PlayStation Earns An Emmy

I thought by ZakuSage · 2005-09-30 10:00 · Score: 1

Emmys were awards for TV shows.

Re:I thought by rizzn · 2005-09-30 10:20 · Score: 1

As did I. Apparently, the organisation's name that sponsors the awards is the "Academy of Television Arts and Sciences" which, at least in its name, awards it a certain lattitude in giving awards out to things like this.

Question in my mind is does the PS2 really deserve the Emmy? Sure it's a great platform and we all enjoy playing on it, but seems to me they're end result has fallen significantly short of their goal. When they came out with the PS2, it was supposed to usher in an era of entertainment in which PS2's were the only gaming/dvd/video/internet device we'd ever buy again. I still don't own a PS2, and I play video games, watch DVDs, and browse the web on a daily basis.

--
goto http://rizzn.com
Re:I thought by ZakuSage · 2005-09-30 10:21 · Score: 1

PS1's getting the award, not the PS2.
Re:I thought by rizzn · 2005-09-30 10:29 · Score: 0, Troll

Then the question goes double. For what the PS2 lacks in Sony's original vision, the PS1 falls severely short.

--
goto http://rizzn.com
Re:I thought by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-30 10:38 · Score: 5, Interesting

I completely disagree - the PS1 phenomenally outperforms the PS2 in every category except physical power. PS1 launched with phenomenal, exciting games from studios like Singletrac, Squaresoft, Core, Psygnosis and Sony themselves that were brand new for everyone. NFL Gameday is the only significant advancement in sports gaming since Bill Walsh College Football. Tomb Raider was the second pillar to N64's Mario 64. Metal Gear Solid and Vagrant Story still have the best low detail art assets in the history of gaming. Not to mention the launch of franchises like GTA, Resident Evil, Wipeout, Tenchu, Metal Gear Solid (not Metal Gear) and Tomb Raider.

The PS1 made a pretty big gamble switching to CD-based media, and it was richly rewarded. I'm a Nintendo fanboi for life, but the PS1 kicked some serious ass, and still does, with long-lasting achievements like Final Fantasy Tactics and Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, and the recently rereleased Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes.

PS2 is, for the most part, a money-making machine that Sony paid you to buy. It hasn't seen anywhere near the variety and intrigue of the PS1's lifecycle. The PS1 absolutely deserves this award, however little prestige or coolness it may actually offer :P
Re:I thought by gl4ss · 2005-10-01 01:01 · Score: 1

if you have enough dough they're for anything - and you can claim crap like that your crap graphics were lightyears more advanced than what was available on pc & other consoles.

psx games as a rule of thumb were uuuugly(with few exceptions), even considering the time(warping textures etc).

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:I thought by ZakuSage · 2005-10-01 01:15 · Score: 0

For the most part, I can stand looking at PS1 graphics easier then N64 graphics. PS1's CD medium allowed higher resolution textures compared to N64's, which looked like someone had smeared vasoline on the lens/object.
Re:I thought by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-01 04:13 · Score: 2, Informative

Actually that isn't true, the PS1 could not display anywhere near the texture resolution of the N64. However, the N64 supported linear texture filtering, which blended adjacent pixels on a face. While not so noticeable in first party titles like Starfox and Mario 64, it was very apparent in many other titles.
Re:I thought by geminidomino · 2005-10-01 13:49 · Score: 2, Informative

Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes

I thought that was a GCN release...
Re:I thought by Retroneous · 2005-10-01 21:16 · Score: 1

The PlayStation brand is getting the Emmy, rather than the PS2. Or that's how I would see it.

--
My Mind Is Rewired. Is Yours?
Re:I thought by Lucractius · 2005-10-02 14:24 · Score: 2, Informative

They made the ps1 purely to try and stab back at Nintendo who actualy did half if not a little more of the initial design and work on the PS1. it was originaly a partnership, with nintendo getting sony in for the CD drive technology, then when nintendo pulled back from the project sony took everything and went... "why the hell not" and made a console of their own...

Im not sure who this makes me more annoyed with... Sony, for never giving any credit for getting helped into the industry and now happily spamming the industry with : "" games that realy only sell cause of bargain bins, hype marketing, and people with no intent to play the game more than a few times who dont care about the games they by at all as long as they have "tons of great games" to go with their "awesome ps"....

Or nintendo for creating their own worst enemy... hrm :/

--
XML - A clever joke would be here if /. didn't mangle tag brackets.

Sharing? by Rydia · 2005-09-30 10:41 · Score: 0, Flamebait

And I'm sure they'll share it with Nintendo, since the original PSX started as a jointly-designed disc drive for the SNES!

Wait....

