Sunday, March 14, 2004
2,043 word rebuttal
Well, what kind of a man would I be if I didn't offer a rebuttal to Tom's lunatic rant? And like a good parent, I'm not angry - just disappointed.
Anyhow, regarding PSM's list. The intro paragraph to the list ends with "Here are our top picks for the 10 best PlayStation game franchises of all time." They don't say "Here is our list of games that have appeared exclusively for the PS1 or PS2." All but one of the games on the list are either literally exclusive, or are considered exclusive by most for all intents and purposes. And even if the game began on another system (which PSM gives a nod to, obviously), they have all defined themselves and found a home on the PlayStation. They are now definitively PlayStation franchises, regardless of where they started or where they're heading or where they made an appearance on. Whether I agree or not with the game choices and ranking for the list (more on that later), they are all completely relevant and are all eligible for a list such as this.
10. "Ridge Racer first made it's jump to multiplatform four years ago with Ridge Racer 64. And don't forget about R: Racing Evolution released for all three systems just last year."
Ridge Racer might have appeared for a one-game stint on the N64, but was defined by Ridge Racer Type 4 on the PS1, and refined in the PS2 launch title Ridge Racer V. And as anyone familiar with the series will tell you, R: Racing Revolution was not part of the Ridge Racer series, it is a separate franchise altogether.
09. "Next up is Tekken. This, it could be argued, is pretty much exclusive. All five major titles have been released for the PSX or PS2. But, then there's that one game: Tekken Advance. Not really exclusive if it's on a Nintendo system as well, eh?"
Well, there were two Zelda games for the CD-i as I remember. One of which is widely considered one of the worst, if not THE worst game ever, mind you. So I suppose Zelda isn't really a Nintendo exclusive series either. Oh, and Mario taught me how to type once on my computer. See how ridiculous this criteria makes things?
08. "Tony Hawk's Pro Skater has appeared on everything from the PC to the N-Gage and the Dreamcast. Not an exclusive."
Yes, Tony Hawk has generally been released on most systems. But the first game debuted on the PS1, and the resulting fuss made the franchise what it is today. And Tony Hawk 3 (and 4 if I recall) both had limited exclusivity periods. Not to mention online gameplay, a big part of the series now, is only available on the PS2. The PlayStation made gaming mainstream, and the THPS series made skating mainstream. No matter how good of a game it was, it wouldn't have caused much of a fuss on a system with a 10 million installed user base.
07. "SSX: Tricky was actually a Gamecube launch title way back in the day."
The series launched on the PS2, and helped make the launch a success. The sequels have indeed seen release on the other consoles, but the PlayStation still carries the defining version (online play, etc.). This is a close one, but this game is so synonymous with the Playstation that I'm not going to let it slide.
06. "Resident Evil 0 was a Gamecube exclusive and Resident Evil 4 will be as well."
In Nintendo's struggle to get decent exclusive non first-party titles they signed an exclusivity agreement with Capcom for a couple of games. They ended up rereleasing three RE titles that were three years old at the minimum (eons in the console business), and managed to get an original game out of it with 0. And I seriously doubt RE4 will stay Gamecube exclusive. Look what happened to Viewtiful Joe. Anyhow, the series has always been on PlayStation first and foremost, and defined a genre now mimicked in countless other games, exclusive and non-exclusive alike across all of the consoles. And I don't think that literal exclusivity means much when a game is released for another platform a year or more later, because it's not competing sales-wise across the board. Same thing for GTA. Alas, I'm getting ahead of myself.
05. "Metal Gear Solid is another obvious example. The first in the Solid series was just re-released for the Gamecube. And don't forget, the series originated on the NES and MSX in 1987."
As I said, PSM respectfully acknowledges that Metal Gear began elsewhere, in a different, gentler time. Though I hardly think this should be taken into consideration considering it picked up again ELEVEN YEARS LATER on the PlayStation. There has never been an original game in the series for another system since then, and the rereleases/remakes have all happened ages after the originals, so as I said, they're not competing. And MGS3 (the most creative, freshest-looking action game I have seen in ages) is only being released on the PS2 this year.
04. "Ok, John Madden Football has been on just about every system."
Indeed. All I can say about this is the same thing I said about Tony Hawk. This series came into it's own because it became mainstream, and the PlayStation made gaming mainstream. But yeah, besides online play (sucks to be you, Microsoft) this one is not exclusive by any means.
03. "Grand Theft Auto was released on the Xbox last year."
