Ken Kutaragi said everyone at Sony thought the PS1 would fail when it was first pitched

What went so right with the PS1?

Bleeding age talent came to the PS1 and made fantastic games. That's what.

edge*

>>11853008 (OP)
A perfect storm when your two opponents were blithering blundering idiots.

>Duuuh it's already hard to fit games on SNES carts, let's double down on it!

Sony asked devs what they would want out of a 3D console and gave them what they wished for.

>>11853008 (OP)
>everyone thought the PS1 would fail when it was first pitched
Then they got Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest as exclusives and everyone breathed a sigh of relief.

>>11853019
yeah this is the correct answer.

7,5%

CDs and Square RPGs.

>Sony having good enough 3D tech and money to push it to consumers
>Psygnosis creating the world's cheapiest and easiest to use devkit for PlayStation
>Sega being initially too conservative with perspectives of 3D gaming at home, then having to hastly add 3D rendering capabilities to already finished 2D home console to keep up with Sony's threat
>Nintendo taking its sweet time until 1996 to release its new system, giving away 1994 and 1995 to Sony to build the initial user base wishing to upgrade
>Both Saturn and N64 being too difficult to develop games for (for different reasons)
>Cartridges on N64 requiring publishers to pay premium for ordering media from Nintendo comparing to buying CDs for pennies
It was really the perfect storm. The established competition made all the wrong moves and Sony had enough cash on hand to push through in those uncertain times.

>>11853089
You also forgot that both Nintendo was kind of shit to 3rd party publishers with their doctrine and Sega pissed on their fans and retailers (with the Saturn)

too much soul

>>11853008 (OP)
sony had no devs unlike nintendo, sega and even microsoft later. they had to both build their own teams and lure in independent ones, and there were many (later failed) rivals that wanted to pitch in the console market. in the end money and the incompence of their rivals played a big part.

How proprietary was the PS1
Did Sony have special access to any technology that no other company could have bought off the shelf? I am actually asking this is not rhetorical.

>>11853008 (OP)
in japan?
cds, square, dragon quest
in us?
cds, square, crash

>>11853008 (OP)
Sega and Nintendo made a lot of mistakes with their 5th gen consoles. Sony was the number 1 electronics giant in the world, basically like Apple or Samsung now.
Sony also was able to make a lot of stuff themselves with their state-of-the-art R&D department. I think they even owned the rights to the CD-format together with Philips. Plus all the money they had from the Walkmans, TVs and other electronics that they made. They could afford to go lower in price than Sega.
Of course they would succeed.
Sony made a console that was easier to develop for, compared to Saturn and N64.
I read how their dev software even had a feature that allowed developers to optimize for performance/FPS.
They also looked at VF2 (arcade) and saw how 3D was the future (what consumers wanted).

>>11853168
i don't know the details but they made chips already
so i'm assuming with internal chip production they had an iron grip on certain productions of said chip

>>11853008 (OP)
true arcade quality games at home for the very first time

>>11853008 (OP)
PS1 games all feel so experimental, even the mid ones have that spark where you could feel every dev had a different approach to solving problems.
Most N64 games seemed to play it much more safe, sticking to 2d conventions. There are probably between 10-20 actually cool, original games on the 64 whereas the PS1 had hundreds

>>11853225
nintendo games are baby tier games.

>>11853168
They mostly added proprietary stuff into an off-the-shelf CPU
And then they had somebody design the GPU
Sound was in house (I mean, it is Sony afterall).

>>11853251
They did actually manufacture the chips in Sony foundries, so they maybe had a relative economic advantage. "Maybe" because it's not like the foundry time is free even setting aside setup costs and such and they could have been making something else.

>>11853180
>I think they even owned the rights to the CD-format together with Philips
Every time this image is printed on a disc, Philips and Sony get paid a few cents. Once you press a few millions of discs, it all adds up.

>>11853259
What chips are manufactured by Sony? The CPU? I was under the impression that they had modified those chips with their specifications and just had them made by an actual foundry

>>11853008 (OP)
jesus christ that thing is still sexy
>still looks futuristic too

>>11853008 (OP)
>What went so right with the PS1?
games being dubbed to french, deutsch, italian, portuguese and spanish.
Also good games.