Re:Sharing? by Slashdot_Gandhi · 2005-09-30 10:49 · Score: 0

I will wait for the day when they award an Oscar to Cloud Strife and Sephiroth.
Re:Sharing? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-30 12:24 · Score: 0

That makes no sense at all. Why would Sony share the prize with Nintendo? The big N killed the project, thinking that it was going nowhere, and began their downfall with the release of the N64.

The creators of the PSX realized that they had an idea good enough to keep working on it even though Nintendo didn't want it. The only Nintendo should get a prize for is short-sightedness.
Re:Sharing? by FinestLittleSpace · 2005-09-30 13:17 · Score: 2, Insightful

"cock"
Re:Sharing? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-01 10:16 · Score: 0

I'm not too up on the story, but as I recall, Nintendo had some kind of problem with Sony, and went to Phillips to finish the project. It didn't work out too well with Phillips either, and eventually Nintendo pulled the plug - the Phillips CDI was the eventual result of that R&D. But to say that Nintendo "thought it was going nowhere" is a stretch. Obviously they thought it was going somewhere, or they wouldn't have bothered to negotiate a second contract.

I'd Like To Thank.... by HappyCycling · 2005-09-30 10:56 · Score: 4, Funny

Sega: For releasing the Saturn early, without a proper launch, at a huge price and with few games.

Nintendo: For endlessly delaying the underpowered N64 while we gained the majority of the market.

...oh...and Satan.

Re:I'd Like To Thank.... by the+morgawr · 2005-09-30 11:22 · Score: 1

I thought Satan consulted for Blizard.

--
The policy of the United States is worse than bad---it is insane. -- Ludwig von Mises, Economic Policy(1959)
Re:I'd Like To Thank.... by Yaotzin · 2005-10-01 01:14 · Score: 1

Satan is mostly a freelancer. He does some jobs over here and some jobs over there, you know.

--
Error: No error occurred
Re:I'd Like To Thank.... by Lucractius · 2005-10-02 14:30 · Score: 1

of course he does freelance.

He discovered long ago the profitable nature of the "oh if you dont want my help anymore" line when you have A: all the power! and B: own their souls.

Its not realy surprising. I mean how else can he consult for MCI, Exxon, Microsoft, Blizzard, and still find the time for the personal touches like buying and selling the souls of the little people.

--
XML - A clever joke would be here if /. didn't mangle tag brackets.

BS by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-30 11:06 · Score: 2, Informative

we had a dream to elevate the quality of computer graphics from a 2D-based environment to a rich, realistic 3D experience

Yeah, Ken, too bad everyone else was ahead of you on that one.

There were actually three gaming awards... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-09-30 11:07 · Score: 2, Informative

http://www.emmyonline.org/emmy/advanced_media_winn ers_release_2005.html

For "Development and Impact in 8-Bit Consoles," Atari won for the Atari 2600.

For "Development and Impact in Polygon Consoles," Sony won for the PS1.

For "Development of Multiplayer Console Technology," Microsoft won for XBOX Live.

Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by Brantano · 2005-09-30 11:15 · Score: 1, Insightful

Hmm, i find it funny since most of the nintendo fanboys like to think of there overlord as the most innovative company to ever grace the earth. But where is there emmy? Where is there award? hehehe..might show them a few things actually. Not saying nintendo isnt great, but this just proves there not as innovative as the fans think.
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by AuMatar · 2005-09-30 11:17 · Score: 3, Insightful

An award given out by a television show proves anything about the video game industry? I don't think so.

--
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by gameboyhippo · 2005-09-30 14:10 · Score: 0, Troll

I guess that goes to show that the Emmys have no idea about anything that goes on in the gameing industry. Next thing we'll hear is that the PSP gets an award for being the best selling handheld console of all time. When it comes to impacting the gaming industry, I think the innovative Nintendo should win some awards. They created the analog controller, creating the 3D platformer, raising the gaming industry from the dead in the 80s, creating the best selling game console ever (Gameboy), and creating the basic control design we have today. Sony just copies what works.
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-02 05:12 · Score: 0

Let me get the straight.

A console that had 4 bit graphics won the award for Development and Impact in 8-Bit Consoles,"?

A console that in no way was responsible for the creation of polygon games nor was the first console to have them won the award for "Development and Impact in Polygon Consoles,"?

A console that arrieved more than 5 years after console games had first been played online won the award for "Development of Multiplayer Console Technology,"?

Am I missing something here? Did I wake up in Bizarro world? How do any of those make sense to anybody?
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by kingsmedley · 2005-10-02 08:11 · Score: 1

A console that had 4 bit graphics won the award for Development and Impact in 8-Bit Consoles,"?

There has never been a 4-bit anything in home game consoles, ever. (Not counting the Microvision because it was a handheld.) The Atari 2600 was not the first 8-bit home game console, nor was it the most powerful (not even when it was launched). But is was THE FIRST to acheive widespread popular success. That's why it won.

