Sony PlayStation One Discussion Thread

[TrekMD]

[align=center:vr6q68h8][/align:vr6q68h8]

The PlayStation

[zapiy]

I have the PSOne in a couple of variations. Great system with many great games but this system is one of those "is it retro" arguments lol.

[TrekMD]

Well, it was released a year after the Jaguar and we consider the Jaguar retro.  It was released almost 20 years ago as well.  If the cut off for retro is 15 years, it meets that criterion.  LOL 

[dot.fyre]

this system is one of those "is it retro" arguments lol.

Definitely retro.
Definitely an iconic piece of gaming hardware (though I prefer the redesigned PSOne). THE console of the 90's.
It had a similar effect to that of the Wii in that millions of "non-gamers" bought them.

[Shadowrunner]

Yeah I definitely consider the PS1 retro. I don't have a huge collection for it, maybe 30 or 40 games at most. There are some real classics on it, but some of the early 3D games haven't aged very well.

It seems it's starting to become a very popular console to collect for. For a lot of people in their 20's this was their first console, and now that they are grown up and working they are starting to buy all the games they missed out on. Prices on ebay and such are rising rapidly for some of the games.

[TrekMD]

So, demand for the games is up and Ebay is following the expected trend by sellers rising prices.  It does make sense, though, that folks who first played with the system are now collecting games they missed on now. 

[WiggyDiggyPoo]

This marked the switch for me from computer based gaming to console as found that I simply couldn't afford the latest
PC (Amiga gaming by this point being almost dead) to play.

I had 5 PSones over time, kept buying one back every time I got rid if it lol.

Name your measure of success cliche and think it applied to PSone. It'd be a stretch to say its impact was as big as the NES but certainly I think it was the first console for a while to start selling to non gamers?

[dot.fyre]

It'd be a stretch to say its impact was as big as the NES..

[WiggyDiggyPoo]

YORKSHIRE!

I'd be honoured to be considered a yank, but no Brit all the way.

What I mean is we know the NES essentially saved the gaming industry, which is quite an achievement. The PSOne didn't have to do that but what it did do is thanks to some very snazzy marketing and games is break out of the traditional market of consoles and sell itself very successfully to a wide audience.

[Shadowrunner]

Yes it's pretty uncommon to hear someone from the UK say the NES saved gaming! Better hope Laird doesn't see this  Myself being from NA I agree, as it really did save gaming over here.

Back on topic though, I also agree the PS1 really was the first console to appeal to non gamers. It completely changed the industry, for good or bad depending on how you look at it or who you ask.

[TL]

YORKSHIRE!

I'd be honoured to be considered a yank, but no Brit all the way.

What I mean is we know the NES essentially saved the gaming industry, which is quite an achievement. The PSOne didn't have to do that but what it did do is thanks to some very snazzy marketing and games is break out of the traditional market of consoles and sell itself very successfully to a wide audience.

The NES most certainly didn't save the gaming industry, it revitalised it - in America anyway. But in Europe, and especially the UK it bombed, it only sold around 600,000 units in the UK. That is less than the Atari Lynx and was outsold but the rival Master System by 4:1. There is so much ridiculous revisionist history about when it comes to the NES, you should probably read THIS THREAD.

The PS1 however was successful everywhere, mainly down to Sony's aggressive marketing (that often included outright lies) and excellent developer support.

But for me personally I have absolutely zero love for the PS1, for me it was the machine that ruined the video game industry and started the turn into a world of faceless corporations releasing identikit games, endless sequels and franchises and ushered in the modern era. The PS1 is where retro gaming ended and modern gaming began, most of the games are the same as the ones released today only with worse graphics. And because of these visuals I think that most PS1 games have aged really badly and I don't see the appeal of collecting for it at all.

I own a PS1 purely for playing the original 2D Grand Theft Auto games but it will, for me personally, always be bland and soulless machine with no personality and zero appeal.

[WiggyDiggyPoo]

I'll read the NES thread at a later time.....

For now though I'll continue with my reason for getting a PSX which was I wanted to play games that I couldn't on my Amiga.

GTA was the first game I wanted, and other early titles I was picking up like Destruction Derby, G Police, were fulfilling my need for 'next gen' games.

I do actually agree with Laird to a certain extent that the PS1 marked a change/end of an era in terms of gaming although what that impact meant in terms of being good or bad is very subjective.

[TrekMD]

I would definitely agree that the PSOne marked a "change of the guard," so to speak, when it comes to video gaming.  It was the transition point from retro to modern even though it still had contemporaries that we classify as retro easily. 

[dot.fyre]

Franchised games and sequels were around long before the Playstation.
It's arrival did mark a change in gaming but it doesn't have to be for the better or worse. Just different.
It was great to be able to play games like Silent Hill, Resident Evil, MGS, ISS, Gran Turismo.
Games that just weren't possible before.

ps All the games I mentioned do have "worse" graphics than their modern counterparts but are
still better games. IMO.

[tomwaits]

Franchised games and sequels were around long before the Playstation.
It's arrival did mark a change in gaming but it doesn't have to be for the better or worse. Just different.
It was great to be able to play games like Silent Hill, Resident Evil, MGS, ISS, Gran Turismo.
Games that just weren't possible before.

ps All the games I mentioned do have "worse" graphics than their modern counterparts but are
still better games. IMO.

Franchises and sequels were around on earlier consoles but the PS1 era was the beginning of recycled game engines in AAA titles. Developing/licensing a 3D game engine is expensive so they were re-used for sequels to ensure profitability. Tomb Raider, Tony Hawk, Spyro, etc. 'New' games were essentially map packs, cutscenes, and a new front end so that they could be released every year or two without having to develop an entirely new game. The sports game yearly update method applied to AAA games. The 'cinematic modern gaming' development model started in the PS1 era and has gradually grown to dominate console gaming since then. Bland, soulless, corporate driven gaming for the masses. Yuck.

There are so many games for PS1 that there are plenty of unique quality titles too. But, looking at the console's role in history, it was the start of mainstream modern gaming and I don't classify it as a retro system.