They brought everything you named into once nice $299 package. Great IP's, CD based, mature games, etc. It wasn't one of those things, it was all of them.

And you missed so many IP's like Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Parappa, Gran Turismo, etc.

I agree with you, too.  I think the only thing that saved Sony and their abysmal marketing during the first year (I don't care what ANYBODY SAYS.  They sucked.  They thouhgt THIS was a good idea as a mascot:

But I digress.  The only thing that Sony did was fuck up the least until Final Fantasy VII came along.  Crash Bandicoot was considered worse than Nights Into Dreams and Mario 64, the PS1 hardware was considered weaker than both, and the controller was considered a clunky SNES knock-off.  It was easy to program for and Nintendo/Sega seemed to make one blunder after another.  Sony rose to power and never looked back.

Both Sega and Nintendo were marketing towards the "cool crowd" in the early to mid 90's.  Sony's TV commercials weren't anything that those two weren't doing, either.  I gotta respect Sony for taking the ball and running with it and providing the hands down best experience of the 5th gen, though. 

I think that pretty much sums it up. I think they were a bit arrogant and it was too late to fight back against Sony by the time they realised the PS1 wasn't just going to disappear into obscurity like all their previous rivals had.

Something else people fail to mention about Sony, the PS1 was the console that introduced the whole sell the hardware at a loss for higher penetration and recoup the losses via software sales philosophy. The Saturn was technically inferior (SEGA planned to release a 2D system originally to preserve the arcade ecosystem) and the 3D capabilities were rushed in as a last minute change making it much more difficult to code.

Add in the fact that it cost about 25% more at retail with inferior looking games (Daytona's original release vs Ridge Racer for example) and the PS1 was actually a no brainer to most consumers.

It's funny how much fuss is being made over the technical differences between the PS4 and XBONE now, as they are microscopic in comparison to the PS1 vs the Saturn for the majority of titles.

Sony DID make gaming cool. They also created many gamers. They produced the very first system, that was not about games only, CD player (was big at that time lol)

They had a lot of great games on the console and sold to the masses, PSOne was more succesful than even the Wii was. Surpassed only by the PS2, so far.

Pre launch maybe, but once they were side by side PS1 was obliterating the Saturn.

Don't know about US marketing, but in Europe they nailed it. But Sega and Nintendo treated Europe like satan's spawn and deemed us fit to be thankful for whatever scraps they decided to give us a couple of years after the Japanese and US releases.

That draw distance! For the bargain of £399!

Or this for £299.99...

Sony's games were generally much better optimised for PAL markets. We got far more "full screen" releases. Daytona USA's PAL release was almost widescreen the visuals were so squashed.

The N64 faired better against the PS1 technically, however the usual Nintendo delays meant it hit the market significantly later than the PS1 which by now had already pretty much relegated the Saturn to irrelevance and big name games started hitting the PS1 exclusively (Tomb Raider 2 etc). The N64 launched at £249.99 and had to have a price cut within months to compete with the £199 PS1.

On top of this, N64 games were between £49.99 and £69.99 due to the cartriges and Sony had just introduced a budget game lineup for older titles with it's Platinum Range. The first properly organised "budget" console range in Europe with games at £19.99 meaning the PS1 was also striking a chord with families as being a much more affordable proposition.

Sony got far more right with the PS1 than a lot of people give them credit for, it wasn't just their opponents making mistakes, their relationship with 3rd parties was far more humble and this delivered big exclusives, they delivered hardware at a much more affordable price than their competitors and adopted the razer blade strategy for videogames. It's no wonder the PS1 became the most successful system of all time.

The kids that grew up on NES/SNES era gaming were old enough to buy their own toys, the industry exploded.

Basic competence. SEGA allowed for more violence in the games they licensed for the Mega Drive but the decisions they made regarding the SEGA CD, 32 X and Saturn ensured their exit from the market. So again, SEGA changed the general public's view of gaming years before Sony enetered the market and their failure had nothing to do with public perception and everything to do with flabbergastingly stupid decisions made by SEGA of Japan.

Ridge Racer had ONE track....and they re-released it with R4 years later with higher FPS and better graphics.  I bought 'em both.  But, since I've never played Daytona (or any Saturn game) and have no idea what it looked like in person, I can't really argue.  Side by side videos of the original version of both would help, I guess.  I recall that, at the time, despite being hard to program for, the Saturn was considered superior.  I'm going off of memory, though.  I could be wrong.

*edit* I just looked up a Tomb Raider comparison and it appears the PS1 WAS stronger.  I'll admit defeat on this one.  Wonder why everyone was always saying the PS1 was the weakest, then?  I dunno.

It was actually one location, with several tracks depending on the difficulty you selected, but yeah, Daytona had 3 courses, one being an oval, Manx TT was the same. Back then, a handful of cars and tracks was all that was expected from a 3D racer. Gran Turismo was the real game changer in that regard.

Ridge Racer Revoultion wasn't too far behind with additional tracks, but yeah it was a straight arcade port. This is the big thing that IMO changed about gaming in the PS1/PS2 days. We've shifted from arcade games being what was aimed for in the home, to people wanting much bigger games for their money now.

Look at the thread that was trying to criticise the new Mario game for "only" being 8 hours long.

In the 90s, if it wasn't an RPG, 8 hours was a damn long game.

Sega Rally is my favourite 32bit racer (and still in my top 5 racers of all time) despite only have 4 short tracks, the Saturn port of that was absolutely stunning and I poured hours into that shaving milliseconds off my times. But yeah, if you look at the multi platform titles like Resident Evil, Tomb Raider etc. The PS1 versions are technically far better.

Nintendo dropping the ball with 3rd parties left a huge void that Sony exploited. Sony also had more lax censoring policies which lead to a more mature perception (although the same could be said of SEGA.) They were in the right place at the right time.

Really though, it was ALL about third parties finding a home, no one played the PS1 for Sony 1st party games.... hell, the only ones I can remember owning (off the top of my head) are Parrappa (which I love), Twisted Metal 1 & 2 (also awesome), and Legend of Dragoon (which was only ok in my opinion.)

Mean while, Konami (Metal Gear, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Suikoden), Sqauresoft (FF, Chrono Cross, and so many other JRPGS), Eidos (Tomb Raider, Legacy of Kain at the time, right?) and others provided all the really memorable Playstation experiences. It is one of the reasons Playstation All Stars wasn't a hit.... PS Allstars are largely 3rd party.