k Oni. If I'm wrong, I will man up.

The games and their makers:

Coolboarders was made by UEP Systems, and published by SCE.

Jet Moto was made by SingleTrack (now part of Infogrames), and published by SCE.

Wipeout was made by Psygnosis and was also released on the PC and on the Saturn. They are now part of Sony as of 1993 (2 years before the PSX west launch).

Xtreme games was made by SCEA. 1 game

Parappa the Rapper was made by NanaOn-Sha and published by SCE.

Now for the other two

Jumping Flash was made by Exact Co., Ltd. and Ultra Co., Ltd. and published by SCE.

Twisted Metal was made by Single Track in development, and completed by SCEA in production, and published by SCE.

1 game Oni.

EDIT:

"YOU said that they had not internally developed games from the start I just showed you five that said they did."

I don't remember saying that. As far as my memory goes, the Playstation launched with Battle Arena Toshiden. I was just saying that people weren't buying it for that, but for 3rd party games and that 1st party offering at launch and early on was 0 (but I was exaggerating... sorry, I meant virtually 0). And I meant internally developed... I was unclear there, so for being unclear, sorry.

If TM was finished by SCE then that would count. As for people not buying it for those games. WHy would they?? That makes no sense. Ninty and Sega had multiple gaming systems made at this point. With multiple franchises, lets be reaslistic, were you expecting SOny to just have butt loads of internally developed games from just there first console?? Especially since said console was intended to be an add-on and they had one dev team? The fact that they slammed Ninty and Sega so soundly makes that console all the more impressive IMHO

The Wii is not a gimmick, if you think it is, than you don't know the meaning of the word.
The definition of 'gimmick':

gim·mick (gmk)
n.
1.
a. A device employed to cheat, deceive, or trick, especially a mechanism for the secret and dishonest control of gambling apparatus.
b. An innovative or unusual mechanical contrivance; a gadget.
2.
a. An innovative stratagem or scheme employed especially to promote a project: an advertising gimmick.
b. A significant feature that is obscured, misrepresented, or not readily evident; a catch.
3. A small object whose name does not come readily to mind.
tr.v. gim·micked, gim·mick·ing, gim·micks
1. To add gimmicks to; clutter with gadgets or attention-getting details. Often used with up.
2. To change or affect by means of a gimmick.

Why is the Wii not a gimmick? Because of 1b and 2b. The motion controls of the Wii are not an unnecessary feature, they are not 'tacked-on'. They are integral to the experience of the device. Which is why motion controls in Wii games that are completely built around it, like Wii Sports and Skyward Sword, are not gimmicks.

If you say the Wii is a gimmick, than the so-called 'multimedia hub' on the PS3 and also the X360 is certainly also, a gimmick.

----
Anyway, to go back on-topic.

I don't think Skyward Sword is the 'worst' Zelda I've played, not by a long shot. But I do agree with some of the others that it falls short compared to most of the other 3D Zelda offerings. Ocarina of Time will likely always be my #1, and of the 3D Zeldas I at least like Twilight Princess better than Skyward Sword. I'm not yet sure about wether or not I like it better than Majora's Mask, but I do like it better than Wind Waker. Which I feel is the weakest of the 3D Zeldas (which doesn't mean it's my least favorite Zelda or a bad game, there's still most of the 2D and 2.5D Zelda games below Wind Waker).

What I feel Skyward Sword lacks is, like others pointed out, the overworld. I don't like the 'stage'-setup of it, it takes away from the exploration and makes the world feel small instead of big which was the developer's intention. This is my biggest gripe against the game and it costs the game major points in my book. Another thing is that I find the dungeons severely lacking in length compared to other games, there were way too few interesting enemies and the music is mostly unmemorable.

People were also complaining about Ganondorf being in Twilight Princess, that his role was too little, but then with Skyward Sword we get this final boss which doesn't have anything else to do with the story than the five minutes it's alive. I'd take Ganondorf any day. I do like how this boss' legacy appears to 'create' Ganondorf in the other games.

With that said, I thought the story was interesting enough. We saw how the Master Sword came to be, what it's true function is and why only Link is always able to find it. We also saw, well it's implied anyway, how the Kingdom of Hyrule was founded and why they worship the Triforce. The only thing really, is like I said, the addition of Ghirahim's master. They could have done a lot more there and simultaneously lengthen the game a little. And yes, there was indeed the plothole where the point of Link continuing to follow Zelda around seemed moot, but oh well.

