Support NeoGAF

[FewRope]

Underground scene ? Piracy scene ? You might want to take a look at the computer market in the 80s and 90s then. Like the Amiga scene, for example...

Not even close. PS1 reached every home, even low income ones

 

[cireza]

Not even close. PS1 reached every home, even low income ones

It didn't create what already existed.

 

[hemo memo]

But those ugly first 3D games. Yikes.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

I don't think that PS1 particularly extended the market to adults. The MegaDrive was already clearly targeting this audience.

What it did succeed at is growing the player base through marketing.

MegaDrive tried but failed

It didn’t have games like WipEout and Gran Turismo that really broke through with adults.

Until the PlayStation, console gaming was something kids dropped once they hit 16.

 

[FreeY$L]

Kotick is right, without the PS1, we’d still have sprite based kid-oriented games. The technological advancement of the PS1 ushered in new genres, and expanded existing ones. Capcom owes its biggest hit of RE to the playstation, as street fighter and arcades were dying back then.
The most important thing is expansion to newer markets, places like the Gulf and SEA benefitted greatly from the CD technology (For piracy reasons, but still), and sony’s expertise in distribution helped expand it to new markets.

 

[cireza]

MegaDrive tried but failed

It didn’t have games like WipEout and Gran Turismo that really broke through with adults.

Until the PlayStation, console gaming was something kids dropped once they hit 16.

The MegaDrive had tons of games targeted at adults, look at EA output, sports game, war games, strike series etc...
Then you get Japanese games such as Golden Axe, Streets of Rage, Shinobi, Outrun, After Burner, Hang On etc...
RPGs too, Phantasy Star games weren't exactly super kid friendly and required investment and planning.

MegaDrive also had the look of a more advanced technological console, and not a blocky toy.

There were a lot of grown-ups (16+ to 30s), when I was kid, that were playing on MegaDrive. Even my father played Zelda on NES...
I don't know where you get that people above 16 were not playing ? If they could afford the console, for sure, then they would be a target for it as a ton of games were for a mature audience, and this included SEGA published games.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

The MegaDrive had tons of games targeted at adults, look at EA output, sports game, war games, strike series etc...
Then you get Japanese games such as Golden Axe, Streets of Rage, Shinobi, Outrun, After Burner etc...

MegaDrive also had the look of a more advanced technological console, and not a blocky toy.

Those games, as much as I loved them, were all cartoony and largely appealed to 14yr olds.

Sega Rally, however, was a massive hit with adults in arcades. Had the Saturn been a big success I could have seen Sega working on a Gran Turismo style game built off the Sega Rally engine.

 

[cireza]

Those games, as much as I loved them, were all cartoony and largely appealed to 14yr olds.

Sega Rally, however, was a massive hit with adults in arcades. Had the Saturn been a big success I could have seen Sega working on a Gran Turismo style game built off the Sega Rally engine.

I don't see how Outrun is cartoony but not Sega Rally lol.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Kotick is right, without the PS1, we’d still have sprite based kid-oriented games. The technological advancement of the PS1 ushered in new genres, and expanded existing ones.

Sega were gradually leaning towards the adult side with the MegaDrive, especially with their marketing in the UK (we had much. Better than the cringy “Genesis does” crap the tanks had to put up with).

It was Sony, however, who really kicked down the doors and went full throttle after the adult market.

 

[deriks]

Let's put aside the fact for a moment that it's a futile endeavour to try to single out one "thing" that changed gaming the "most", you could make a much better argument for "online" to be that thing. Hell, you could probably make a better argument for "home consoles" being that thing, seeing how gaming would probably not gone very far if it had been stuck at the arcade.

So this is both a very stupid question as well as a pretty stupid answer.

*Drops mic*

 

[RetroGamingUK]

I don't see how Outrun is cartoony but not Sega Rally lol.

Maybe because one looks reaslistic and the other looks like a Saturday morning cartoon?

 

[cireza]

Maybe because one looks reaslistic and the other looks like a Saturday morning cartoon?

I what world does Sega Rally look realistic ? They are both super colorful arcade games.

Awful screenshots, by the way. You might also want to pick a screenshot at the start of the race for Sega Rally, to avoid showing any bias.

