The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
There is no doubt that the winner of the last 'Console Wars' was the PSX, by a country mile.
But why do so many people criticise Sony for this?? The reason that the PSx is more popular is that it offers a better package than its competitors.
The reason the Saturn failed is simply because Sega made some fundemental mistakes and that it was a bad machine. Too many people were stung by the failure of the Saturn and that's why the DC is not dead - not because it's a bad machine, but because of the 'stigma' that's attached itself to Sega.
The Saturn did not fail because of Sony - it failed because of Sega and yet people claim that the downfall of Sega's console is down to something that Sony did.
All that the PSX offered was a better option to the Saturn and later the N64.
For newcomers into the console market Sony set new standards for 3rd party relations etc and also managed to produce one hell of a console!!
It's easy to forget that Sony didn't employ 'dirty tactics'. They didn't use negative advertising to slate the Saturn (Sega) and they didn't offer certain developers huge sums of money simply to produce exclusive titles for their console (Microsoft)
Sony should not be criticised for succeeding in their aims and making the most popular (non handheld) games console ever.
Failure on the part of Sega and, to an extent, Nintendo is down to their own mistakes and lack of foresight.
Sony should not be blamed for this, it just happened that they were in the right place with the right product at the right time to take advantage of this.
But why do so many people criticise Sony for this?? The reason that the PSx is more popular is that it offers a better package than its competitors.
The reason the Saturn failed is simply because Sega made some fundemental mistakes and that it was a bad machine. Too many people were stung by the failure of the Saturn and that's why the DC is not dead - not because it's a bad machine, but because of the 'stigma' that's attached itself to Sega.
The Saturn did not fail because of Sony - it failed because of Sega and yet people claim that the downfall of Sega's console is down to something that Sony did.
All that the PSX offered was a better option to the Saturn and later the N64.
For newcomers into the console market Sony set new standards for 3rd party relations etc and also managed to produce one hell of a console!!
It's easy to forget that Sony didn't employ 'dirty tactics'. They didn't use negative advertising to slate the Saturn (Sega) and they didn't offer certain developers huge sums of money simply to produce exclusive titles for their console (Microsoft)
Sony should not be criticised for succeeding in their aims and making the most popular (non handheld) games console ever.
Failure on the part of Sega and, to an extent, Nintendo is down to their own mistakes and lack of foresight.
Sony should not be blamed for this, it just happened that they were in the right place with the right product at the right time to take advantage of this.
The Male Gaze as Spectator in Hitchcocks Rear Window - 2008
Montage Film Reviews freelancer Gemma Parmar has written a review of the film 'Rear Window' 1964 (dir. Alfred Hitchcock).
To read the review see here!
Montage Film Reviews freelancer Gemma Parmar has written a review of the film 'Rear Window' 1964 (dir. Alfred Hitchcock).
To read the review see here!
Flying Pig wrote:
But why do so many people criticise Sony
> for this??
Who? Whos been doing that? Isnt this more like Critisising Man Untd when you supporting another time? (actually I think its alright to support Man U and critise it.... actually, thinking about it, I cant imgaine a time when its alright to support ManU :) )
The reason that the PSx is more popular is that it offers
> a better package than its competitors.
Not really... As a console its specs were a little dated at the time of release... is was supposed to be a SNES+ after all...
The reason the Saturn failed
> is simply because Sega made some fundemental mistakes and that it
> was a bad machine.
(arnt you now doing to the Saturn what yourt complaining others are doing to the PSX?
I didnt buy a Saturn, didnt want a Saturn and still am not interested by the Saturn... but I dont think of it as a bad machine... just one I dont want...
I suspect bad advertising & price was its downfall, rather than specs...
Too many people were stung by the failure of the
> Saturn
Nope... most people I know couldnt have cared less at the time or now wether the Saturn failed or was a runaway success :)
The Saturn did not fail because of Sony
Cant argue with that reall...? :)
>yet people claim that the downfall of Sega's console is
> down to something that Sony did.
Who does that?
> better option to the Saturn and later the N64.
For newcomers into
Change option to marketing... :)
> the console market Sony set new standards for 3rd party relations
> etc and also managed to produce one hell of a console!!
Sony and Nintendo produced one hell of a console... although 3rd PArty releastion theyt setup was pretty much the same system used by all western system developers... its only really been Japanese producers that limit developers in such a way...
It's easy
> to forget that Sony didn't employ 'dirty tactics'. They didn't use
> negative advertising to slate the Saturn (Sega) and they didn't
Good call... they didnt at that (well not in the UK...) although they have done with the PS2... and are getting tin troubel for it arnt they?
> offer certain developers huge sums of money simply to produce
> exclusive titles for their console (Microsoft)
Nooo. nooo. noooo :) ... Microsoft offers the best 3rd Party development package avalible... you can develop the same titles for any other console you like, develop titles sole for other consoles, in fact you dont een have to develop and X-Box titles at all... ever... just make PS2 games if yoyu like... :)
Sony should not be
> criticised for succeeding in their aims and making the most popular
Were not complaining at the success of the PSX... but its not aperfect console, and not above making its own mistakes, and just because it sold by the bucketload, doesnt mean it should be hearlded as the new god? ;)
> to an extent, Nintendo is down to their own mistakes and lack of
> foresight.
Nintendo in by view completly screwed up the N64 in europe...
Sony should not be blamed for this, it just happened
> that they were in the right place with the right product at the
> right time to take advantage of this.
I dont think anyone is blaming Sony for that in any non-business fair play way... in fact most people use PSX rise to console dominace as a favourable argument... The only time Ive ever seen the PSX used realy unfailrly in a discussion, their argument ususally revolves around their console being better because they say so...
