By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Why was the PS1 so successful despite being a newcomer?

I think the biggest factor was Sony being such a gigantic conglomerate at the time. They had their hands in music, movies, electronics, television. They had the marketing dollars, clout, and a distribution network that permeated a huge chunk of the globe. I think having such a huge global presence also helped persuade 3rd parties.



Around the Network
Leynos said:
chakkra said:

You say that, but it really is hard to imagine that a newcomer would just come out today and outsell the PS5 and Switch out of the gate.

Well, it's been pointed out before Sony wasn't actually a newcomer. They had been dealing with SEGA and Nintendo for years in both hardware and software prior to PS1. Microsoft was not a newcomer either. From the MSX in Japan in the 80s. From PC gaming to working with SEGA on Dreamcast and then using DC's in focus tests for Xbox. (hell,XB was almost BC with DC games) Nintendo had arcade experience. Game & Watch. Pong clones. SEGA had arcades. So each console maker had a warm-up period before entering console gaming.

Google Stadia does not understand it's the audience. It was created by executives with no knowledge or interest in gaming. Google had no real experience. They hired the Vince Russo of console launches with Phil Harrison to be in charge and yet wonder why it struggles lol. For context. Vince Russo destroyed wrestling companies like WCW and TNA. Phil Harrison helped with the disastrous launch of PS3, Xbox One, and now Stadia. Only after Phil left Sony and MS did things start to improve.

But still, at this point in time Nvidia, Intel, AMD, Atari, Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, etc, have all had experience in gaming before, but it is still hard to imagine that any of them would release a full-on gaming console next year and it would manage to outsell the others out of the gate.



Leynos said:
chakkra said:

You say that, but it really is hard to imagine that a newcomer would just come out today and outsell the PS5 and Switch out of the gate.

Well, it's been pointed out before Sony wasn't actually a newcomer. They had been dealing with SEGA and Nintendo for years in both hardware and software prior to PS1. Microsoft was not a newcomer either. From the MSX in Japan in the 80s. From PC gaming to working with SEGA on Dreamcast and then using DC's in focus tests for Xbox. (hell,XB was almost BC with DC games) Nintendo had arcade experience. Game & Watch. Pong clones. SEGA had arcades. So each console maker had a warm-up period before entering console gaming.

Google Stadia does not understand it's the audience. It was created by executives with no knowledge or interest in gaming. Google had no real experience. They hired the Vince Russo of console launches with Phil Harrison to be in charge and yet wonder why it struggles lol. For context. Vince Russo destroyed wrestling companies like WCW and TNA. Phil Harrison helped with the disastrous launch of PS3, Xbox One, and now Stadia. Only after Phil left Sony and MS did things start to improve.

Sony hadn’t made a home console prior to the PS1, so yeah, Sony was a newcomer to the home console market.



Hynad said:
Leynos said:

Well, it's been pointed out before Sony wasn't actually a newcomer. They had been dealing with SEGA and Nintendo for years in both hardware and software prior to PS1. Microsoft was not a newcomer either. From the MSX in Japan in the 80s. From PC gaming to working with SEGA on Dreamcast and then using DC's in focus tests for Xbox. (hell,XB was almost BC with DC games) Nintendo had arcade experience. Game & Watch. Pong clones. SEGA had arcades. So each console maker had a warm-up period before entering console gaming.

Google Stadia does not understand it's the audience. It was created by executives with no knowledge or interest in gaming. Google had no real experience. They hired the Vince Russo of console launches with Phil Harrison to be in charge and yet wonder why it struggles lol. For context. Vince Russo destroyed wrestling companies like WCW and TNA. Phil Harrison helped with the disastrous launch of PS3, Xbox One, and now Stadia. Only after Phil left Sony and MS did things start to improve.

Sony hadn’t made a home console prior to the PS1, so yeah, Sony was a newcomer to the home console market.

You are not understanding what is being said but then again probably just wanting to argue again so meh.



Bite my shiny metal cockpit!

Hynad said:

Final Fantasy VII

This. Playstation was completely out of my mind until I learned that one of my favorite series was going to appear exclusively on PS1. I rented the console and FFVII for a weekend, played like a madman during those two days and the deal was done. I needed to buy a Playstation ASAP!



Signature goes here!

Around the Network

Playstation was successful for three key reasons:

1. Pricing competitiveness. When Sega Saturn announced their price of $399, Playstation undercut them by selling it at $299 (despite them initially planning for a $399 launch). Before Nintendo entered the scene they dropped the price again to $199. The cost of games was also very minimal. Many games cost $40-$50 new. Some even cost $30, and prices dropped more significantly. Meanwhile, N64 game prices were at least $60 and some as high as $80 or $90. Playstation was cheap for all consumers.

2. Ease for developers. Not only was the Playstation hardware easier to develop for than both the N64 and Saturn, but Playstation had little restriction for publishers on their console. This was much different than years previous where Nintendo had very high restrictions and limited/censored content for audiences.

3. Marketing. Playstation was a marketing beast. There were many different slogans, mascots, etc. The image was both kid friendly and "mature". They were edgy and casual, it was a perfect balance. Hundreds of millions went into marketing the Playstation. In just the UK a hundred thousand was used just in impromptu marketing each year...that's in one small region for specific marketing...every year. I don't have data for the entirety of the Playstation era, but I'd be willing to bet it was upwards of $500 million dollars on the very low end.



Leynos said:
Hynad said:

Sony hadn’t made a home console prior to the PS1, so yeah, Sony was a newcomer to the home console market.

You are not understanding what is being said but then again probably just wanting to argue again so meh.

I understand that when the OP mentions “first foray into the game industry”, he means it as a console maker. This is made obvious by what he elaborates afterwards.



javi741 said:

To those who lived and experienced the 90s, when did you first hear about PlayStation and what made you immediately trust Sony with the PS1 enough to buy one? And did you skip out on the N64 for the PS1?

I had a Sega Megadrive and I sold it along with my Sega games to pick up a PS1. The reason I did this was because my buddy had a PS1 and he had Digimon World, and I wanted that too. That's all there was to it for me.

I didn't know which company made what console at the time, I didn't think about things like that. Similarly the entire concept of a console generation was alien to me.



Because of price and games



REQUIESCAT IN PACE

I Hate REMASTERS

I Hate PLAYSTATION PLUS

1) cheaper to produce games for.
2) 3D graphics.
3) money hatting publishers.
4) developers and publishers freedom to do what they wanted.