>>11853265
didn't even think about this either
damn

>>11853308
I have a crazy conspiracy theory about N64, that it used cartridges instead of discs because Hiroshi Yamauchi was adamant about not wanting to pay royalties to its competitor for using CD-ROM format. It is supported by GameCube, Wii and Wii U later using fake Mini-DVD/DVD/BD discs designed by Panasonic which did not use DVD Forum's specs, hence they were free from licensing fees.

>>11853265
Yeah that is what I meant to say. They owned the DVD and Blu-ray (shared with other brands) formats as well.

FACT: the net yaroze's coating is made of cat noses.

>>11853019
/thread

>>11853276
Sony had fabs in Japan. They were even making Cell CPUs in Japan at their fab

>>11853307
PlayStation era was when European gamedev finally got in sync with the rest of the world and many actually great European games started to get released. You can limit yourself to only PAL PS1 releases and still have a blast.

>>11853008 (OP)
>What went so right with the PS1?
N64 and Saturn had nogames

>>11853019
Was basically my first thought. N64 lost most its devs with expensive cartridge tech, you could produce way more CDs for the cost of a cart. The Saturn was a raging dumpster fire that burnt retailers and was extremely difficult to design games for. The arrival of the PSX must have felt like a godsend for devs… and guess what?
GAMES
SELL
CONSOLES

>>11853168
I’m guessing it was at least somewhat proprietary? I’m thinking about how the Sony guys (Kaz?) had been engineering the CD based Nintendo system before being unceremoniously dumped by Shiggy & friends. It seems to me like their hard work felt like such a waste that they went ahead and turned it into its own system. I’m really just speculating here but if it was made out of stuff that could be assembled by anybody I figure they wouldn’t have cared as much about Nintendo dumping them. lol also I’m sure Sega would have loved to just grab some non proprietary hardware if it meant it could perform as well as the PSX, the Saturn was a total clusterfuck

>>11853319
Could’ve been part of it. My interpretation was that the CD based systems that had come out thus far had really bad load times and Nintendo considered the technology “not ready.” Also they were afraid of piracy, which lol hasn’t changed a bit

>>11854085
Care to list a few

If Kutaragi is such a legend why did he allow the firing of all of the Sony Imagesoft people who made the console a success in America and Europe?

>>11853149
>Sega pissed on their fans and retailers (with the Saturn)
Not entirely so. Sega just panicked due to the PS1 which they were unprepared to compete with. It has to do with a long succession of wrong decisions. Had a few key decisions not been made things probably would have been different. Not enough to stop the PS1's success though.

>>11853180
This is basically correct and nails the entire 5th generation story. Sony would repeat a similar formula with the PS2, leveraging their in house tech to make it double as a DVD player. Sony also developed alot of hype for the PS1 through it's 3D demos, people foamed at the mouth for it.

>>11853251
>>11853168
They licensed an existing MIPS R3000A CPU and had it fabbed by LSI.

The GPU, GTE (matrix math co-processor for 3d transformations), and SPU were all in house Sony designs. The SPU was in fact the same tech as the SNES APU, just larger with more memory and higher quality samples.

>>11854362
>Sony guys (Kaz?) had been engineering the CD based Nintendo system before being unceremoniously dumped
That was just a stock SNES with a CD drive attached. It didn't even have extra memory to load CD games, you had to put a boot cart into the system for that, which housed the CD BIOS and extra memory which cd based games needed.

>>11853149
>>11854447
>Sega pissed on their fans and retailers (with the Saturn)
That was an US only thing and happened because the Saturn was too expensive to launch, so they planned the 32x instead, but everybody was so uninterested in a stopgap that nobody cared about it. So they had to backpedal hard and instantly launch the Saturn, which completely ruined their reputation with all major retailers. Plus the system was weaker and more expensive than the Playstation. They originally wanted Saturn for Japan, 32x for US, then introduce the Saturn 1-2 years later once it came down on price. It was a bad idea, but in retrospect the Genesis was doing so well that extending its life was somewhat logical especially since they already had precedents for it.

>>11854475
>ruined their reputation with all major retailers
This is sort of irrelevant. If people want to buy the Saturn, retailers will want to sell. That's how they make money. It was only a temporary thing too.

