Turning point(s) in Console history!

[Tagrineth]

the thing is, had nintendo not made the NES or SNES someone else would have made something similar. EITHER WAY one day or another Sony would have got the hint and made a console of their own. just like Microsoft got the hint and realised they needed to enter the market... u se what i mean...

Microsoft entered as a result of the huge market.

The NES pretty much rescued the console market from the grave.

We'll never know for sure whether any other console at the time could've pulled it off... maybe Sega's 8-bit would've done the trick had NES not existed?

If no 'saviour' had appeared, the console market would've died there and then, and Sony and Microsoft simply wouldn't have had any reason to make consoles, because there would be no market for them.

besides, had Sony not thown as much money as they did in publicising the first PS1 they way they did, making it COOL, making it mainstream, i don't really think videogames would be in the same position as they are now....

Yes, but had NES not existed and prevented the death of consoles, there wouldn't have been a PS1 to make things 'cool'.

u see my point babe

Yes, but do you see mine?

 

[London Geezer]

Yes, but do you see mine?

yes i do

well this is all about IFs and BUTs so it's a bit useless really :?

 

[Tagrineth]

Is that so? I could remember some programmers havin' a hard time on the platforms like SNES, Saturn, N64 too ... at least in the beginning.

SNES used a standard CPU, 65816, which was used previously in the Apple IIGS and an expansion board for Commodore64 and 128. 65816 is also an extension of the already-familiar-to-many 6502.

Saturn was evil, I'll grant you that. Two main CPU's, a tertiary processor, and quadratic primitives...

N64 had numerous common libraries available to developers right from the start... that's the entire reason UltraHLE was possible ^_^

 

[London Geezer]

and remember that the market is as big as u say NOW because of Sony's influence on the masses. how can anyone think that nintendo had the interest in doing what sony did... they still don't care about how many consoles they sell.. or at least that is the impression they give, which is not very good...

Sega was just too broke to be able to do that i think but u never know...

 

[Tagrineth]

and remember that the market is as big as u say NOW because of Sony's influence on the masses. how can anyone think that nintendo had the interest in doing what sony did... they still don't care about how many consoles they sell.. or at least that is the impression they give, which is not very good...

What I'm saying has nothing to do with that, and in fact I agree that PSX did popularise the console market dramatically... but, what I'm saying is that had NES not existed, there would have been no market for PSX to popularise in the first place.

 

[London Geezer]

and remember that the market is as big as u say NOW because of Sony's influence on the masses. how can anyone think that nintendo had the interest in doing what sony did... they still don't care about how many consoles they sell.. or at least that is the impression they give, which is not very good...

What I'm saying has nothing to do with that, and in fact I agree that PSX did popularise the console market dramatically... but, what I'm saying is that had NES not existed, there would have been no market for PSX to popularise in the first place.

:? MMM i guess.... still, i think Sega would have done something to revive the market but as i said we will never know....

the console market might have been in crisis, but the VIDEOGAME market wasnt dead, i'm sure Sega would have picked something up...

 

[Sonic]

SEGA had its limelight in the console industry. It was the little console knowns as Megadrive/Genesis. It's my personal favorite system of all time. SEGA was evil and turned its back on the gamers with the Saturn, tried to make up fo rit with the DC, and look where we are now.

Sony did design the PSX hardware even when it was SNES CD. Nintendo's input to to the project was basically: Make us a CD adapter for the SNES and give it some extra powerful hardware so it has an edge over current SNES games and SEGA CD games. The design of the hardware was usually and ultimately in Sony's hands. But MS turned away from the project and basically told Sony to stuff it if you will and that's how PSX was born.

Now a turning point in the console industry is the release of the Genesis. SEGA released a system that had a fast processor blah blah blah, but most importantly 3rd parties could now make games that they wanted and had mroe freedom to do so. Royalties were down, as were licensing fees, and more adult oriented games were released. At the same time, a small company known as EA was getting pushed by SEGA to make some stellar games and numerous sports titles for the Genesis. EA blew up on the Genesis and we haven't seen a stop to the potential of EA yet.

What else is there? Sony with the PSX with highly mainstreaming the console industry and having the first console that's actually good at 3d grapics. With their tight focus on marketing and developer relations it's no wonder how their little console rose to popularity and broke all kinds of records around the world.

With Nintendo we have Duck Hunt. That might not be a crucial turning point, but I swear the packin with Super Mario Bros. helped that dang NES out alot. I couldn't get enough of Duck Hunt and played the game religiosuly for hours a day.