 

[Drell]

Maybe because one looks reaslistic and the other looks like a Saturday morning cartoon?

Then I guess GTA Vice City also looks like a saturday morning cartoon? Seriously drop this colorful = kids game or we'll be back to ps3/360 era where every game was in that boring braun/grey/dark green hue.

 

[Thanati]

Let's put aside the fact for a moment that it's a futile endeavour to try to single out one "thing" that changed gaming the "most", you could make a much better argument for "online" to be that thing. Hell, you could probably make a better argument for "home consoles" being that thing, seeing how gaming would probably not gone very far if it had been stuck at the arcade.

So this is both a very stupid question as well as a pretty stupid answer.

But without the original Playstation, you most likely wouldn't have had the huge switch to gaming that there was. The Playstation made gaming "cool" and brought gaming out into the world more than pretty much any other time. Back in the 8-bit days (which I grew up with), gaming was seen as the "nerdy kids thing". Playstation completely changed that.

So yes, he's correct.

 

[Rival]

I was about 14-15 when ps1 came out in the US and it was the first time I noticed people substantially older than me buying and talking about video games.

 

[No BBC=Anger]

The Megadrive and PS1 are night and day when it comes to adult engagement and the mainstream. Wipout, Gran Turismo, Tomb Raider (multiplatform but most associated with PS1) Time Crisis, MGS etc. The Dreamcast does hold a certain avant-garde vibe to it though. And SEGA arcade games were popular at the time.

 

[od-chan]

But without the original Playstation, you most likely wouldn't have had the huge switch to gaming that there was. The Playstation made gaming "cool" and brought gaming out into the world more than pretty much any other time. Back in the 8-bit days (which I grew up with), gaming was seen as the "nerdy kids thing". Playstation completely changed that.

So yes, he's correct.

I'm not disputing that the PS1 brought gaming to a wider audience, but so did the NES. And then, when discussing what "thing" changed gaming "the most", you obviously need to factor in quantification. Yes, the PS1 did bring gaming to a wider audience. Wider than the PS2 though? This gets murky, quickly.

Also, let's not go overboard: Stacy and Chad still didn't give a shit about gaming with the PS1, it was still mostly only the most based nerdiest guys who were invested. Yeah, they had some events at clubs and the advertisments got edgier, but don't conflate marketing with reality.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Psone developed a voice for serious gaming.

 

[Thanati]

I'm not disputing that the PS1 brought gaming to a wider audience, but so did the NES. And then, when discussing what "thing" changed gaming "the most", you obviously need to factor in quantification. Yes, the PS1 did bring gaming to a wider audience. Wider than the PS2 though? This gets murky, quickly.

Also, let's not go overboard: Stacy and Chad still didn't give a shit about gaming with the PS1, it was still mostly only the most based nerdiest guys who were invested. Yeah, they had some events at clubs and the advertisments got edgier, but don't conflate marketing with reality.

When you factor in games like Wipeout, Gran Tourismo and Tomb Raider, they alone elevated gaming to the cool status, which were of course on the PlayStation. The NES was still confined to the bedrooms whereas the PlayStation was in the living rooms of student houses and such.

Music bands got on with the PlayStation. The Wipeout soundtrack alone earned legendary status. The Cardigans even named their fourth album, “Gran Tourismo” with one song called “My favorite game”. And yes, it was based on the original PlayStation version. TV adverts were also more prevalent for the PlayStation.

As for wider than the PS2. It stands to reason that if the original wasn’t successful, there wouldn’t have been a PS2.

But that’s a different story, as GTA3 essentially crowned that console.

 

[Deerock71]

Has anyone seen Bobby and Neelix together?

 

[od-chan]

As for wider than the PS2. It stands to reason that if the original wasn’t successful, there wouldn’t have been a PS2.

But of course, without Nintendo, Sony probably would never even have entered the home console market in the first place, so this isn't really a viable argument as to why the PS1 should be considered more transformative (in terms of mainstream appeal) than the PS2.