A console that in no way was responsible for the creation of polygon games nor was the first console to have them won the award for "Development and Impact in Polygon Consoles,"?

True, Playstation was not the first to use polygons. But like the Atari 2600 before them, it was the Playstation platform that brought this into the lives of the mainstream population.

A console that arrieved more than 5 years after console games had first been played online won the award for "Development of Multiplayer Console Technology,"?

Five years?!? The Intellivision and Atari 2600 both had networking accessories. Granted, those only allowed for the download of games. But even the Genesis and SNES were capable of playing games head to head on remote consoles in 1995, which is 7 years before the Xbox Live launch. It is the Xbox that finally brought online multiplayer to the masses. In other words, they made it easy.

These awards are not intended to point out who did these things FIRST. That is what history books are for. These awards are meant to point out who was the first to do them RIGHT. And while widespread popular acceptance may not be the best yardstick to determine this, it is as good as any other. (This is why the award is for development AND IMPACT.)

--
Must... think up... something... clever!
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by Lucractius · 2005-10-02 14:37 · Score: 1

hrm i just realised. Sony owns a big fat international Content distribuiton network, including TV shows if im not mistaken... Oh can anyone say conflict of interest! or vote buying!

Or even WHy the hell do i care about an EMMY... if anything i think it makes everything but the atari look even more pathetic that their getting given petty little statuets for things that have NOTHING to do with what the awards are for (realy... if it was so related then why wasnt this given out 5 years ago?)

--
XML - A clever joke would be here if /. didn't mangle tag brackets.
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by Lucractius · 2005-10-02 14:46 · Score: 1

It is the Xbox that finally brought online multiplayer to the masses. In other words, they made it easy.

Brought it to the masses? oooooh right you mean SPAMED it.

As for making it easy. Im sorry i have some understanding that Nintendo have made it realy easy. Its called Wireless. Theyve already done it. Their partnering with companies to do it in public places, and their also making better looking consoles.

Ill probably buy a PS3 and an Xbox 360 and you know what, theyll both wind up running linux within a week of opening the box, to me those arent game consoles, their HTPCs with game, might even see if some smart bugger codes a Xen/Virtualised Emulation layer for them so i can play the games without having to turn off linux on them since its more fun than most PS games and XBox ones.

back to the point, does automaticaly playing against your neighbours wirelessly, your gameboy wirelessly playing with other peoples gameboys, and your gameboy working as a wirelss controller for the console automaticaly with the ability to download "games" to it. weellll im not gonna be going far for my gaming, MMmmm retro games and Retro Studios games... great combo.

--
XML - A clever joke would be here if /. didn't mangle tag brackets.
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by Prophet+of+Nixon · 2005-10-03 05:30 · Score: 1

I dunno, the Dreamcast had fairly effortless multiplayer, although not that many online games. Alien Front Online was awesome (I still prefer it to the similar Mech Assault, and would love a sequel).
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by kingsmedley · 2005-10-03 09:07 · Score: 1

As for making it easy. Im sorry i have some understanding that Nintendo have made it realy easy. Its called Wireless.

They couldn't exactly give an award for something nobody on the committee has ever seen now, could they? Nintendo's wireless plan is cool, but aside from head-to-head connectivity they are not online yet. Come on, give your reply a little more thought next time.

I am hardly a Playstation or Xbox fan and find it awkward to defend either of them getting an award. But the facts of history show pretty clearly why these awards went the way they did. Now if Nintendo's wireless online startegy goes as they hope, especially with the Revolution, then I can easily see them winning a similair award in the future. But at this point in time is far too early - they have to acheive success before they are recognized for it!

--
Must... think up... something... clever!
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by kingsmedley · 2005-10-03 09:11 · Score: 1

Dreamcast had fairly effortless multiplayer

Yes they did! The Dreamcast was an EXCELLENT machine, and if mine wasn't broken I would still play it frequently. But what kills the DC when it comes to this award is the lack of mainstream market penetration.

--
Must... think up... something... clever!
Re:There were actually three gaming awards... by Prophet+of+Nixon · 2005-10-03 10:18 · Score: 1

I still wish that Capcom would re-release some of their DC library on PS2, Xbox, or some other system that might last into the future (PC perhaps, though their games are ill-suited to it). I would love a DVD of all their 2D shooters (Mars Matrix, Gigawing 1 & 2, Gunbird 2, etc) and Cannon Spike. They already moved their Resident Evil stuff (albeit re-done) to the Gamecube, and their fighters to PS2/Xbox, but the excellent shooters are stranded on a disc format that I need a Dreamcast to ever play. I wouldn't care so much, except that nobody seems to make games like those anymore, and my Dreamcast will surely die some day.

Mkay, sure... by Blaaguuu · 2005-09-30 11:38 · Score: 1

I wouldn't give this any more merrit than the winners of the SpikeTV Video Game Awards.