IMO one of the things that really screwed them over was the 32X, they should have just gone all in on developing games for the Saturn and not waste resources on 32X shit.

praystation

>>11853008 (OP)
There is something incredibly wide about his face
There is so much space for his eye sockets it must be to contain all of that wisdom

>>11853008 (OP)
Look at the fuckin drip

>>11853008 (OP)
Yeah, literally everyone thought it will fail but somehow they went ahead with it anyway. A proper miracle. Why the fuck are all the japanese devs so full of shit in their interviews?

>>11853008 (OP)
>What went so right with the PS1?
it was 100 bucks cheaper than a saturn
it uses a cheaper game media that stores more data than the n64
sce had less developer and publisher restrictions than nintendo
it's more easier to develop for compared to the saturn and n64
it was your first cd player

I was standing in an empty toys r us on my birthday between 3 kiosks for video game systems.

On my left, PS (not psx) and on my right Sega saturn.Somewhere else, N64. I chose PSX because the designs of the console was so nice and the idea of using CD's was awesome. Best choice of my life.
I used to go to electronics boutique and get games like wild arms for 10 dollars every weekend, not even used.

>>11855268
>it was 100 bucks cheaper than a saturn
Saturn quickly matched the price with the PS1's

>>11855301
The difference was that Sony had bags of money to keep selling PlayStation at a loss, while Sega Enterprises was already in austerity mode by 1995 due to very rapid expansion into arcade and amusement venue ventures and terrible accounting of loans given by the head office to Sega of America.

>>11853008 (OP)
>What went so right with the PS1?
Probably just Sony having bigger budgets. It's not liek they had any clue about videogames compared to Sega and Nintendo.

I think the day the PS1 outsold Nintendo and Sega was the day videogames went to shit. Sega and Nintendo actually developed games themselves. They were the kings of consoles. And then Sony came and bought everything up. They never developed a single good game.

>>11854370
I am not that anon but:

Codemaster games
Psygnosis games
netyaroze games with europea OPSM
plenty of budge line a la platinum (value series)
tomb raider series
rayman games
Discworld

and other series.

>>11855275
>On my left, PS (not psx)
>I chose PSX
What was this PS that wasn't a PSX?

>>11855275
I think the Saturn game boxes were really not good looking in the west and probably played a part why people didn't buy it. Which is a shame because the japanese game boxes for Saturn look awesome.

>>11853008 (OP)
Maximum advertising, cutting edge technology that didn't settle for less.

>>11855491
>>11854370
Moto Racer
Alien Ressurection
Machine Head
Croc

>>11855301
>Saturn quickly matched the price with the PS1's

And every time they did, Sony dropped prices further. Sony was ALWAYS ahead in the price game. They knew it and they were bleeding out Sega.

>>11854531
>This is sort of irrelevant. If people want to buy the Saturn, retailers will want to sell. That's how they make money. It was only a temporary thing too.

Where do you think they will buy it from you stupid fucking zoomer? Order it from sega's online store? Put up Craiglist ads? You didn't have webshops or ebay in 1995, if people wanted to buy a console, they got it from Walmart and Toys'R'Us and any other retailer that carried the consoles. But nobody could buy consoles that retailers DID NOT CARRY.

And nobody wanted to carry Sega consoles because they were sick to fuck about Sega releasing more and more new hardware that didn't even last one marketing cycle and left all retailers with tons of unsold inventory to write off. The 32x in particular had a years worth of marketing material set up, and Sega pissed in everyones pockets by demanding that they put the 30 000 Saturns it launched with in the US in place of the 300 000 32xs already in stores. Stores said, lol, no, fuck you, and just ordered more Playstations.
Plus parents were sick to fuck from buying a new hardware every year only for it to get axed immediately. Plenty of people spent the 2000s and 2010s rediscovering the console because their parents told them they are not falling for this shit again, you are getting a Playstation instead.
It's why Sega took major fucking losses from 96 and onwards, retailers started sending back the millions of unsold Game Gears and 32xs and Activators that NOBODY WANTED and Sega had to dump them in landfills. The only thing they could keep selling was the mexican made Genesis 3 because it cost $50. Many kids didn't even knew the Saturn existed, they thought Sega went from Genesis to Dreamcast.

Stores not carrying the Saturn was not irrelevant. It killed the fucking company.

