Blob said:
estebxx said:
Intrinsic said:
What pushed the PS1 more was variety. And it pretty much shaped the core of what is sony first party today. The PS was a mascotless console, not cause it didn't have notable characters but cause it had lots of notable characters in many different genres.
When I thin or remember the PS1, I don't just think of FF7/MGS. I think , Cloud, Squall, Ashely Riot, Snake, Crash, whatever car is on the GT cover, Spyro, Gabriel Logan, Musashi, wipeout, tony hawk, tekken, RE, silent hill.....etc.
There were lots of reasons to buy a PS. |
Agree, variety is PS strength and one of the reasons why they fullfil my gaming needs better than the competition, on PS you can find games from the biggest american AAA exclusives or multiplats like Farcry 4 and Uncharted/The Last of US to the most niche japanese games like the Neptunia games, the Tales games, Disgaea etc, plus Sony is also always focused on creating new IPs (and thats another thing i love), thats part of the reason why they dont have "mascots" because most of their IPs only last one gen or two, since they focus more on making new and interesting games.
|
Erm what? If sony owned spyro and crash you better beleive we'd be getting games from them. What do you think rachet, jak and sly were trying to replace on the ps2?
On topic: Final fantasy for sure. I remember some people posting some information about how the ps1s sales wern't overly impressive until it showed up.
|
what are you talking about? i never even mentioned crash or spyro... im only saying that Sony is focused on making new games every gen which is undeniably truth, just look at all the new exclusives the PS3 got, and now the PS4 is also getting a lot of new exclusive IPs Knack, The Order 1886, Driveclub and Bloodborne.
Edit: i tink you were trying to reply to Intrinsic not to me... i may have agreed with him in the overall point but i never said that crash or spyro were owned by sony...