--
My hand touched her hand. Her hand touched her boob. By the transitive property, I got some boob! Algebra is awesome!

Meanwhile, 10 years earlier... by derrickh · 2005-09-30 13:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

Atari, the makers of I Robot and Hard Drivin, say hello.

D

--
The first, last, and only tech news site on the net

Sounds like 'made up awards' for conventions. by Celestial+Avenger · 2005-09-30 17:53 · Score: 1

Like 'most ferocious dragon costume' award going to some 3-year-old or 'best 17th century whore' to that chick that showed some leg.

Not knocking the award, just saying it comes off as one of those last-minute awards.

Hey, Kiddo... by LKM · 2005-09-30 18:12 · Score: 0, Troll

Based on your writing style, and assuming your post isn't supposed to be a joke, I guess that you weren't born yet way back when the PS was released in 1994, so maybe I should clear up a few things for you. The only thing the PS achieved was a huge market share. Maybe that's the "Outstanding Achievement" for which it got the Emmy, I frankly don't know. Nothing about the PS was revolutionary in any way. 3D consoles like the 3DO or the Atari Jaguar were available before the PS came out. CD-Based consoles like the Sega CD or Amigas CD32 were available before the PS.

There's nothing innovative about the PS.

To finish, let me just tell you that the only thing this Emmy proves is that those handing it out have no clue.

Re:Hey, Kiddo... by superpulpsicle · 2005-10-01 03:55 · Score: 1

PS1 was the first system with a combination of software and hardware that rivals the arcades. Every other console before it tried to make arcade games or had arcade-like chipsets and didn't know what to do with it. CDrom had little to do it.
Re:Hey, Kiddo... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-01 04:24 · Score: 0

That comment makes absolutely no sense.
Re:Hey, Kiddo... by ZosX · 2005-10-01 16:03 · Score: 1

not true. there were plenty of arcade perfect ports to the SNES. even Mortal Kombat 2 was a pretty great port even if they axed a few frames of animation. everything else was arcade perfect. even a good deal of neo geo ports weren't really all toned down graphically. king of monsters and samauri showdown both come to mind. also, for what it is worth, the NES had a few arcade perfect ports as well. granted they were of older games, but still. this argument really hasn't had much clout, since the arcades are continually advancing whereas the console remains the same for 5 years. look at the tekken 3 port, for instance. instead of 3d backgrounds the psx version got a panoramic box with a graphic of the arcade's background for each side. I could go on, but my point is that while the psx was definately graphically superior (for a short period of time I might add) to both the arcade and the PC, this really didn't mean much in the grand scheme of things. Consider that in 1995 the arcade was already being laid out in the funeral parlor. After the mortal kombat and street fighter craze, things kind of started to die over the long haul. when killer instinct *cough* was the next greatest thing, it was the beginning of the end. now when I go to an arcade there are a bunch of driving games and gun games and of course, DDR or something like it. not much really new there.

--
zosxavius photography
Re:Hey, Kiddo... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-02 04:32 · Score: 0

The Playstation was the first arcade-powerful system? Maybe if you were born in 1995. The rest of us old enough to remember will laugh and say the words "Neo Geo", then go away shaking our heads at the silliness of kids these days.

Neo Geo could use the words "arcade perfect" in its ads for a reason: it used the same boards as an arcade machine on the home system. When you played it, you WERE playing the arcade game, not a translation.

PS1 was great, I love mine to death, but it was not the first system with software and hardware to rival the arcades.

Voggage
Re:Hey, Kiddo... by default+luser · 2005-10-03 08:19 · Score: 1

EVERY console that has been worth its salt has rivaled the arcades on release.

The Atari VCS was incredible when it came out, capable of quite accurate renditions of hits like Space Invaders and Bezerk. Sure, by the time Pac Man was popular (4 years later), it was faltering, but that's what happens.

The NES produced surprisingly accurate versions of arcade hits like Ikari Warriors, Super Dodge Ball and Double Dragon, just to name a few.

The Sega Genesis was BASED on Sega's System 16 arcade board, which was the platform for great games like Altered Beast, Alien Syndrome, Golden Axe and Shinobi (link has full games list). Even the later Street Fighter II and Mortal Kombat ports were quite complete (but the graphics suffered due to the aging Genesis' limited color depth).

The SNES, that's already been well-covered by another poster.

--
Man is the animal that laughs.
And occasionally whores for Karma.
Re:Hey, Kiddo... by LKM · 2005-10-05 09:25 · Score: 1

PS1 was the first system with a combination of software and hardware that rivals the arcades.

So you're telling me my playing of Pac Man on my VCS 2600 was all an illusion? Oh my god! I never suspected!

MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by Frodo+Crockett · 2005-09-30 18:22 · Score: 1

WTF? Nintendo didn't create the analog controller, but they certainly popularized its usage in console game systems. They didn't exactly create the 3D platformer either (there were a number of 3D platformers released at the same time), but theirs was the only one that featured unrestricted movement in most levels. (If I am wrong, correct me. I know Crash was on rails at least 90% of the time, and I think that NiGHTS was, too, but I might be wrong.)

I'm just having a hard time understanding how anyone could mod the grandparent insightful (an Emmy is worthless) gets modded insightful, while the parent gets modded as a troll.

--
"The newly born animals are then whisked off for a quick run through a giant baking oven." --heard on Food Network

Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by ElleyKitten · 2005-10-01 14:43 · Score: 2, Informative

Nintendo so created the analog controller. Who had it before them? No one. There were joysticks, but not analog sticks like all controllers have now. Also, I think creating the first free-movement 3D platformer is a major achievement, much more so than creating a game on rails.

--
"What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-01 15:21 · Score: 0

No, Nintendo did not invent analog controllers, rumble, or 3d platformers. There were many before the N64 came out.
Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by Jarlsberg · 2005-10-01 22:18 · Score: 1

Bull. Analog joysticks was invented several years before the Nintendo put them onto a controller.
Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by ElleyKitten · 2005-10-02 01:42 · Score: 1

Do you mean joysticks, as in on an Atari controller, or thumbsticks, as in modern controllers? Because obviously no one has ever claimed that nintendo invented joysticks. And, since you're so knowledgable, why don't you tell me who invented them if not nintendo?

--
"What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by kingsmedley · 2005-10-02 07:37 · Score: 2, Informative

Nintendo so created the analog controller. Who had it before them? No one.

Nope, sorry. Here's a quick list of game consoles that used analog sticks before the Nintendo 64. In no particular order:

Vectrex
Atari 5200
Arcadia

And that is just counting those released in the USA, there are a number of European and Australian systems as well, PLUS a number of computer platforms that used them. And before anybody brings it up, Nintendo wasn't the first to put four controller ports on a console either.

Nintendo is a very innovative company, and they deserve a lot of credit for leading Sony to where they are today. But they didn't invent EVERYTHING and I get tired of people not realising it.

--
Must... think up... something... clever!
Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by buffer-overflowed · 2005-10-02 11:38 · Score: 1

I don't recall the arcadia, but both the Vectrex and Atari 5200 used analog joysticks. The analog stick(the analog thumbstick) as we know it today is a bit of a different beast.

--
The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by Jarlsberg · 2005-10-03 04:57 · Score: 1

Yeah, it's a huge leap from analog stick to analog thumb stick. Those Nintendo guys are really clever. ;)
I don't know if they were first, but Ataris 5200 controller had an anlog stick, and that was back in 1982. It might not have been very thumb friendly, but the idea was there. I've also seen several devices, not quite controllers and not quite joysticks, for a lot of the micros from the 80s to sticks to 16-bits and the PCs in the nineties - most were used in conjunction with pseudo 3D games, such as flight sims. Suffice to say I wasn't awestruck when Nintendo put an analog stick on their controller - it was a natural evolution when transitioning to 3D games.
Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by kingsmedley · 2005-10-03 08:57 · Score: 1

I don't recall the arcadia, but both the Vectrex and Atari 5200 used analog joysticks. The analog stick(the analog thumbstick) as we know it today is a bit of a different beast.

If you are referring to the fact that modern sticks aren't really analog, then you are correct. But if you are trying to say that modern sticks are different just because you control them with your thumb, then you need to reconsider that Vectrex controller. (Not to mention the 5200 dual stick adapter, but that one was a bit awkward and rarely used.)

Reclassifying analog sticks based on the length of the shaft is like redefining mice based on the size of the rollerball - the feel may be a little different, but ultimately the function and use are the same.

--
Must... think up... something... clever!
Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by buffer-overflowed · 2005-10-03 09:31 · Score: 1

Well they aren't really analog, but that's not a point. The big nintendo thing was shortening the stick, adding a pad on top for comfort, traction from the top, and ease of use(so you manipulate it by resting your thumb on top as opposed to a joystick where you manipulate it from the sides), and positioning it in a location that forced thumb control. It all seems soooo obvious, but they are fundamental tweaks that changed the analog-joystick into the analog stick we know today.

Sorta like the difference between a trackball and a mouse. You're manipulating content the same way(via a ball that spins and moves an on-screen pointer), but the method is a bit different. Or a joystick(as on the 2600) and an analog joystick. They're all related but they are all different.

Was it revolutionary? Ehh.. nah. But it was evolutionary, and I find it hard not to credit nintendo for what was basically the end of a control method family tree.

--
The key to the enjoyment of pop music is to replace any instance of "love" with "C.H.U.D."
Re:MODS ARE SONY FANBOXEN by CityZen · 2005-10-03 12:32 · Score: 1

You mean that they basically copied airplane RC "radios", which people had attached to computers long before Nintendo dreamed of 3D?