But I could be wrong? ;)
But why do so many people criticise Sony
> for this??
Who? Whos been doing that? Isnt this more like Critisising Man Untd when you supporting another time? (actually I think its alright to support Man U and critise it.... actually, thinking about it, I cant imgaine a time when its alright to support ManU :) )
The reason that the PSx is more popular is that it offers
> a better package than its competitors.
Not really... As a console its specs were a little dated at the time of release... is was supposed to be a SNES+ after all...
The reason the Saturn failed
> is simply because Sega made some fundemental mistakes and that it
> was a bad machine.
(arnt you now doing to the Saturn what yourt complaining others are doing to the PSX?
I didnt buy a Saturn, didnt want a Saturn and still am not interested by the Saturn... but I dont think of it as a bad machine... just one I dont want...
I suspect bad advertising & price was its downfall, rather than specs...
Too many people were stung by the failure of the
> Saturn
Nope... most people I know couldnt have cared less at the time or now wether the Saturn failed or was a runaway success :)
The Saturn did not fail because of Sony
Cant argue with that reall...? :)
>yet people claim that the downfall of Sega's console is
> down to something that Sony did.
Who does that?
> better option to the Saturn and later the N64.
For newcomers into
Change option to marketing... :)
> the console market Sony set new standards for 3rd party relations
> etc and also managed to produce one hell of a console!!
Sony and Nintendo produced one hell of a console... although 3rd PArty releastion theyt setup was pretty much the same system used by all western system developers... its only really been Japanese producers that limit developers in such a way...
It's easy
> to forget that Sony didn't employ 'dirty tactics'. They didn't use
> negative advertising to slate the Saturn (Sega) and they didn't
Good call... they didnt at that (well not in the UK...) although they have done with the PS2... and are getting tin troubel for it arnt they?
> offer certain developers huge sums of money simply to produce
> exclusive titles for their console (Microsoft)
Nooo. nooo. noooo :) ... Microsoft offers the best 3rd Party development package avalible... you can develop the same titles for any other console you like, develop titles sole for other consoles, in fact you dont een have to develop and X-Box titles at all... ever... just make PS2 games if yoyu like... :)
Sony should not be
> criticised for succeeding in their aims and making the most popular
Were not complaining at the success of the PSX... but its not aperfect console, and not above making its own mistakes, and just because it sold by the bucketload, doesnt mean it should be hearlded as the new god? ;)
> to an extent, Nintendo is down to their own mistakes and lack of
> foresight.
Nintendo in by view completly screwed up the N64 in europe...
Sony should not be blamed for this, it just happened
> that they were in the right place with the right product at the
> right time to take advantage of this.
I dont think anyone is blaming Sony for that in any non-business fair play way... in fact most people use PSX rise to console dominace as a favourable argument... The only time Ive ever seen the PSX used realy unfailrly in a discussion, their argument ususally revolves around their console being better because they say so...
But I could be wrong? ;)
Remember, we live in a country that raises Eddie 'the Eagle' Edwards to hero status, yet choose to ignore Lennox Lewis boxing success, claiming he's not a true Brit.
There is no doubt that the winner of the last 'Console Wars' was the PSX, by a country mile.
But why do so many people criticise Sony for this?? The reason that the PSx is more popular is that it offers a better package than its competitors.
The reason the Saturn failed is simply because Sega made some fundemental mistakes and that it was a bad machine. Too many people were stung by the failure of the Saturn and that's why the DC is not dead - not because it's a bad machine, but because of the 'stigma' that's attached itself to Sega.
The Saturn did not fail because of Sony - it failed because of Sega and yet people claim that the downfall of Sega's console is down to something that Sony did.
All that the PSX offered was a better option to the Saturn and later the N64.
For newcomers into the console market Sony set new standards for 3rd party relations etc and also managed to produce one hell of a console!!
It's easy to forget that Sony didn't employ 'dirty tactics'. They didn't use negative advertising to slate the Saturn (Sega) and they didn't offer certain developers huge sums of money simply to produce exclusive titles for their console (Microsoft)
Sony should not be criticised for succeeding in their aims and making the most popular (non handheld) games console ever.
Failure on the part of Sega and, to an extent, Nintendo is down to their own mistakes and lack of foresight.
Sony should not be blamed for this, it just happened that they were in the right place with the right product at the right time to take advantage of this.
But why do so many people criticise Sony for this?? The reason that the PSx is more popular is that it offers a better package than its competitors.
The reason the Saturn failed is simply because Sega made some fundemental mistakes and that it was a bad machine. Too many people were stung by the failure of the Saturn and that's why the DC is not dead - not because it's a bad machine, but because of the 'stigma' that's attached itself to Sega.
The Saturn did not fail because of Sony - it failed because of Sega and yet people claim that the downfall of Sega's console is down to something that Sony did.
All that the PSX offered was a better option to the Saturn and later the N64.
For newcomers into the console market Sony set new standards for 3rd party relations etc and also managed to produce one hell of a console!!
It's easy to forget that Sony didn't employ 'dirty tactics'. They didn't use negative advertising to slate the Saturn (Sega) and they didn't offer certain developers huge sums of money simply to produce exclusive titles for their console (Microsoft)
Sony should not be criticised for succeeding in their aims and making the most popular (non handheld) games console ever.
Failure on the part of Sega and, to an extent, Nintendo is down to their own mistakes and lack of foresight.
Sony should not be blamed for this, it just happened that they were in the right place with the right product at the right time to take advantage of this.