Quantcast
PlayStation Classic is out & receiving "Do Not Buy" recommendations (did Sony even develop it themselves?) *updated 12/5/18

Forums - Sony Discussion - PlayStation Classic is out & receiving "Do Not Buy" recommendations (did Sony even develop it themselves?) *updated 12/5/18

OTBWY said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:
Do you guys remember what it was like before the NES classic was released? There were these other retro compilation consoles put out by Sega and Atari. They were never really popular though, because the consoles weren't that great. This PS1 is more like those consoles.

You actually had some good ones though, like the C64 clone that wasn't exactly a NES on a chip like the others. You could tweak it to make it work like a normal C64. Besides those few ones, the Atari flashbacks or countless arcade plug & play ones aren't that bad. They were just limited (and cheap). The PS1 mini however, it's not cheap for what it is.

Hmmm...never saw that C64 clone.  I might have to check that one out. 



Around the Network

All these retro systems are trash and this Sony one might be the worse of the bunch. (maybe the Genesis one)



The_Liquid_Laser said:
OTBWY said:

You actually had some good ones though, like the C64 clone that wasn't exactly a NES on a chip like the others. You could tweak it to make it work like a normal C64. Besides those few ones, the Atari flashbacks or countless arcade plug & play ones aren't that bad. They were just limited (and cheap). The PS1 mini however, it's not cheap for what it is.

Hmmm...never saw that C64 clone.  I might have to check that one out. 

It's this one to be more specific.




pokoko said:
RolStoppable said:

Indeed. Not Sony's fault that only now it dawns on people that the PS1 was overrated.

Kind of.  I mean, It wouldn't have been such a smash hit had the competition not been terrible.  Still, hindsight is 20/20 and in reality the PS1 changed the landscape of gaming and allowed it to grow like never before with the greatest library of games ever to hit a console, and by a wide margin.  In that regard, its spot in history is probably underrated.  

Did it really though?  Video gaming was expanding Gen over Gen before Sony's entrance into the market.  Whenever a competitor stumbles, someone always fills more of the void than if there was a healthy environment.  When Atari, Coleco, and Mattel all got hit by the North American Video Game Crash, Nintendo stepped in and absorbed all of their sales, plus whatever part of the market they might have had anyway.  Once Sega got a foothold in the marketplace, the SNES had to split sales with the Genesis that the NES hadn't had to face the previous gen.  But the SNES having less sales than the NES doesn't mean the video game market contracted.  It expanded.  When Nintendo stumbled by sticking to cartridges with the N64, and Sega made their mistakes leading to the Saturn launch, Sony sucked in sales from 2 competitors simultaneously.  It's easy to look at the PlayStation's sales in a vacuum and say "Sony introduced 100 million people to video games that weren't there before", but that's a gross over-estimation of what happened.  Each successive gen has a wider consumer pool of potential sales to go after.  If Nintendo had switched to discs, they wouldn't have lost Square and the Final Fantasy series, among other 3rd party support, and the N64 would have taken back some of the sales it lost to the PlayStation.  If Sega hadn't made the mistakes they made as well, the division of console sales would have been more even among the 3, more like what we saw in the Wii, PS3, Xbox 360 gen just recently.

edit - I also don't think the PlayStation library is dramatically more impressive than the NES library.  Not by a wide margin, or any margin to be honest.

Last edited by Mandalore76 - on 09 November 2018

No surprise there. There's no reason to buy it unless it's for collector value. Just like all the classic/mini consoles.



Around the Network
Megiddo said:
No surprise there. There's no reason to buy it unless it's for collector value. Just like all the classic/mini consoles.

Your personal opinion.  A lot of people buying the other retro systems bought them for use and enjoyment.



RolStoppable said:
twintail said:
They never advertised it as anything else but a working PS1 in a smaller form factor.
And that's what you've got.

Indeed. Not Sony's fault that only now it dawns on people that the PS1 was overrated.

Sorry, but no.  The PS1 was not overrated, it was the best console with the best games in its generation.  This classic is just the greatest example of why these classics are nothing more than collectors items or toys for people who never owned the original consoles and games in the first place.  Not a single classic yet has seemed worth the money for any actual gamer.



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of his first breath to the moment of his last.



dharh said:
RolStoppable said:

Indeed. Not Sony's fault that only now it dawns on people that the PS1 was overrated.

Sorry, but no.  The PS1 was not overrated, it was the best console with the best games in its generation.  This classic is just the greatest example of why these classics are nothing more than collectors items or toys for people who never owned the original consoles and games in the first place.  Not a single classic yet has seemed worth the money for any actual gamer.

Riddled with personal opinions and misconceptions.  Go on Atari Age or YouTube and see how many people buy these mini consoles for actual play, or just to put on a shelf.  And to say that no one who bought one ever played them back in the day, lol.  And then to say that no "actual gamer" would find value in one of them... wow.  It's good to know that you get to classify who is and isn't an "actual gamer".  That must be a hefty burden for you to bear.

If they served no other purpose than just sitting in a collection, no one would complain when a shoddy version of one comes out.  It literally wouldn't matter if the emulation quality was good or bad.  No one would care.  Just because Sony throws a lazily rushed cash grab product into the holiday marketspace doesn't vindicate your belief that all retro consoles are pieces of trash for people you believe are non-gamers.

Last edited by Mandalore76 - on 09 November 2018

Mandalore76 said:
dharh said:

Sorry, but no.  The PS1 was not overrated, it was the best console with the best games in its generation.  This classic is just the greatest example of why these classics are nothing more than collectors items or toys for people who never owned the original consoles and games in the first place.  Not a single classic yet has seemed worth the money for any actual gamer.

Riddled with personal opinions and misconceptions.  Go on Atari Age or YouTube and see how many people buy these mini consoles for actual play, or just to put on a shelf.  And to say that no one who bought one ever played them back in the day, lol.  And then to say that no "actual gamer" would find value in one of them... wow.  It's good to know that you get to classify who is and isn't an "actual gamer".  That must be a hefty burden for you to bear.

If they served no other purpose than just sitting in a collection, no one would complain when a shoddy version of one comes out.  It literally wouldn't matter if the emulation quality was good or bad.  No one would care.  Just because Sony throws a lazily rushed cash grab product into the holiday marketspace doesn't vindicate your belief that all retro consoles are pieces of trash for people you believe are non-gamers.

Yeah of course it's my opinion.  What the hell do you think all this crap is?  Opinions.  IMO if you are satisfied with the NES Classic as anything more than a collectors item or to play some shits and giggles games for a little while you aren't much more than a sunday gamer.  AKA not much of a gamer really.  And yeah, this PS1 classic is the shittiest of a line shitty classics.  It really is nothing more than a PS1 with a crap limited library with an HDMI port slapped onto it.

Though, the fact that the other classics have more than an HDMI port slapped onto it, still don't make them appealing to me.

More opinions.  Please cry more.



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of his first breath to the moment of his last.



Mandalore76 said:
Megiddo said:
No surprise there. There's no reason to buy it unless it's for collector value. Just like all the classic/mini consoles.

Your personal opinion.  A lot of people buying the other retro systems bought them for use and enjoyment.

There could simply be software for the games themselves. See how many 15 to 20 dollar "____ Greatest Hits" collections there are. The software would cost a fraction of the mini console. The mini console itself is useless since it has no operation of a console. It's not a console at all. It's basically software itself. So you are paying $60 - $100 for a fancy dressed "greatest hits" software. So the only reason to buy it is for collector's value. Which is what Sony/Nintendo will exploit its consumers for.