It's only sensible to reward TV ads. by Hitto · 2005-09-30 20:25 · Score: 4, Insightful

PSX sold thanks to its marketing. It began the long downfall of videogames thanks to TV ads, MTV ads, and supposedly "cool" games, while they tried to appeal to a "mature" audience. And by "mature", I mean 12-year-olds who thought they'd look badass because they didn't play mario games anymore.

Video games have now turned into something weird. You have people who base their manliness on what console they own. On a *toy*. And they keep swallowing that shit up!

So, yeah, emmy awards for ads. Maybe.

Re:It's only sensible to reward TV ads. by RogueyWon · 2005-09-30 21:33 · Score: 1, Insightful

Decent marketing is only one of the many reasons why the PSX sold as well as it did. To be frank, the biggest reason was, as it's always been in the console industry, that they had the games. They had the kit that let third party developers make the games they wanted (compare this with how Nintendo lost Square over the optical drives issue) and they didn't impose much in the way of content restrictions. Games like Wipeout and Ridge Racer were visually stunning and beat anything that had previously been available on anything less than a $1500 gaming PC into the ground. This was a huge factor in bringing a lot of people who wouldn't previously have touched a console into playing games. Then when you got "serious" games, for the more traditional demographic, like Final Fantasy VII appearing as well, the PSX's domination was pretty much assured.

Far from killing gaming, I'd see the Playstation as having pulled it out of a fairly dangerous slump. Other attempts at the time at driving the industry forwards, such as the Saturn and the Jaguar, had been miserable failures. Nintendo were busy trying to play god and driving games towards their homogenised idea of what a game should be. If a successful, technologically advanced platform that was attractive to developers hadn't appeared, the market wouldn't be anything like as healthy as it is today.

As for the snide remark about 12-year-olds who thought thet were cool for not playing Mario - explain to me please how this is any better than the small, but vocal and annoying group of slashdotters who think that just because they *do* still play Mario, they're somehow "real" games whose opinions magically count for more.
Re:It's only sensible to reward TV ads. by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-01 05:00 · Score: 1, Insightful

Because we are better than you guys. Most Nintendo fans have been playing consoles since the NES ressurected the US market(or earlier), before most Sony and MS fans were born. We're the old guard of the oldest still in existance console/game maker. The guys responsible for: The analog stick, rumble, the d-pad, shoulder buttons, the platform most modern franchises started on, the first decent 3D platformer, etc. etc.

20+ years of gaming, quality, nostalgia and innovation... against what?

Sony never seriously won over a huge chunk of the oldschool market, they just grew that market. I certainly didn't buy the PS1 or the PS2 because of Sony's offerings, I bought them mainly because of the support given by Square, Enix, Capcom, Konami, Namco etc. The devs that contributed so much during the NES/SNES days. And I'm just as much of a fan of those companies and their games/franchises as I am of Nintendo's(except that I'm finally burnt on traditional Final Fantasies and Megaman).

Besides, if you can't appreciate say, Mario Kart, forget not being a real gamer, you probably don't have a soul. That's just a fact, replicant.
Re:It's only sensible to reward TV ads. by RogueyWon · 2005-10-01 06:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

This post proves my point entirely.

Let me give a little background. I've been playing games since the mid 1980s. Along the way, I've owned (or had access to when owned by parents) umpteen home computers (C64, Amiga, several PCs) and at least one console from every generation (NES, SNES - later a Genesis as well, although after the generation had ended, Playstation, all 3 of the current gen consoles). Gaming has been my "main" hobby since about 1990. When I was at school, most of my pocket money went on games. Now I'm working, a significant part of my disposable income goes on them.

And I loathe Nintendo - and their fanboys - and what they have become over the last 10 years from the depths of my soul.

Over the last decade, I've seen games get better looking, deeper, more varied and more emotionally involving. I've seen companies such as Squaresoft/Square-Enix, Lucasarts, Bioware, ID, Valve, Epic, Capcom and... yes... even EA and Microsoft produce titles with the sort of quality and longevity that puts almost anything from the 10 years before that to shame. In virtually every genre, there have been advances in technology, gameplay contents and production values, be it RPGs, first-person games, beat-em-ups or just plain old fashioned shooters. But of all the companies who have driven the state of gaming forwards, there's one name noticably lacking: Nintendo.

The reason that people stopped playing Nintendo isn't that it became all "cool" and "hard" to abandon them. It's that they stopped making games that were worth the purchase price a long time ago. You mention Mario Kart. Sure, great game. 10 years ago (longer now, in fact). When the company is still pumping out the same game with slightly updated graphics every console cycle (with Double Dash being a really offensive example), people are going to get bored. Playing Double Dash rather than Burnout Revenge or Gran Turismo 4 (yes, both franchises - but franchises which have developed) does not make you a better person or a better gamer. It makes you a guillible twat.