>>11855719
lmao I cant believe I specified (not psx) because I hate that shit but then said "i chose psx"

>>11855725
yeah I forget which demo they had on the kiosk but it was not good.

>>11853168
Depends on what you mean by "proprietary". Technically the whole thing is proprietary, but it wasn't like on N64 where Nintendo skimped on documentation to hamper devs or outright forbade using the hardware in a certain way (mostly custom microcode).

>>11855817
>Everyone is buying le Saturn
>I AM LE ANGRY I WIL NOT SELL THIS AND MAKE MONEY
They were temporarily mad. Like when Sony knocked Sega out of the market. Sega developed games for former rivals Nintendo and Sega, because there is money to be made. This is business.

Also they couldn't buy them because an early release meant very few console allocated. If the Saturn took off commercially they would stock it.

>>11853008 (OP)
I wish the PlayStation was actually released with 4MB of RAM instead of 2, as with the Net Yaroze. As far I know they could have done it, but chose not to.

>>11854085
>americans will never know about the european playstation raves
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moZa7VbZHpc

>>11853008 (OP)
I mean, pretty much everything... it was relatively cheap, easy to programm for and pump out software, things like the Memory Card were brilliant moves money wise, the OG controller was recognizeable and the DualShock was essentially perfect, it came out early on the generation against a Saturn that dropped the ball almost everywhere, the CDs made it have an upper edge on Nintendo, especially with things like Square moving 100% to Sony from that point onwards, they made a ton of great new IPs for essentially every genre you could want... they barely made any mistakes with the PlayStation, which is why it sold over 100m units.

>>11855860
It was always the PSX

>>11856547
True, the magazines of that time called it that way.

>>11853089
>Both Saturn and N64 being too difficult to develop games for (for different reasons)

Why is this stupid meme brought to the table every fucking time? I think it was initially discussed for devs not being able to squeeze full potential in early stages of the consoles, but it degenerate into

>shit's too hard to program, let's drop it'

Like devs being retarded monkeys who can't handle it.

>>11856885
There's a push and pull when it comes to making games though. Of course the devs could learn the N64 and Saturn architecture, but if a game has to be released in an 8-12 month crunch and you have to actively struggle with the hardware, it's either gonna be incredibly poor or not released at all like Sonic X-treme.

>>11856898
>>11856885
Forgot to mention: The devs could become incredibly proficient but then the console hardware is completely out of date by that point. Some impressive Saturn homebrew I've seen, they have hindsight and online resources they didn't have back then.

>>11855268
>it was your first cd player
Oh boy this again. I hope you die.

>>11853008 (OP)
third party support

>>11854085
nah you could already have a blast with the previous generations, it was just the world getting more globalized.

>>11856547
>>11856826
Me and my friends read magazines and owned Playstations. We didnt call it "P.S.X".
Only cringe jewish writers did that because its easier to identify psx in writing than PS.

>>11853013
>Bleeding age talent
lolis?

>>11853008 (OP)
>"$299"

>>11857461
I was there and called it that because of Mega Man X and I bet a lot of people started doing it because of that game.

>>11856547
Yeah. This is the timeline:
Playstation release to Playstation 2 announce - Everyone called it PSX
Playstation 2 release - Some people said PS1 and some people said PSX
PSX DVR/PS2 combo announcement - Almost everyone stopped saying PSX because it caused confusion

Heres the realm time line:

Playstation (said Playstation by the masses) (psx by literal retards and magazines)

Playstation One (said Playstation by the masses) (said PS one in writing)

Playstation 2 (said PS2 by the masses) (notice how its not called psx2)

Playstation is now called PS1 (PS1 by the masses)

PSX digital recorder (called nothing because nobody knew wtf this shit was)

Source: i was alive then

>>11855301
People keep saying this like it matters. Imagine if two consoles released tomorrow and one was $100 cheaper. Even if it was only for a couple months it would make a massive impact in the moment. That's months of one console building a huge install base over the other.

>>11857604
>psx2
It wasn't called PSX2 because Sony never called it that. PSX was the codename Sony used for the PS1. Now when confronted with proof people want to shift the goalpost and say "only magazines called it that" when there are endless usergroup posts of people saying PSX.

