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

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.
12 answers Last reply
More about playstation king times
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. 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).
  12. 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
Ask a new question

Read More

PlayStation King