I think some of you are giving the PS1 a little too much credit for what I'd call a "natural evolution", more than being "transformative". In their infancy video games were more heavily marketed towards kids, and then as these kids grew up of course the industry recognized that there's money to be made there as well. It's not like there weren't any edgy or "adult" games prior to the PS1 (or that they didn't try to market to them), it's just that there weren't enough people in that age bracket to make it matter. Sony didn't solve that problem, that problem solved itself with kids getting older and growing tired of Mario. In lots of ways, that's an evolution that we are still seeing today.

The PS2 is kinda different in that way because of, again, quantification. Wasn't the PS2 only outsold recently by the Switch? That's just bonkers.

Obviously I don't want to downplay the cultural impact the PS1 absolutely had, and Sony did a phenomenal job with their marketing. They were at the right place at the right time and they played their hand perfectly, both the system and the company deserve credit for that, absolutely. I just think the PS2 did that same thing again, but MUCH bigger. The NES did something similar, but earlier. So I just don't see why the PS1 specifically should be considered THE MOST transformative.

But you're making a lot of good points, and once you get into the details of it (like we currently are) my earlier point becomes a lot more salient: It's a silly question to begin with.

 

[Melchiah]

Nah, especially in Europe, Sony made a push to get demo stands in night clubs and other such places, and that changed the view of consoles just being the "Nintendo" in the kids room, here you had people getting smashed, grouping round these things checking out the Namco and Psygnosis line up, people taking turns playing Ridge Racer, Tekken, Wipeout, etc. No other console maker at the time was doing those sorts of moves and Sony helped push that shift.

On top of that, they were the first to treat Europe as an equal market.

How PlayStation conquered Europe

Ian Hetherington, Chris Deering, Phil Harrison, Ray Maguire, Doug Goodwin, Simon Jobling and Alan Welsman on 20 years of PS1

web.archive.org

That sell-out was partly driven by the fact Sony decided to launch PlayStation in ten European countries – which was more than its rivals ever did. A move that Deering insisted upon.

“The Japanese arm of Sony were looking at Europe through the eyes of their mates at Sega and Nintendo, who said that if you get France, Germany and UK, you basically have Europe and Europe is roughly half the US,” he says.

“Before I joined PlayStation, I had 20 years experience in international markets. I knew that Europe had the same population as the US and the same per-capita income as the US.

“I thought Nintendo and Sega were being lazy on producing translated versions. And they were dealing with distributors that were taking the mick with the video games industry. I remember saying to Ken Kutaragi [PlayStation CEO at the time] that Europe can have the same install base as the US. He laughed and said: ‘In your dreams, go for it.’ And it did happen. We localised in multiple languages, we worked hard and made it happen.”

PlayStation rolled into the market in 1995 and transformed the games industry. The business model, the target audience, the advertising – the industry changed overnight. Sony took on Nintendo and Sega’s duopoly and won, and its loyalty and support for Europe continues to pay dividends to this day.

Funnily enough, even after Sony showed everyone how to conquer Europe, Microsoft still continued to treat the market as 2nd class and reaped what they sowed.

 

[Melchiah]

Changed, not saved
The NES saved gaming from crashing and continued as it was as a kids hobby.
The Playstation exploded the industry to new heights.

The infamous video game crash only happened in America. In Europe there was no such thing, thanks to the popularity of C64, and Amiga later on. PS1 was seen as a continuation of those platforms, partly due to Psygnosis, and the Net Yaroze initiative, with its consumer dev kits, was a stepping stone for the Amiga demo scene. The official UK PS magazine even included Net Yaroze indie games on their monthly demo discs.

 

[Thanati]

But of course, without Nintendo, Sony probably would never even have entered the home console market in the first place, so this isn't really a viable argument as to why the PS1 should be considered more transformative (in terms of mainstream appeal) than the PS2.

I think some of you are giving the PS1 a little too much credit for what I'd call a "natural evolution", more than being "transformative". In their infancy video games were more heavily marketed towards kids, and then as these kids grew up of course the industry recognized that there's money to be made there as well. It's not like there weren't any edgy or "adult" games prior to the PS1 (or that they didn't try to market to them), it's just that there weren't enough people in that age bracket to make it matter. Sony didn't solve that problem, that problem solved itself with kids getting older and growing tired of Mario. In lots of ways, that's an evolution that we are still seeing today.