And with this post >>11855275 we now have proof that the people who say "it wasn't called PSX" are lying to themselves. "not psx" "I chose PSX"

>>11857621
The PSX wasn't real in my mind

>>11857604
>Playstation (said Playstation by the masses) (psx by literal retards and magazines)
>PSX digital recorder (called nothing because nobody knew wtf this shit was)
So that means we had more people using "PSX" to refer to the PS1 than the digital recorder, even if it was "literal retards and magazines" as you described.

>>11857604
It says PS-X inside the console itself and in every single game released for it.

Because PS-X was the official acronym as dictated by Sony, which was originally done to differenciate the console from the first PlayStation that talked about in magazines: the joint venture between Nintendo and Sony.

Source: I'm not a retard

>>11857673
>>11857654
>>11857625
>>11857621
12 year olds who just hit puberty will never know the truth!

>>11857461
>>11857604
>>11857625
Retards

>>11853089
>Sony having good enough 3D tech and money to push it to consumers
>Psygnosis creating the world's cheapiest and easiest to use devkit for PlayStation
You could mash these into one point, because until Psygnosis came along, Sony's SDKs were shit like everyone elses.

>>11856090
>but it wasn't like on N64 where Nintendo skimped on documentation to hamper devs or outright forbade using the hardware in a certain way (mostly custom microcode).
Has there ever been a reason for this? Why the fuck would not want devs to take every advantage of your system to make games that could better sell the hardware?

>>11859157
>Sony's SDKs were shit like everyone elses.
I wouldn't say they were shit, but expensive as fuck. Old PSX devkits were literally repurposed Sony NEWS machines.

>>11853008 (OP)
Piracy

>>11859137
Not saying that the whole psx moniker was fake but is there a audio source of somebody actually saying psx out loud from back then?

>>11859162
They wanted all games to have a look that supports the machine having more advanced capabilities, hence why people had to use the microcode that forced z-buffer, filtering, etc. So no shaking/shimmering polygons, no pixelated textures, etc. The microcode being slow as fuck was a side effect. There was a "Fast3d" microcode (I think that was what they called it) that turned off extras and could push 500k polygons per second, but it was not allowed to be used because it looked like playstation games (no texture filters, no z-buffer, etc).

>>11857621
>It wasn't called PSX2 because Sony never called it that. PSX was the codename Sony used for the PS1. Now when confronted with proof people want to shift the goalpost and say "only magazines called it that" when there are endless usergroup posts of people saying PSX.

Mags called it PSX2 before it came out, on account of it being the 2nd PSX console (and at the time it was not at all sure if it was going to be Playstation 2 on account of successor consoles getting different names, ie. Saturn 2 was talked about in the press and it ended up as Dreamcast).

Then Sony released it with the large PS2 letters engraved in neon on the front of the console, while also releasing a console titled "psOne", and everyone eventually forgot about the PSX thing.

It really comes down to three things:
- Sega aggravating retailers with head scratching releases and early launches.
- Nintendo saying 'no' to CD ROM's, which caused third parties like Square to leave for Sony;.
- $299

>>11857461
>We didnt call it "P.S.X".
Nobody called it P.S.X. like how nobody called the Nintendo console a "snezz". Acronyms weren't used by people when talking about the console, they used the full name of it, while parents/kids just called it the Nintendo or the Sega or the Sony.

I think the N64 was the first exception to that, unless you count the Genesis being nicknamed Genny.

>>11859378
>There was a "Fast3d" microcode (I think that was what they called it) that turned off extras and could push 500k polygons per second, but it was not allowed to be used because it looked like playstation games (no texture filters, no z-buffer, etc).
Source?

>>11854460
>They licensed an existing MIPS R3000A CPU
True. It really helped Sony chose the MIPS architecture, with it being one of the easiest architectures to develop in the whole existence. Neither x86, nor ARM come close.

>>11859137
>>11859282
No, because nobody audibly, verbally said "Pee-Ess-Ecks", we just said PlayStation. Typed out though, "PSX" as an abbreviation was pretty common.

>>11859162
It's because it's in Nintendo's best interest to sell _their_ games. We can't have every other dev making shinier things over Nintendo's software, Rare was already a problem despite them being 2nd party.