Nintendo's rhetoric about wanting to return to "real" gameplay is a smokescreen - marketing FUD of the highest order. All Nintendo want to do on a business level is drive gaming back into its old niche corner. Too bad, that's not going to happen. Sony let that genie out of the bottle a decade ago and it won't go back in now. It's my experience that most so-called "real" gamers don't actually play many games, not least because their chosen Messiah-company puts out so few. Rather, they're like the Final Fantasy fans who bang on in every thread about how VI was the last decent game and anybody who likes anything since is stupid; sad, washed up old fanboys trying to impress the "vulgar mobs" by basing a spurious claim to authority on a skewed version of gaming taste that refuses to play anything less than 10 years old on principle.
Re:It's only sensible to reward TV ads. by KDR_11k · 2005-10-01 08:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

Okay, now we've got two statements: Nintendo does everything right and everybody else sucks and Nintendo does everything wrong and everyone else is better. Hm, how likely is it that either of these is correct?

Isn't it more likely that Nintendo, just like everyone else, has a number of good and bad games? Double Dash happens to be one of the more mediocre ones, Metroid Prime and Wind Waker are much better games. Neither is flawless but neither is Halo and that was heralded as the second coming. Or how about SSBM? Or is that just a rehash of SSB to you while Burnout Revenge is such a huge step up on Burnout?

--
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Re:It's only sensible to reward TV ads. by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-02 11:07 · Score: 0

Let me give a little background. I've been playing games since the mid 1980s. Along the way, I've owned (or had access to when owned by parents) umpteen home computers (C64, Amiga, several PCs) and at least one console from every generation (NES, SNES - later a Genesis as well, although after the generation had ended, Playstation, all 3 of the current gen consoles). Gaming has been my "main" hobby since about 1990. When I was at school, most of my pocket money went on games. Now I'm working, a significant part of my disposable income goes on them.

Ok, now I'm positive that you're british to the point of characture. First was the usage of the word kit, and now you're getting into an elitism measuring contest. News flash Euro, you're opinion counts for shit in this industry. That's a sad truth. You don't matter. Now go cry in the corner and pray the nice US and Japanese companies feel fit to give you candy.

And I loathe Nintendo - and their fanboys - and what they have become over the last 10 years from the depths of my soul.

Show some respect. They've earned it. If only for the fact that you wouldn't be able to play your shiny games with "compelling stories" of homoerotic melodrama had they not come along.

Plus, as we've established, you're european and thus don't matter.

Over the last decade, I've seen games get better looking, deeper, more varied and more emotionally involving. I've seen companies such as Squaresoft/Square-Enix, Lucasarts, Bioware, ID, Valve, Epic, Capcom and... yes... even EA and Microsoft produce titles with the sort of quality and longevity that puts almost anything from the 10 years before that to shame. In virtually every genre, there have been advances in technology, gameplay contents and production values, be it RPGs, first-person games, beat-em-ups or just plain old fashioned shooters. But of all the companies who have driven the state of gaming forwards, there's one name noticably lacking: Nintendo.

You know what? Some of that older stuff, it's still really, really fucking good. Even going back pre-NES, into arcades and atari, and single games that hooked up to the television... and as an added bonus to those who played them when they were new and fresh, they're like coming back home and visiting an old friend.

EA and Microsoft produce titles with the sort of quality and longevity that puts almost anything from the 10 years before that to shame.

Yea, I love me some Madden 2000 and Halo multiplayer. Oh wait, no, don't play most of those anymore. I instead play the modern versions or progenitors. But I do still ocassionally pop in stuff from the NES/SNES/SMS/Genesis era. Why? Because it doesn't get outdated with the next release, they use stylized sprite-based graphics that look precisely how I remember them looking(as opposed to like ASS for anything 3D from last generation) and there's a strong nostalgia factor because it's part of the shit that filled up my summers in my younger days. There are VERY few games from the PS(or N64 for that matter) that I still go back and play compared to JUST the SNES, but I do do it. Oh yea, also toss in there that ALL of my old stuff still works relatively problem free(1 contact replacement/cleaning on the NES thus far)... EXCEPT my PS.

I've personally probably gotten more playtime out of Warioware and Super Smash Bros. Melee than any 1st party Sony/MS console game I've ever owned. They are awesome invite your friends over and play party games, and they're accessable enough for anyone to just jump in. Hell, I've probably put more time into Rampart("Vat vill I do vith vall of vy cannons?") than anything modern that's not an MMO or board game.