 

[darkblu]

If you're referring to the PlayStation-X, technically Nintendo designed the PlayStation and Sony didn't revise it that much for the "X" version that everyone knows and loves

have to disagree here. nintendo can be considered "responsible" for the psx, but sony gets the technical merit (or at least we have no evidences for the contrary).

technically, sony designed a cd-rom-based sub-system for the super famicom, nintendo eventually decided they didn't like the media format being largely sony-proprietary (understandable, evenmore that sony had plans to enter the SFC-compatibles business, but what did nin think in the first place?), broke off with sony (not without legal fights), went for philips and tried to forget about the case. later on, sony designed their own console around the original nintendo-targeted project.

anyhow, do you believe that if the psx had substantial nintendo technology nin would have let go easily about it?

 

[Phil]

Tagrineth:

Microsoft entered as a result of the huge market.

I'd second that was the only reason...

Also about Nintendo designing the PSX - I think Sonic summed it up pretty nicely. That's more how I recall things...


ChryZ:

Custom hardware is always hard to tame. I am pretty sure Kutaragi had enough faith in coder to choose "cheap/highpowered/bitch2code4" instead of "pricy/highpowered/dream2code4" or "cheap/underpowered/dream2code4"

Respect to coders for (SC2|ZOE2|Burnout2|SH3) and to Kutaragi-sama for PS2

Precisely. I'd take custom, new, exciting and open hardware over what Nintendo/Microsoft are offering anyday.

 

[Teasy]

What's the point of saying if Nintendo hadn't done this then someone else would have done it? You could say that about anything.

Thomas Edison.. who's he?.. if he hadn't invented the light bulb then someone else would have done it anyway

On what Sony have done for the console industry:

Pros:

They increased the growth of the industry.

Cons:

- They brought mass marketing to the industry.

- They brought loads of casual no nothing gamers and journalists to the industry.

- They brought quantity over quality to the industry.

Of course that pro couldn't have happened to such an extent without those cons. From a gamers point of view though the cons outweigh that one pro.

But then if your someone making money from the industry you'd probably think the opposite.

 

[London Geezer]

Cons:

- They brought mass marketing to the industry.

- They brought loads of casual no nothing gamers and journalists to the industry.

- They brought fast food gaming to the industry (quantity rather then quality).

1) HOW IS THAT a bad thing?

2) what do u care if other people came in?

3) fair enough.

one thing is for sure, hadnt they done that, big budget games would be absolutely non-existant, since the market would not support it....

games budget (and with that POTENTIAL growth in quality) has increased immensely and that has only to do with the growth of the market which u consider Sony's merit as well.

of course there are shitty games. but there are more shitty games than before because there are MORE games altogether...

 

[ChryZ]

While I am on it, .... the PSX was the successor Nintendo failed to deliver. Nintendo sat around busy cooking up the much too late N64, dispelling 3rd party devs / publishers with "rulebooks of what content not todo" and "sure we like to produce your cartridge, after we approved it and you have signed this prepaid 30.000 unit order". Anyway, GC is a brilliant package ... what bugs me, is that the 3rd party support isn't increasing. Just my 0.02$

 

[Teasy]

1: This is a bad thing to me because it causes all the negative things that I mentioned. Although yeah I suppose it also causes the positive thing I mentioned. So you have a good reason not to think its a negative thing in itself. But since my overall opinion is I'd rather not have that positive if it meant getting rid of those negatives, I see it as a negative thing.

2: Well I care because I have to talk to these people. I have to hear what they say and cringe Its like being at a party and having a group of drunken morons gate crash it. Its just something that annoys me, or annoyed me a lot at the time, I've gotten more used to it now.

I agree with almost everything you said in your last post. With one slight revision. I don't think there are more crappy games now just because there are more games. That is part of it yeah, but I also think with PSX the good games vs crappy games ratio dropped substantially compared to previous consoles.

 

[Teasy]

what bugs me, is that the 3rd party support isn't increasing

Do you mean GC's third party support isn't increasing from what it has now? Or do you mean GC's third party support hasn't increased compared to the third party support N64 had?

 

[Tagrineth]

Is that so? I could remember some programmers havin' a hard time on the platforms like SNES, Saturn, N64 too ... at least in the beginning.

SNES used a standard CPU, 65816, which was used previously in the Apple IIGS and an expansion board for Commodore64 and 128. 65816 is also an extension of the already-familiar-to-many 6502.

Saturn was evil, I'll grant you that. Two main CPU's, a tertiary processor, and quadratic primitives...

N64 had numerous common libraries available to developers right from the start... that's the entire reason UltraHLE was possible ^_^

*bump* my reply to the 'over-complex consoles from the start' deal.

 

[ChryZ]

what bugs me, is that the 3rd party support isn't increasing

Do you mean GC's third party support isn't increasing from what it has now? Or do you mean GC's third party support hasn't increased compared to the third party support N64 had?

First one! From N64 to GC it increased for sure ... right? It's just my perception, I have the feeling there are less 3rd party triple A titles on the GC, than on the other platforms, but I have not the facts to back it up ... anyway there is enough to make me plan a purchase in the near future.