>>11859162
>>11859943
This is true and they still do that shit even to this day. They will never allow other companies to overshadow their Marios or their Zeldas, so that's the reason Nintendo never reveals their "secret sauce" to developers.

>>11853008 (OP)
>Ken Kutaragi said everyone at Sony thought the PS1 would fail when it was first pitched
Why do these companies always shit on good ideas? The Trinitron and GBA SP also almost didn't exist.

>>11853319
>It is supported by GameCube, Wii and Wii U later using fake Mini-DVD/DVD/BD discs designed by Panasonic which did not use DVD Forum's specs, hence they were free from licensing fees.
Could they have also done this with CDs for the N64?

>>11853319
That's not a schizo theory, that's a fact. Nintendo's business model has been having a proprietary medium since the NES (and I mean NES, not Famicom; but then they actually imported the idea to Japan for the Famicom as well which pissed off Namco and Hudson).

That way game makers have to no other choice but to go through them and Nintendo makes money on every single game *made* for their system, regardless of whether the game is actually bought by a customer (if they're actually bought there is a royalty fee on top of course).

Had they gone with CD not only they can't do that, but *they* would have to pay for every game they make. Pay their competitor.

>>11861129
The CD licensing costs are barely anything.
There's a reason so many third parties jumped on the format.

>>11853160
I love this picture. Thank you for sharing it.

>>11861135
Yes but there is a big difference between
- Receive money on every single game manufactured
- Don't get money on every game made, give money for every game you make instead

With the former they can set their terms too like force publishers to order a minimum numbers of copies and make sure every order is in big bulk

>>11859406
>Source?
Sorry, Fast3D was the default one that game used and could do around 100k polys.
The 500k one was called Turbo3D.

Source is N64 SDK and every n64 wiki ever.

Both Nintendo and Sega shot themselves in the foot, that's what went right with it.

>>11859401
>think the N64 was the first exception to that
I remember the N64 was called Ultra 64 for a time. All of my friends called it that way for like 2-3 years after debut.

>>11855268
>>11856907
Not the first, but it actually had a very good DAC that even audiophiles usually praise.

>>11856907

>>11853008 (OP)
it has a fucktonne of games

like an absolutely insane amount of games, like 100x what current gen consoles have. Devs don't seem to be able to make games anymore, but back then fucking everyone was absolutely pumping out games. It was crazy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_(console)_games_(A%E2%80%93L)

>>11862728
That's because audiophiles are retarded.
Even for the 90s it was pretty mid.
And it's shit compared to modern cheap DACs.

>>11854425
He saw that westerners ruined Sega and didn't want the same thing to happen to Sony under his watch

>>11862728
>>11863228
I come from a poor family and we had CD players since the late 80s. PS1 was no one's first CD player except for little timmy aged 5 in 1996.
>no trust me, people were buying gorilions of CDs despite not having a dedicated CD player before the PS1! this schizo nonsense makes sense in my mind!

>>11856885
>>11853089
>>11859157
>Why is this stupid meme
Because he posted it in the correct order.
The Psygnosis devkit bypassed a lot of the hurdles, and neither SEGA nor Nintendo ended up making anything similar.

If you can get a working prototype going, you can actually plan out the game
Similarly it turns out more important to get the game out, so you can get game 2 and game 3 going once the team is familiar with the hardware.

>>11859162
The conflicting reasons makes it confusing in retrospect
You want a lot of the 3D render stuff, instead of adding another frame per second, especially when its one of the consoles big competitive advantages.

But it doesn't make sense to not try to ship out more microcode variants, at the least for benchmarking purposes.
Similarly incomplete documentation is a bad idea in a world of FAX and global shipping taking several weeks with priority.

>>11853008 (OP)
>What went so right with the PSX?
beacuase it had hundreds of games in each genre.

>>11863257
Wrong, SOA was always better than SOJ. If they released Project Black Belt instead of Project Katana, SEGA would have not failed as it did with the Dreamcast.

