
= http://www.villagebbs.com
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 12:12:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

Darth Chaos wrote:
> It's going to be between PS3 and Xbox360 (or whatever the hell they
> name it). Whichever has the best games will reign supreme. Revolution
> (the code name for Nintendo's next console) will probably come in
third
> place unless a miracle happens.

To be honest, it's probably going to remain the same as the current
line up. Which is pretty much what you're saying.

I wonder how many more mediocre showings Nintendo will go through
before it drops out of the hardware race. It's been rumoured already.
They'd end up making more money probably, considering how strong
Nintendos software is..

= numsix
= http://www.villagebbs.com
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 1:16:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

"Jack (www.villagebbs.com)" <lupin3@planetjurai.com> wrote in
news:1115046532.672309.81730@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:


> Starting with the 32x Sega started making blunders.

Interesting. I've always thought that it was the SegaCD that marked
the beginning of Sega's chain of blunders. However, I could see why
you might want to start with the 32X... it was an even bigger screwup.


> Sony hit hard with a much better launch lineup and was able to secure
> better third party support. Once they took out Sega, they were easily
> able to keep a solid lead over Nintendo

Sony had damn good timing. They released their system at a time when
they could crush Sega, and Nintendo was determined to compete with the
SNES until the N64 was finished. They really were the only game in town
for several years. I really don't think the Playstation would have done
nearly as well if Nintendo had a viable system to compete with it at
launch- carts or no carts.

> who has been in the middle of
> its own 'bad idea' freefall for the better part of a decade.

I think some of Nintendo's best stuff came out between 1992-1998, but
even I'm not going to deny they made some bad calls around then. Most
of it happened early on, and we only saw the ramifications later... kind
of like how we're only now seeing Nintendo correct the mistakes they
made with the N64.

>Unlike
> other companies Sony managed to retain that lead into the PS2 mostly
by
> not making any major mistakes. Right now they're so far ahead I can't
> imagine the PS3 not dominating the next generation.

Oh, I can. They've got nowhere to go but down, and both Nintendo and
Microsoft are ready to challenge them. My personal hypothesis (which
admittedly means nothing) is that you'll see the systems more evenly
spread out.



--

Aaron J. Bossig

http://www.GodsLabRat.com
http://www.dvdverdict.com
Anonymous
May 3, 2005 2:32:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

"Jack (www.villagebbs.com)" <lupin3@planetjurai.com> wrote in
news:1115089823.490535.274720@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> Many people consider the SegaCD to have been a failure, but I have to
> disagree. It's the most succesful 'add-on' ever. Now, that may -not-
be
> saying much, but think of another add-on that managed to last several
> years and over 100 titles. Plus if nothing else the SegaCD managed to
> single handedly spawn and then just about bury the FMV console genre,
> saving future systems a lot of time and worry. Anyway, the SegaCD has
> some good titles and I wouldn't call it a total loss...

I figured that's what you were getting at. I could see either argument,
myself.


> Well, Nintendo had at least recieved a bloody nose from Sega. And now
> their blunder which spawned the PSX in the first place is legendary.

It was a hard move for them to avoid, really. Nintendo somehow signed
away their rights to make CD games without Sony help.

> I
> don't think they were necessarily counting on the SNES lasting, that
> was their NES mistake -- it just took them too long to get the N64 to
> market.

I remember when MK3 (or maybe UMK3?) was released for both systems,
Nintendo had a campaign saying "You don't need a new system!" and
"Plays great, and looks almost as good!". This was around the time they
pushed their SuperFX and other chip technologies to close the gap.
Maybe they weren't counting on the SNES outlasting the Playstation,
But with the Virtual Boy DOA and the N64 stuck in R&D, it's all they
had left.

> But since they
> both just fumbled as much as they could Sony was smart enough to take
> advantage.. and I don't think Sony is going to make the same mistakes.

I think they already are. Sony's dropped the ball with a few developers
as of late, and their marketing is getting to be fairly weak. They know
they'll be in charge until the new Nintendo/Microsoft system hits, so
they aren't even trying right now.

> Don't mistake N's corporate hardware mistakes with its software
> divisions. First Party Nintendo stuff remains one of the best out
> there. It's all that has kept the company afloat for awhile now.
> Nintendo has and continues to make great games.. but its not going to
> rise out of 3rd place by itself.

No mistake about it: we all love Nintendo's games... but they've had
trouble promoting their systems, as well as trouble delivering them
to the market on time.


--

Aaron J. Bossig

http://www.GodsLabRat.com
http://www.dvdverdict.com
Anonymous
May 4, 2005 7:03:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

Personally, I think the SegaCD would've been a bigger success if Sega
(and the third-party developers/publishers) would've avoided those
god-awful "nothing but full motion video" games and concentrated on
super-huge 16-bit games with CD-quality soundtracks. I think Sega's
decision to pack in Sewer Shark was not a wise move. Those Sega
Classics CDs would've made a better pack-in along with a super killer
ap (the Sega CD allowed for Mode 7-type scaling, and I'm sure Sega
could've developed a new Outrun, Hang-On, or Super Monaco GP which
would take advantage of the scaling capabilities).
Anonymous
May 5, 2005 10:34:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (More info?)

> Personally, I think the SegaCD would've been a bigger success if Sega
> (and the third-party developers/publishers) would've avoided those
> god-awful "nothing but full motion video" games and concentrated on
> super-huge 16-bit games with CD-quality soundtracks. I think Sega's
> decision to pack in Sewer Shark was not a wise move. Those Sega
> Classics CDs would've made a better pack-in along with a super killer
> ap (the Sega CD allowed for Mode 7-type scaling, and I'm sure Sega
> could've developed a new Outrun, Hang-On, or Super Monaco GP which
> would take advantage of the scaling capabilities).

Hmm, well first off Sewer Shark wasn't the original Pack-in. It was the
Sega Classics Disc and Sol Feace - A shooter. Sewer Shark wasn't the
pack-in until later.

As for the FMV, you have to chalk it up to a fad. At the time everyone
was so amazed by just having FMV in games like Sewer Shark and Night
Trap that you were able to somewhat overlook the fact that these games
weren't very good. But, for awhile at least.. FMV games were popular
enough.

Overall the SegaCD did fairly well all things considered. They could
have done things better. Had they been able to get games out on both
the Genesis and SegaCD at the same time with some enhancements on the
SegaCD version, it probably would have done better. They did manage to
get some pretty solid A titles out by the end as well as some good
'cart' upgrades. I don't know why they didn't put out more 'classics'
compilations. The Genesis had a huge library of older games by this
point, so it would be been a cheap and simple move..

= numsix
= http://www.villagebbs.com
!