Sony, Good or bad?

[Tan]

It makes me laugh when people claim how Sony brought about backwards compatability first with the PS1/PS2.  It realy does show you how young the current gaming generation is.

Average age of gamers is 33 and the fact is the 7800 and the PBC for the Genesis are minor footnotes in gaming nothing more. Getting nitpicky about "who done what first" will get nobody no where. nothing about the new systems is innovative even the wii-mote. It's not so much about who got their first as much as who done it better. No doubt Nintendo will make the motion sensor tech work better than anyone else just as backwards compatibility will be measured against the PS1/PS2. Even Sony is a victim of their own standards in that regard, 200 of 8000 games have issues and all of a sudden it's a failure. N64 games on virtual console have no rumble, and pretty much half or better of the best Xbox1 games still don't work on the 360.
The PS2 has had allot of issues in it's lifetime but never let it be said they didn't raise the bar, most of us who've been there since the 2600 days never seen or heard of the Power Base Converter until later on or played much with the 7800, so you can't say they introduced it if few actually knew about it. Otherwise we should be thanking companies like Microsoft for old products like the Freestyle Pro, or the Atari 5200 adapter for 2600 games.

[chrisbid]

or the coleco and intellivision adapters that allowed you to play 2600 games

[shoes23]

As a man who has nearly 500 PS2 games, the reasons for having so many is easy.  My system sees approximately twice as many releases per month than the other guys.  My system commands twice the shelving space of the other too competitors, meaning more variety to spend my hard earned cash on.  Tons of people love and buy Sony's games, therefor the aftermarket (used games) are abundant (Average $$$ I spend per title at my local pawn shop for a used PS2 game = $7).  I can also play EVERY genre out on the market and even have a selection when I chose to play that genre.  

I'm by no means a Sony only guy (although anyone who doesn't express a distaste for Sony nowdays is immediately coined a "fanboy"), but lets face it I (and many of you) LOVE VARIETY in games, and Sony and their 3rd party support delivers it to me.  

Sony's tactics for selling and marketing their consoles are no more sinister than any other company that came before them.  Would we really like to go back to Nintendo's precedent of 5 titles per publisher per year?  It's foolish to hate the #1 videogame console just because its on top at the moment.

[Tan]

Well said shoes23. I really don't think there are many fanboys on this site, and that's what makes it one of the best and most mature for good reading.

There's a big difference between a fan and a fanboy. A fan will defend his system and debate the finer points but shake hands, laugh and walk away without any grudges. A fanboy is someone who attacks without reason, doesn't listen to logic or common sense and generally has nothing to contribute to a topic of discussion.

Thankfully there aren't any of those on this forum, which makes it a safe haven for people who find forums like IGN or Gamefaqs lacking.

Less "teh suxxorz" and more "l33t"

 

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

 

It's all phoenix's fault.

Yes, well said shoes.

[Cobra]

I hate Sony, and think it's funny how Sony is getting pissed by the damage Microsoft has done to their sales even though Microsoft is just playing at Sony's game. But I don't like Microsoft either, so my perfect resolution would be if the two kamikazed.

But I DO have my reasons for hating Sony (I'll just keep it to Sony as that's the topic here)
* Sony Ericsson T105 died without reason
* Sony Ericsson J200i died without reason
* Sony Hi-Fi system, radio stations don't save. Power button collapsed, and sound keeps cutting out one speaker.
* Slim PS2 overheats, solution by external power supply available separately.
* 10 million faulty laptop batteries Sony supplied to several manufacturers.
* Betamax, Minidisc, Memorystick, SACD, UMD and BluRay
* They killed  Lik-Sang.com
* Playstation games would stutter and freeze, audio would skip. It was the 1st system you had to turn upside-down to make sure it worked.  I can't remember the overall percentage, but I think it was something like 10% of all PSXs by the end of it's production suffered from shitty hardware problems like this... and that's a lot if you think about how many PSXs they made.
* I never saw the end to Wild Arms because my PS froze after I beat the final boss!!
*Sony Music CDs contain spyware!

Especially the ego, this is what Sony Europe even had to say about the PS3

We have built up a certain brand equity over time since the launch of PlayStation in 1995 and PS2 in 2000 that the first five million are going to buy it, whatever it is, even if it didn't have games.