>>11863638
SoA's own leaked emails confirmed that they were the problem, your argument was put to rest some time ago anon

>>11863703
Can you post that? Everything I've seen indicates sega of japan shit the bed for decades and was propped up by their western successes

>>11853019
>>11854342
not only that, the n64 also had a shitty memory bus that held it from its true potential unless you had infinite time to figure it out (which devs didn't back then)

>>11859162
I think that Nintendo just didn't fully know how the N64 works, and restricted stuff like the microcode to play it safely and not having to deal with games that were gonna be broken on arrival.
Even nowadays they struggle with some parts of the hardware when they have to emulate it, like how it happened on NSO (some OOT graphics had bugs that Project64 had fixed back in 2005 btw)

>>11864218
That's just a lame excuse. They just could have asked SGI for the internals and the manuals, they actually had an exclusivity contract, after all.

>>11854460
>The GPU, GTE (matrix math co-processor for 3d transformations), and SPU were all in house Sony designs.
tl;dr Sony's dominance in Television, Electronics, and Video in the 80s lead to them bringing to market texture-mapped polygonal 3D effects chips in the late 80s. These were used by television and news studios to do 3D titles and computer effects. Sony supposedly then re-used some of this hardware design for the PS1, which allowed them to reduce their costs and hit the low MSRP.

I've never seen really solid sources for it, but if it's true it explains how they went from having seemingly 0 experience in 3D games to leapfrogging Sega in tech despite Sega doing 3D for 5 years at that point.

>>11865457
>despite Sega doing 3D for 5 years
Sega's 3D designs were half-baked as fuck. Hell, they didn't even want to make 3D games, in first place, and they reluctantly had to because they started to notice gamers were actually demanding more 3D games and their competitors were starting to improve in their 3D hardware department.

>>11866192
Not true at all, Sega’s arcade department was making huge advancements in 3D all throughout the 90s. But arcade hardware was still way ahead of consoles, and Sega figured there would be at least one more 2D generation before larger 3D games became feasible on console.

>>11865429
Remember that they didn't completely know how the Game Boy worked at the launch year (even with how simple it is) and they had to reverse-engineer some Konami games just to understand it better. Just because they made it, doesn't mean that they fully understood it.
>They just could have asked SGI for the internals and the manuals
They did, and they still struggled. Rare managed to make games that were more impressive despite being second party.

>>11853008 (OP)
Out of touch Nintendo and Sega of Japan didn't know what western gamers wanted.
Sony just copied Sega of America's playbook in terms of marketing but matured the campaign.

>>11863995
Sega America played big, won big for 2-3 years, then they couldn't find the right thing to do with the next gen switch and lost big.

Sega Japan just couldn't sell shit anywhere, it was always SOA and SOE selling their games and making them big. Megadrive was a complete joke in Japan. Sonic was so unknown that once the team made big on the Saturn, everybody asked them what "sonic team" was and they had to release Sonic Jam to explain all the Saturn owners what the fuck Sonic is.

And the reason SOA lost big in the first place was because Japan shot down all the plans they had that made sense (Sony approached them to make a console together, SGI came to them with the N64 chipset, etc). Then when the Saturn was too much of a shit, they told them they NEED to launch a new hardware, so come up with a new Genesis expansion.

SOA being at fault is because SOJ mismanaged the entire company like shit and SOA was unable to deal with the parent company pulling their strings like a retard.

>>11866192
Sega went and asked all their own devs in 1991 about what they wanted and everybody said better 2D. Yu Suzuki told them 3D, but remember at this point not even Virtua Racing existed. So they made a console based on what their own devs wanted, not based on what the market wanted.

Sony took a huge gambit with 3D, and when Virtua Fighter came out in 1993, that's what vindicated their decision, Kutaragi said so in an interview. Keep in mind that when these machines were being designed, the most advanced 3D games on the market were... I don't even know, Namco's Winning Run? So yeah, it was a huge risk.

>>11866564
Sega's arcade department was churning out 2D games like Rad Mobile or Golden Axe Revenge of Black Adder or fucking Cool Riders. They had ONE department, Yu Suzukis, who was doing research into 3D games, and those ended up as completely unexpected hits in 1992 (Virtua Racing) and 1993 (Virtua Fighter) but the boards were extremely expensive. And Saturn development was already well underway by the time Suzuki delivered.

>>11866772
I’m not sure you’re aware, but 3D games were pretty rare in 92-93.