 

[jvd]

Sega was in a great postion going into the 32 bit era . They had designed the saturn for 2d games which was the big thing at the time . They didn't forsee the shift sony had to 3d . Thats why the saturns design was so fubar . But what i find funny is when the saturn and psx were around people condemded the saturn cause it was hard to program for and praised the psx because it was easy. Then the dc and ps2 came out and the dc was easy to program for and the ps2 was not and which one got all the praise ?

The nes system enjoyed as much sucess if not more than both the psx and ps2. Its only rival was the failed master system. The snes faced of against the mega drive. They almost split the market between themselves (there was turbo graphics ). Then with the 32bit age there was saturn , psx , n64. The saturn was sega's death cry . N64 still held a decent share of the market . With the ps2 . Gc and ms happened. They Both have decent installed bases but haven't been able to stop the stigma of sony. Back when i was young everyone said i had a nintendo or i want the new nintendo . Now everyone says they want a sony or a playstation . If they don't watch it everyone may be saying they want a ms or a xbox . People are sheep they see it enough on tv and they think its the best. Which couldn't be any futher from the truth . Anyway gf wants to watch a movie so i'm out

 

[ChryZ]

Sega was in a great postion going into the 32 bit era . They had designed the saturn for 2d games which was the big thing at the time . They didn't forsee the shift sony had to 3d . Thats why the saturns design was so fubar . But what i find funny is when the saturn and psx were around people condemded the saturn cause it was hard to program for and praised the psx because it was easy. Then the dc and ps2 came out and the dc was easy to program for and the ps2 was not and which one got all the praise ?

The nes system enjoyed as much sucess if not more than both the psx and ps2. Its only rival was the failed master system. The snes faced of against the mega drive. They almost split the market between themselves (there was turbo graphics ). Then with the 32bit age there was saturn , psx , n64. The saturn was sega's death cry . N64 still held a decent share of the market . With the ps2 . Gc and ms happened. They Both have decent installed bases but haven't been able to stop the stigma of sony. Back when i was young everyone said i had a nintendo or i want the new nintendo . Now everyone says they want a sony or a playstation . If they don't watch it everyone may be saying they want a ms or a xbox . People are sheep they see it enough on tv and they think its the best. Which couldn't be any futher from the truth . Anyway gf wants to watch a movie so i'm out

I've read this twice, still don't get it ... would someone be so nice to tell me (in a nutshell), what point jvd tries to make? Something like "Sega would rule the console realm today, if they would had aired more tv-commercials"? (sorry for the grammar)

 

[Sonic]

That's not the point he's trying to make. I'm sure if SEGA made the right moves during the time of the coming 32bit generation it would still be in the console manufacturing business today and be quite successful at that. The problem was never Sony concerning SEGA's failure when it ocmes to the Saturn, it was SEGA's and SEGA's only. If SEGA made right business decisions it wouldn't be in such a bad position in the industry as it is today.

I think the point jvd is trying to make is that the market tends to go in so many different direction sand the consumers making the purchasing decisions are so fickle that they cannot stick with one brand for long. This might be what he's trying to say, that's what I got from it. jvd, what did you mean?

 

[jvd]

Sega was in a great postion going into the 32 bit era . They had designed the saturn for 2d games which was the big thing at the time . They didn't forsee the shift sony had to 3d . Thats why the saturns design was so fubar . But what i find funny is when the saturn and psx were around people condemded the saturn cause it was hard to program for and praised the psx because it was easy. Then the dc and ps2 came out and the dc was easy to program for and the ps2 was not and which one got all the praise ?

The nes system enjoyed as much sucess if not more than both the psx and ps2. Its only rival was the failed master system. The snes faced of against the mega drive. They almost split the market between themselves (there was turbo graphics ). Then with the 32bit age there was saturn , psx , n64. The saturn was sega's death cry . N64 still held a decent share of the market . With the ps2 . Gc and ms happened. They Both have decent installed bases but haven't been able to stop the stigma of sony. Back when i was young everyone said i had a nintendo or i want the new nintendo . Now everyone says they want a sony or a playstation . If they don't watch it everyone may be saying they want a ms or a xbox . People are sheep they see it enough on tv and they think its the best. Which couldn't be any futher from the truth . Anyway gf wants to watch a movie so i'm out

I've read this twice, still don't get it ... would someone be so nice to tell me (in a nutshell), what point jvd tries to make? Something like "Sega would rule the console realm today, if they would had aired more tv-commercials"? (sorry for the grammar)

Kinda but the same goes for turbo graphics 16 and everything else . Once u become the "it" thing its easy to sell your product . Once you loose being the "it" thing it becomes much harder . Look at beanie babys they were the "it" thing , now they are nothing and something else replaced them . Its the way it works .