I will never speak bad of the control scheme however, that's probably the best thing to ever happen to the franchise. Personally I'm always open to new control schemes, I liked the Stylus control of Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks too, so the motion plus scheme is absolutely perfect. This is why I was constantly reminded about the lack of enemy variety, this game would have been perfect for some fight against Darknuts or Iron Knuckles.

At least the Stalfos were in there.

All in all I wouldn't be so harsh on it as the OP. It still was the best game of last year for me, but then again I thought it was slim pickings if you ask me. I was still greatly entertained, but I'm also entertained with the 'bad' Zelda games, except Four Swords perhaps...

I'm mostly saying that if PSX didn't have 3rd party devs, the Playstation line would be an absolute disaster.

As for their ability to make games, a bit of going to the books gave this.

The Super CD was in the works since 1988. Nintendo was able to come up with a system and a boatload of games in a very short period of time with the NES. I agree, it's the NES and games were less resource intensive, but so also were teams smaller. Plus, this is Sony we're talking about.

The NES came out with a plethora of games and new IPs, you should see this page for some. That's just one studio.

When you compare to Nintendo, Sony did peanuts on the software front, in house. Legend of Legaia was made by Contrail I don't even think that started out as Sony. Legend of Dragoon was made by SCEI so that's clean, but it was launched in 1999.

A game finished by Sony is "acceptable" at most in terms of comparing volume. Ultimately that's how it is. I'd see it differently if there was another way to see it, especially when the company in question wasn't 1st party (2nd party) to begin with.

The only point of all this is that S.T.A.G.E. was trying to tell me that Sony was the natural evolution to Nintendo, but I countered that with 2 points:

1) It's the 3rd parties that made Sony's success during the PSX era there is no doubt there.

2) Yamuachi was interested in CD technology, until Sony left a bitter taste in his mouth.

In the end, I believe that Nintendo had it coming to them. They made lots of mistakes in their attitude in the business. It had nothing to do with tech and skill, it had everything to do with the character of the man leading the company at the time: Hiroshi Yamauchi. So telling me that PSX is the natural evolution to Nintendo is horribly wrong, and desperately revisionistic.

The PSX is the tech meant for Nintendo, the tech Nintendo knew was the natural evolution to Nintendo. Thank goodness for Kutaragi getting Sony to join in on the gaming industry or I would've eventually left. For those who are fans of Microsoft they can thank Sony dominance in creating the best tech/multimedia gaming device for Microsoft joining. Thats the reason why Microsoft themselves joined...not for gaming.

As I said, Nintendo was interested in CD tech, and that would have been their direction had Sony not blocked them. Do you get what I mean?

Sure, Sony brought in some multimedia gimmicks, but who cares about those, not gamers. Those are "good-to-haves", things to draw appeal but are a side-dish, gimmicks.

The PSX is the Super CD Nintendo would have built had Sony not tried to screw them from the backdoor.

Who knows where Nintendo would have been by now had that not happened? But anyways, to blame was Yamauchi himself, who became much too arrogant for his own good. At first his arrogance was his success after he got rid of almost all his father's prospective successors, but when it came to 3rd parties and people with who you needed to play fair, he got a good lesson I think he never forgot, and helped Nintendo swallow a good dose of humble pie.

Now it's Sony's turn. Natural evolution my friend, or what you would call the law of "What goes around comes around".

Multimedia isn't a gimmick, it isn't a novelty. It's a product people actually make use of on a daily basis and Sony and Microsoft knew it would take over the home eventually because thats the evolution of tech. If thats a gimmick then so is a home computer, Blackberry, Ipod, tablets and things like that. People seriously use in their house and have actual use. I haven't bought a stand-alone Blu Ray because of the PS3 even though its old, it still works and I can put my files on it from my computer. Gimmicks need to prove themselves in a market, gaming consoles once real tech companies joined the gaming industry were always meant to evolve.

-Nintendo always came out with gimmicks and family friendly games. 

-Sony came with tech and formats.

-Microsoft came with online.

The biggest  evolution 

From a tecchie perspective yes. From a gaming perspecive, the pyramid is reversed.

Weak-Sony always came out with tech and formats gimmicks.

Ok - Microsoft came with the complete online solution.

#1 - Nintendo made games and new game inputs

 SONY ONLY MAKES GIMMICKS

NINTENDO IS AWESOME

And that, my friend

is a pissing

contest.

GJ

.

Question...is your DVD player in your house a gimmick? Just asking.