Playstation wins Emmy

Reading that infoworld, this bit in particular...
Microsoft will share video game honors with Atari Inc. and Sony (Profile, Products, Articles) Corp., whose Atari 2600 and PlayStation 1 machines are being retrospectively recognized for their milestone achievements.
Click to expand...
I have to ask why XBLive! is rated as highly as the Atari 2600 and PS1? How come MS got a recognition for something that was mostly a consolidated take on conventional network gaming principles, a nice front end and unfied interface for peer-to-peer gaiming, whereas the Atari and Sony awards were for new developments in hardware with far more reaching effects on the industry, and yet Nintendo and others have got no mention despite their input? Surely the genres and 80's consoles Nintendo has come up with are worth more to the industry then XBLive!'s network gaming?

Seems like an 'easy' award to me. Not because its not worth anything to gamers, nor because it's not as technically demanding as creating a successful hardware platform, but because I think there's industry players who have achieved a lot more.

Though if there's a category for network gaming I guess XBLive! would win by default, being pretty much the only contender ;)
 
Since when have these awards seremonies like Emmy's and Oscars truly reflected the achievements, efforts and artistic merits.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Reading that infoworld, this bit in particular...

I have to ask why XBLive! is rated as highly as the Atari 2600 and PS1? How come MS got a recognition for something that was mostly a consolidated take on conventional network gaming principles, a nice front end and unfied interface for peer-to-peer gaiming, whereas the Atari and Sony awards were for new developments in hardware with far more reaching effects on the industry, and yet Nintendo and others have got no mention despite their input? Surely the genres and 80's consoles Nintendo has come up with are worth more to the industry then XBLive!'s network gaming?

Seems like an 'easy' award to me. Not because its not worth anything to gamers, nor because it's not as technically demanding as creating a successful hardware platform, but because I think there's industry players who have achieved a lot more.

Though if there's a category for network gaming I guess XBLive! would win by default, being pretty much the only contender ;)
Click to expand...

Live was pretty damn revolutionary (ignoring the failed xband or whatever it was called) for consoles and has a pretty far reaching effect on the industry as well (look at the work that Sony and Nintendo are doing to "catch up" to Live). Oscars for gaming systems does seem pretty stupid to me though.
 
Live was pretty damn revolutionary (ignoring the failed xband or whatever it was called) for consoles and has a pretty far reaching effect on the industry as well (look at the work that Sony and Nintendo are doing to "catch up" to Live). Oscars for gaming systems does seem pretty stupid to me though.
Click to expand...

Revolutionary my arse, evolutionary at best. As people have said, this is the kind of award that comes from the sort of no nothing cronnies that run ceremonies such as the emmys and oscars. Playstation 1's award is fair enough though from an industry point of view. Its effect has been similar to NES/SNES in that it expanded the gaming userbase (though I think NES was more significant). Speaking of those systems if there going to give out awards Nintendo should be first in line. But then they would be the choice of someone who actually has a clue, so I'm not suprised they're not represented in these awards.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Teasy said:
Revolutionary my arse, evolutionary at best. As people have said, this is the kind of award that comes from the sort of no nothing cronnies that run ceremonies such as the emmys and oscars. Playstation 1's award is fair enough though from an industry point of view. Its effect has been similar to NES/SNES in that it expanded the gaming userbase (though I think NES was more significant). Speaking of those systems if there going to give out awards Nintendo should be first in line. But then they would be the choice of someone who actually has a clue, so I'm not suprised they're not represented in these awards.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I get the feeling that Live! was included only to add an American flavour in the mix, IMHO.:rolleyes:
 
a688 said:
Live was pretty damn revolutionary (ignoring the failed xband or whatever it was called) for consoles and has a pretty far reaching effect on the industry as well.
Click to expand...
What has Live! managed that Revolutionary? We've had online gaming before Live!, long before, and bigger online gaming afterwards. Live! is a step up from that, but not something new and amazing. Live! is to online gaming what XBox is to PS1. It's better, but not as radical for it's time. PS1 ushered in mass gaming and 3D and pop culture for consoles. Xbox does was a PS1 does much better but wasn't rated above the original. So why should Live! get a recognition?

Not that I pay any attention to award ceremonies or really care. Most of the time I think the awards are handed out to friends more then anything. Certianly I can't find a reason to justify Live!, and not definitely not over the many other contributors throughout history.
 
The 57th annual Technology & Engineering Emmy Awards? I had no idea such a thing existed.

I can't believe you guys are getting worked up over xbox live. I didn't think anyone actually took these award seremonies seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cyan
AI Chatbot talks about relative console powers *spawn
Replies
8
Views
2K
Nesh
N
T
Proof that PSN actually stands for ProtoSkyNet
Replies
1
Views
1K
Nesh
N
U
Horizon Zero Dawn [PS4, PC]
57 58 59
Replies
1K
Views
168K
chris1515
C
Shortbread
Tokyo Game Show 2014
3 4 5
Replies
89
Views
14K
scf
S
P
Hirai becomes SCEI chairman, House takes over as president
Replies
1
Views
2K
patsu
P
Back
Top