The reason that people stopped playing Nintendo isn't that it became all "cool" and "hard" to abandon them. It's that they stopped making games that were worth the purchase price a long time ago. You mention Mario Kart. Sure, great game. 10 years ago (longer now, in fact). When the company is still pumping
Re:It's only sensible to reward TV ads. by Lucractius · 2005-10-02 15:01 · Score: 1

Old guard indeed, excelent way to put it. And its right.

For a start stop it with the game company makes good and bad games rhetoric, its obvious. but the ratios are the true signs, I see the same number of "amazing" games on the PS2 and Xbox as i see on the Gamecube and :O there are less gamecube games, so that means the ratio of good games to mediocer and worse games it better. Better gaming quality!

And the crap about "Playing Double Dash rather than Burnout Revenge or Gran Turismo 4 (yes, both franchises - but franchises which have developed) does not make you a better person or a better gamer. It makes you a guillible twat." is void, Im sorry, playing EITHER makes you a gullible twat. All of them are rehash cruft, with nintendos Double Dash being the more quality title, it had an original aspect to it.

oh and for the whole "return to gameplay" being fud and smoke. Right, im sure they do... they arent trying to push all gameplay to that niche, what they want to do is to spread their niche, theyve realised that with Sony and MS doing the same thing as PC gaming is but on a 5 year (or shorter) cycle theyre just going to be making sequels and sporadic successes, mostly stemming from other companies efforts. Theyre aiming for people to PLAY their games not brag about owning them. Theyre making inovative design choises, careful technological ones too, designed to keep things prices down, and still deliver high quality gaming.

It boils down to this. Do you care if they go from games that look like RE4 does (on the gamecube, its fantastic) to games where theres so much proccessing power they can animate every freaking hair and folicle but the damn game still looks the same since ray trace rendering cant be made photorealistic in hardware and most game developers do not have the damn skill to push their code to the level of proffessional 3d graphics software that CAN render photorealistic effects through the use of high quality layering and light filtering effects.

--
XML - A clever joke would be here if /. didn't mangle tag brackets.
Re:It's only sensible to reward TV ads. by brkello · 2005-10-03 07:00 · Score: 1

Bah, that's a load of crap. The whole MTV mainstream gaming is more recent than the release of the PSX. Why did I switch to Sony? I followed the Final Fantasy series. The console had good games made by good companies. They went with a disc based system rather than carts which allowed them to have larger games with cut scenes and better graphics (with the draw back that load times were longer and you needed a memory disc for saved games).

You come off as a bitter fan boy. You could market the living crap out of Gigli and it will still be a terrible movie with mediocre box office sales. The PS was a solid system and had good marketing as well. Marketing alone can't make you displace the former market leader.

Video games have grown up a lot. You can still get the same type of games as you could in the past. True, a lot of games now target a different group of people, but guess what, people don't have to like the kind of games you like. Maybe some people base their manliness on their console, but that is a really terrible generalization and I really doubt the majority of new gamers feel that way.

Gaming is not in a decline. There are still great games being made. Some games don't target you. Some games are bad. People look at the past with rose colored glasses. There were terrible games made in the past as well. This is usually when someone says "but games are less innovative". This is such a stupid comment. Games were a NEW MEDIUM...anything you did was innovative. Games that were popular defined the genres that we have today. There are more good games out there than you would be able to play. If you can't find them, you are too lazy to look. Yeah, you have to sift through garbage to find gems sometimes, but they are out there! Have you beaten all the great games of the past? If that era was so good, just keep playing those games. But no, everyone is going to buy their revolution, 360, or ps3. Because good games are still coming out and this will always be true. Get over your bias. Competition is a good thing.

--
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
Re:It's only sensible to reward TV ads. by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-04 01:43 · Score: 0

Hear hear!

There are two Academies by rbanzai · 2005-10-01 03:17 · Score: 1

Back in 1977 the Academy split in two: The Academy and The National Academy. The regular ol' ATAS is the one that organizes the primetime emmy awards and the creative arts emmys. These cover all the primetime shows for both in front of and behind the camera folks.

The national academy (NATAS) controls all the regional sites. These are the ones that give out "local" emmy awards for things like your local TV news show. They are supposed to run the Daytime emmys but they screwed it up so badly one year that ATAS has to manage it for them in their name. In order to make money they have also created other emmy shows like the sports and news emmys.

There is also in international academy but that's a staff of like 3 people responsible for the totally ignored international emmy awards.

Thanks a lot. by some+guy+on+slashdot · 2005-10-01 10:03 · Score: 1

I was just sitting here enjoying myself playing games, and you have to come along and try to make it all mean something. If I wanted to be a soldier in an intractable war, I would've signed up for the military right off. Thanks for killing my buzz, asshole.

3d graphics with jaggies by Anonymous Coward · 2005-10-03 00:28 · Score: 0

The psx did nothing, it only brought idiots into the industry. The n64 out powered it in the ingame graphics sections.

66 comments