But what really made me hate them to start is their bullshit vs the Saturn. The Saturn can only do 2D graphics? Then it can apparently do what was seen in Daytona USA. Yep that's the max polygons it can push, ignore the fact it's one of the systems 1st releases, and was already out when Sony was claiming the Saturn could only do 2D. Sony loved the way they had a respected name, and whatever bs they could spin any one who didn't know better believed it. The truth of the matter is, the Playstation was easy enough for a monkey to program for it, with most stuff built in ready to just be switched on like  compressed audio, light sourcing, and video codecs. This is also the reason for some godawful games that appeared on the PS, since it was now easy enough for some people who should never of made a game to make a game. While the Saturn was still more complex to program for, however the Saturn was in fact the more powerful of the two despite Sony's false advertisements and interviews. The Saturn had more RAM witch could also be expanded further,  twin CPUs of 28.6MHz compared to the PS's one 33.8MHz, a more video RAM, a far superior sound processor, as well as the Saturn being able to achieve resolutions higher than that of what the PS could do. Sony sure loved to flash their fat wallet around though, and would pay of developers not only to make games exclusively for their system, but to also claim it's because the Saturn couldn't handle it.

And last but not least, Sony killed 2D gaming the bastards. The Playstation they put so much effort into making the No.1 seller had no 2D capabilities whatsoever. Sony's goal was to eliminate 2D and force all developers to make 3D games. Even top level PC video cards by nVIDIA & ATi today are capable of both 2D and 3D, but there was no room for 2D in Sony's world. But your probably thinking you remember 2D games on the PS though. They were actually 3D, with flat polygons textured. Think of it as Parappa the Rapper if he never rotated from his front view. This made it extra hard for those who were dedicated to 2D, especially since 3D was so limited at this time, the number of colours that could be on any one texture being far less than a 2D sprite could of used with 2D graphics by now having finally reached it's true potential with stunningly beautiful graphics possible like that seen in games like Astal.

So yeah, I have my reasons for hating Sony. Although once upon a time prior to all of this, it was a brand name I trusted instead of avoided. I use to love buying their recordable tapes.

[phoenix1967]

There's a big difference between a fan and a fanboy. A fan will defend his system and debate the finer points but shake hands, laugh and walk away without any grudges. A fanboy is someone who attacks without reason, doesn't listen to logic or common sense and generally has nothing to contribute to a topic of discussion.

Thankfully there aren't any of those on this forum, which makes it a safe haven for people who find forums like IGN or Gamefaqs lacking.

Less "teh suxxorz" and more "l33t"

That's probably the best definition of a fan vs. a fanboy that I've read. Thanks Tan.

It's all phoenix's fault.

Me!?!? What? 

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

You've driven me to fanboyism, I was once a simple protector, but now you've turned me into a Sony Crusader. (I still don't really want a PS3)

[Alabama-Shrimp]

Psycho Fox i think you might be a bit wrong with the thing that the PSX cant do 2D have you not seen Castlevania on it theres only a few tiny 3D sprites in it the rest is flat.


I do agree with you on the whole 2D killing thing though, Sony, Sega and Nintendo seamed to want all new game in 3D back then, So much so that some people would see a 2D game and laugh calling it shit even though it might have been excellent, i think that is why the Gameboy Advance had such a tiny life span as it was nearly all flat, The thing it a game can be good and look even better in 2D just some people will never even try them and i think its all companies fault that that has now come the case.


(yes i know that they still do make games for the GBA but really that are only crappy titles not the Mario, Zelda and the like of a few years ago.)

[Arrrhalomynn]

I'd like to say that innovation is more than having a good idea, it's also a matter of executing that idea in a good way. It's not who does it first, it's who does it best. Sure, you could play master system games on the genesis, but you'd have to buy this chunky thing you had to jam on top of your genesis. They playstation 2 had backwards compatibility right out of the box and it even enhanced the playstation 1 games! THAT's real innovation.

Another sony example is the memory card. The Saturn had one, and I'm sure other consoles had one before. But none of them worked as wel as sony's. The ease of the whole thing was very innovative. I just worked so damn good.

Let's compare the gaming libraries of the Saturn, Playstation and Nintendo 64. The Saturn and Nintendo 64 both had their great games, but not to the extent of the Playstation.
I've had nearly all Saturn games and most of them play like they're from an entirely different generation. Sure, I love some of the saturn games (sega rally!!!), but for nearly every good Saturn game, there are 10 better Playstation games.
The games for the Nintendo 64 were, overall, so much the same, that the public felt the console only catered to children. I won't go into the discussion wether it's justified, but if a majority of the people considers you a play toy for kids, you've surely done something wrong in the gaming department. Where is the Nintendo Metal Gear Solid? Or DDR? Or Vib Ribbon? Or Gran Turismo? etc. The playstation had a much more diverse gaming library.