The PS2 is kinda different in that way because of, again, quantification. Wasn't the PS2 only outsold recently by the Switch? That's just bonkers.

Obviously I don't want to downplay the cultural impact the PS1 absolutely had, and Sony did a phenomenal job with their marketing. They were at the right place at the right time and they played their hand perfectly, both the system and the company deserve credit for that, absolutely. I just think the PS2 did that same thing again, but MUCH bigger. The NES did something similar, but earlier. So I just don't see why the PS1 specifically should be considered THE MOST transformative.

But you're making a lot of good points, and once you get into the details of it (like we currently are) my earlier point becomes a lot more salient: It's a silly question to begin with.

Agreed.

What the Plystation did though was make gaming something “cool” and that’s huge.

The NES was phenomenally popular, beyond of a shadow of a doubt but it was still seen as a kid-thing. Now, the SNES on the other hand was a much bigger step and I would argue that this brought Nintendo out from the “kid only” aspect but it still had that stigma with it.

When Sony launched the PlayStation, it came with the CD ROM. This doesn’t sound that impactful but people were using CD’s to listen to music and having this medium being used as two devices was actually really impactful; people could associate with it.

And the music aspect was huge for the PlayStation. We had popular music bands now actively promoting the console in their music videos and bands wanting to create music for it. We also had sports personalities saying things like, “yeah, I play that on the weekend on my PlayStation”.

Then there’s the name itself. NES (Nintendo Entertainment System) (followed by the Super version). Sure, Sega had the Genesis (Megadrive) in the Europe but they also sound very kid-orientated. PlayStation is an interesting compound of words that immediately implies what it does but again, in a cool way.

What Sony did with the PlayStation was make gaming a cultural thing and made it so that adults felt good playing this thing with their mates. It had cool characters, followed the trends, actually no, it made the trends, got popular music on board and made it a communal device that the others simply didn’t do. You now had a device in people’s living rooms and not the bedroom of the kids.

That’s a huge impact right there.

 

[noob smokes]

Ps1 was the 1st serious adult console games like re1 & mgs1 opened up the barrier for casual adults to get in to the gaming scene

 

[cinnamonandgravy]

I don't think that PS1 particularly extended the market to adults. The MegaDrive was already clearly targeting this audience.

ps1 was the first console to really get the attention of teenagers around me.
prior to that, consoles were for kiddos (sega was trying to get the "cool" kids--most teenagers/adults didnt bite).

sony's reputation at the time also played a key role--they were regarded as a high end electronics producer, which made teenagers/adults look at the PS1 more seriously. plus, you know, discs... discs made it look high end too, because CD players werent super cheap back then. same with the huge emphasis on 3d. very forward-looking and premium.

but the thing that transformed gaming the most?
not sure what it is, but dont think it was the ps1.

 

[John Wick]

Let's put aside the fact for a moment that it's a futile endeavour to try to single out one "thing" that changed gaming the "most", you could make a much better argument for "online" to be that thing. Hell, you could probably make a better argument for "home consoles" being that thing, seeing how gaming would probably not gone very far if it had been stuck at the arcade.

So this is both a very stupid question as well as a pretty stupid answer.

It's not stupid at all. PSX bought gaming to the mainstream.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

PS1 was the perfect storm.
It rode the wave of the emerging 3D polygon graphics that Sega had already taken to the next level in the arcades.
It rode the wave of the relatively new CD-ROM tech to do more than just grainy full-motion video.
It was less expensive than any other CD-based competitor in the race of new gaming hardware.
It had the support of publishers tired of Nintendo’s control and royalties.
It benefited immensely from Sony’s marketing savvy. Sega and Nintendo believed they could just announce new hardware and their existing fans would follow. 3DO and such believed you’d just need to show hardware that looked like something an adult man would not be embarrassed to have under his TV, slap a “this plays CDs!” label onto it, and people would want one. Sony? They went all in with crazy ads that made a lasting sensation. They weren’t selling you games, they were selling you the future - and in the 90s, people could still dream about the future.
It bridged gaming generations in genius ways. Namco let you play Galaga and Galaxian while the main game was loading onto the system’s RAM. Imagine a 70’s kid, now an adult who has long left video games behind, seeing their son playing that and thinking back to the fun days of early arcades. Maybe they give it a go too, memories rushing back. Then Ridge Racer starts and it’s the most mind-bending “show me how far gaming has come” moment you could arrange for anyone.
Sony also understood pricing very well. The system went progressively down in price, and old games would keep getting released in a “Greatest Hits” selection for a significantly lower price.
Most of all, PS1 had the games. Mature-looking western games that made the system interesting to people who were never into Japanese aestethics and themes and gameplay, and then Japan got into the groove with stuff like Resident Evil and they also published the best JRPGs on the PS1.