>>11866763
People have forgotten how it was before the success of Doom (in the west) and Virtua Fighter (in the east). 3D was still highly primitive in 90-91, it was perfectly sensible, from a business standpoint, to imagine that the focus of next gen console should be 2D with the addition of FMV capabilities (because of the ‘multimedia’ push). Sony correctly read how the market was moving, went with a dev-friendly hardware simple enough to be produced right on time, and cheaper then the concurrence.

>>11866909
>went with a dev-friendly hardware simple enough to be produced right on time
After they hired Psygnosis to make it

>>11866754
>>11863703
>Sega Japan
If your enterprise is arcade and arcade ports, its going to be arcade ports. Inserting your shit opinion don't really make it right.
Saturn ended up with some rather amazing sales, for what in Japan is a machine that exist solely for arcade conversions. Everything else was a afterthought.

>>11853276
Sony made pretty much every chip in playstations up until the PS3 era when Nvidia made the RSX and IBM made the cell.

Fabrication used to be a pretty widespread technology but as node shrinkage continued, the amount of capital and expertise necessary (along with the increasing versatility of newer designs) meant that everything consolidated to like a handful of big boys

>>11868493
>Sony made pretty much every chip in playstations up until the PS3 era
That's not true, the PSX chips were made by LSI Logic.

Seeing demos of PS1 at Sears and Toys R Us sold it. MGS, Resident Evil, Road Rash kiosks. It looked technically advanced for a long period while N64s content was limited by carts. The library for it in 1998 exploded, and expanded with 3d fighters, arcade / driving etc. Dreamcast shut interest in PS1 off. By 1999 and 2000 Ps1 was retro, but a really good console to pick up for less money, and still good to rent/buy games for. The GREATEST HITS collections moved software late in its life. Exclusives and movie tie ins moved product off the shelves. The promotion in magazines was crazy. They made no major mistakes with PS1.

>>11869656
That would be a gotcha if
>Fabrication used to be a pretty widespread technology
Was not attached to the post.
IP != Manufactured. We have a similar thing today where anything high end is going to be made in Taiwan, or handcrafted in a lab.

This is also a console with multiple hardware revisions.

PSX? More PEE IN SEX amiright?

>>11866754
>>11868123
You know, I don't even know how Sega of Japan became more powerful and influential than Sega of America when the company itself was originally founded in the US.

>>11872609
Open Wikipedia retard

>>11859378
>but it was not allowed to be used because it looked like playstation games
That's effectively true but not entirely true. You were allowed to use it BUT it had to generate results that DID NOT cause texture errors, z-fighting, pixelation, etc. In other words you could only use it in niche cases where you knew the z-buffer was unneeded (because you had already sorted the polygons) or if you needed the filtering off for UI elements or what have you. I don't know all the dos-and-donts but that was the basic rule: use it if you can ensure it doesn't look like a ps1 game.

>>11853008 (OP)
>What went so right with the PS1?
demo discs

>>11866754
>SoA was at fault because SoJ was actually the ones at fault
fatfuck retard amerimutts are allergic to accountability lmao

>>11866754
>SGI came to them with the N64 chipset,
One thing we do know is that the N64 chipset they brought to SEGA was a pile of shit, which we know because they brought it to Nintendo and nintendo said it was a pile of shit. The N64 is the improved version. It's understandable that SEGA saw it and said "we can do better." It's just a shame that so too did Nintendo with SGI and they made something better than SEGA did in the end.

>>11873376
Play before buy so we keep up with our n64 Bros where only good purchases exists

>>11853008 (OP)
Get nintendo funds and blueprints of their upgraded snes simple as that.

>>11873943
The only thing in common the PlayStation and the CD-NES had were the sound chips.

>>11853008 (OP)
>Nintendo after realizing how successful the PSX has become

>>11870435
This is true, people still underestimate how demos helped build the playstation fanbase. A shame "demo culture" seems dead in this day and age.

being cheap to develop for.

>>11853008 (OP)
They bet everything on (awful but fast) 3d and new young developers. Also Sony was big enough to keep the price pretty low

>>11874995
>awful but fast) 3d
What was the alternative? Because I don't remember a proper way of doing 3D at that time.

You don't say.

>>11866740
Both Sony and Microsoft ironically copied Sega of America in their first years. Microsoft is a special case because they actually were partners during the Dreamcast era.

>>11874357
They created their own enemy. They don't have anyone else to blame but themselves.