The playstation was so great and had such an impact, that the playstation 2 was a winner from the start. Sega and Nintendo had been dissapointing with their previous consoles and Microsoft was completely new. Sony had build up a lot of credit and deserved to start ahead.

I agree Sony lost a lot of their edge with the Playstation 2 and that the Dreamcast and XBOX were in many cases more innovative, but Sony hadn't completely lost it. If you don't find the playstation 2 innovative and original, how can you find the XBOX or gamecube innovative and original? All three of them have their strong and weak points, but the huge amount and diversity of games released for the playstation 2 is enough to call it innovative and original. I don't want to bash Nintendo or Microsoft, but the gamecube's best selling games were all 20 year old franchises and the XBOX's best selling games were the 2 halos and ports. (according to wikipedia)

Of course, the Playstation 2 is less innovative and original than the pc or the Atari 2600, but it isn't fair to compare it to these 2 systems. Saying the playstation 2 isn't innovative is saying all modern gaming isn't innovative and original. And if you think that way, I wonder why you're even on this board.

I somewhat understand people disliking a company for the way it acts, but I cannot possibly understand people disliking either the playstation or playstation 2 for what they are. You must really hate games if you think that way, because they gave the gaming community more good games since 1995 than Nintendo, Sega and Microsoft combined.

I also believe that people who claim that Sony killed gaming and isn't innovative wish the world hadn't changed since 1993 and developers would still churn out 2D games for the SNES and Genesis. Yeah, that would be mighty innovative and really push gaming forward. Saying sony killed 2D gaming must be one of the more pathetic arguments one could say on this issue.

[Cobra]

Actually you can look it up if you want, while Castlevania was a great 2D game it had to use a 3D engine just like the rest. This is actually the best game you could of pointed out as proof of this. As unfortunately while the Saturn was a 2D powerhouse, the port of Castlevania suffered somewhat  from slowdown in parts. Dracula X as it is called on the Saturn could of been a much better port even had it actually been true 2D game. However, the core of the game is a straight port of the 2D-3D original.


I have to disagree with the Playstation memory cards being  better than the Saturn's as I have over 100 Saturn games saved on one cart, something a PS memory card is no where near capable of. However the PS Memory card is very small, and portable, so I'll give ya half a win there.

As far as Sony killing 2D games, I like this guys views
http://egoraptor.webmoron...tart_from=&ucat=&

[Arrrhalomynn]

I think 'this guy' is completely out of his mind.

He first says:

The problem with 3D is that companies don't seem to be doing what 2D devlopers did in the 2D age. They aren't trying to come up with new and innovative ideas. It's the same crap.

And then he says:

The fact is, as long as console gaming can evolve, so can 2D gaming. How many high res 2D games are there? Guily Gear X... and that's all I'm familiar with. Even low resolution 2D games can still look beautiful. Street Fighter 3: Third Strike is low res, and it's gorgeous.

Imagine Mega Man X in high resolution 2D graphics running at 60fps.

Oh yes! Those games surely are the pinnacle of new and innovative! Seriously though, this guy is terribly prejudiced towards 2D games and lives in a fantasy world. He wants the exact same games we've had for the last 20 years, but only slightly prettier.

But there's more!

How many 3D games have you been playing it and you see a character model go through a wall, or another character model? If you're answer isn't "every game EVER" then you're lying.

It seems like this guy is stuck in 1996.

[Tynstar]

I hate Sony because of their arrogance. Also because the PS2 broke so much. Also I think all TV's and stereos are over priced. I also hate the fact they are forcing Blu-Ray onto the consumer.

[Alabama-Shrimp]

i think Tynstar does have a good point Sony products so seam to be higher priced than other makes and have a perceived better quality weather they have or not.


i dont know how Arrrhalomynn can say that the PS2 is innovative does it have a HDD as standard? Could or would it have gone on the internet if others had not done it first?

They can be innovative the Duel Shock was very clever to have 2 analogue sticks but there memory cards were too small (memory wise) and too expensive plus they never released the Pocketstation outside of Arrrhalomynn
Japan.

LOL Pocketstation made after they had seen a Sega VMS, the Duel Shock has a motion sensor after the Wii, its things like this and the arrogance that make people hate Sony not the products nobody said the console was bad just the company.

[phoenix1967]

I hate Sony because of their arrogance...I also hate the fact they are forcing Blu-Ray onto the consumer.

I 100% agree and have been stating that as well. It takes the decision whether or not they want a Blu-Ray player out of the consumer's hands and into the corporation's. Why should the consumer be forced to pay a higher price for a hardware opti/n that they don't want/need?