Sure, when they launched, it was a gamble. The market has so much new stuff to offer to gamers and newcomers alike, and Sony were outsiders. We tend to forget that PlayStation had to prove itself, that it took it a couple of years to really take off and start offering games that you simply couldn’t play anywhere else. It didn’t look like the clear winner right from the get-go. Sony played all their cards incredibly well, but it wasn’t until 1996 that the gap really started widening. After that, well, it’s undeniable that it changed things forever.

 

[Celine]

I'm not disputing that the PS1 brought gaming to a wider audience, but so did the NES. And then, when discussing what "thing" changed gaming "the most", you obviously need to factor in quantification. Yes, the PS1 did bring gaming to a wider audience. Wider than the PS2 though? This gets murky, quickly.

To add to your point, I'd wager PS1 strongest contribution to exapanding (console) gaming population was geographical (in european countries and other smaller markets) more than the age groups.
I mean the average game players age was naturally increasing simply due to the constant accumulation trend continually building up (the youth of yesterday is the adult of tomorrow).
Like every cultural revolution embraced at first by the youth that had an enduring legacy, with time the age of adopters is bound to grow and its cultural relevancy is bound to cement and be accepted by the mainstream (once the kids become the new parents) despite being challenged and ridiculed in the early phases by the then establishment.

Console sales by macro-region break down:

NES
Japan: 19.3M
America: 34M
Other: 8.6M

PS1
Japan: 21.6M
America: 40.8M
Other: 40.1M

In U.S. and Japan which were and still are the two biggest console markets in the World, NES had already built up a consumer base close to what PS1 would achieve.
It was in Europe where PS1, coupled with the Game Boy, enlarged the gaming population to new heights.

1st console to sell more than 100m. units

The first console to break the 100M threshold was the Game Boy.

 

[ReBurn]

To add to your point, I'd wager PS1 strongest contribution to exapanding (console) gaming population was geographical (in european countries and other smaller markets) more than the age groups.
I mean the average game players age was naturally increasing simply due to the constant accumulation trend continually building up (the youth of yesterday is the adult of tomorrow).
Like every cultural revolution embraced at first by the youth that had an enduring legacy, with time the age of adopters is bound to grow and its cultural relevancy is bound to cement and be accepted by the mainstream (once the kids become the new parents) despite being challenged and ridiculed in the early phases by the then establishment.

Console sales by macro-region break down:

NES
Japan: 19.3M
America: 34M
Other: 8.6M

PS1
Japan: 21.6M
America: 40.8M
Other: 40.1M

In U.S. and Japan which were and still are the two biggest console markets in the World, NES had already built up a consumer base close to what PS1 would achieve.
It was in Europe where PS1, coupled with the Game Boy, enlarged the gaming population to new heights.

Europe was kind of a different case. During the NES days Europe favored home computers over consoles. By the time PS1 dropped the PC market had homogenized behind IBM clones and consoles had already started increasing in popularity in Europe as a result. It wasn't just what Sony had accomplished in Europe, it was also the home computers Europe used for gaming disappearing in the clumsy early days of modern PC gaming.

 

[Sooner]

PlayStation, as a whole, is one of mankind's top 3 or 4 greatest achievements in its entire history.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

From the perspective of a third party publisher it is easy to see why he chose that - Sony actually treated third parties like trusted and equal partners and did everything in their power to help them succeed. Like the complete opposite of how Nintendo treated them, and the results speak for themselves.

For instance people say it was CDs that swayed FFVII onto the PlayStation, but equally if not more important was the favorable licensing agreement terms Sony have them.

Sony wanted the industry to grow. And they did it.