A little over a year later, everyone who wanted to own Vice City owned Vice City. Not that it didn't still sell well, but it had been a cultural icon and the malicious addiction of gamers for quite a while already. GTA is Sony's biggest 'exclusive gun', and San Andreas will be no different this year.
02. No Comment.
Gran Turismo has always been completely literally PlayStation exclusive.
01. "And, of course, Final Fantasy has been on every Nintendo system minus the N64 and Virtual Boy."
Final Fantasy VII was the first 3D traditional RPG as far as I know, was treated as quite the revolution in gaming, and has gone on to sell at least eight billion copies. All the FF games since have turned into gaming icons, and made the series one of the few that can compete with Mario. And none of them have been on any other systems, save for a couple of drastically different offshoots. And it's going to stay that way for quite a while I imagine. It's a PlayStation series now, deal with it.
So, you see, whether they are literally exclusive by definition, or released years later on other platforms or remade or bought out or whatever, these games are more than considered "PlayStation game franchises." If you really want to get into technicalities, we can go there too. As I said, Zelda (CD-i) and Mario (PC, Arcade, Atari) have both been released for other platforms. And what about X-box? Well, Halo and KOTOR are both PC games now (superior ones, no less), and Crimson Skies started as a PC game. The only significant one I can think of is Panzer Dragoon Orta, but that's hardly a system seller.
The games I would have liked to see on PSMs list, you ask? Why, how thoughtful of you. Well, it's a shame that the Crash Bandicoot series kinda blew on PS2, because all the PS1 iterations were fucking solid gold. Twisted Metal would have been nice, but then again, two of the games in the series sucked like three miles of cock. The Jak and Ratchet series are both great, but with only two games each it's tough to consider them franchises quite yet (each series on PSM's list has a minimum of 3 titles released on a Sony console, with most having 5+). Castlevania: SOTN is one of my top five favorite games ever, and LOI is cool from what I've played, but they're a bit too spread out. Red Faction and Timesplitters would both be solid entries too (Timesplitters moreso for originality), as would Colony Wars had a PS2 sequel ever been made. The Silent Hill games have been fucking phenomenal when I've gotten up the courage to play them. Also, props to Ace Combat, Medal of Honor and Parappa, it's too bad none of them received PS2 sequels that did the originals justice. Top three, I would have to say MGS, FF, GTA, in descending order.
It's true though, since 1995 Sony has been unable to produce a Mario-caliber mascot. But you know what? I fucking loved my PlayStation. And now I fucking love my PS2. And I'll "settle" for Metal Gear Solid. I'll "settle" for Grand Theft Auto. I'll "settle" for Final Fantasy. Saying that non-exclusive content is what Sony has brought to the industry is just ignorant. You wouldn't even see a fucking X-Box if Sony didn't pave the way into the industry for companies that don't typically make consoles. And clinging to exclusive content is exactly why your precious ultra-superior Nintendo is in hot water right now. Releasing one great game on a system every six months isn't exactly what I'd call a clever business plan. Nintendo wants to sell their systems based solely on exclusive content, and it just doesn't work that way. They need to encourage other people to make games on their system by providing support for things consumers want, such as, I dunno, online play. Exclusive content is their downfall at the moment. And Mr. Tom "Exclusive Content" McNintendo here didn't even play through Metroid Prime or Wind Waker (and if you did play through Mario Sunshine, you can't tell me it was the ride of your life). But we've been over this before.
You say that without a strong in-house development team Sony can't succeed. Well, the only system lagging behind right now is the one with the strong in-house development team. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing to have on your side, because it's obviously not, but encouraging other people to make games for your system, even publishing them, is infinitely more important.
As far as the next generation of systems, the only thing I know for sure is that Sony will come out on top. And I'm not saying that because I'm a fan boy, or because I want them to, I'm saying it based on my educated opinion. Even Microsoft has said that they plan to pull ahead in the next NEXT generation. I don't think a company with hundred of billions of dollars to spend would be shooting for second place if they thought they had a shot at the top spot.
I agree that Sony and Microsoft will launch similarly powerful systems at a similar time, and that Nintendo will launch their next system without any extra doodads. You say that "right now, it doesn't look like Sony has the exclusive firepower of Nintendo, and it seems like MS is still more eager to purchase series/developers to make games their own." Nintendo's 'exclusive firepower' hasn't even been competing with games like Enter the Matrix lately, and unless they get a little more prolific the next time around or drastically alter their plans I see them being a lock for third place. And Microsoft can buy all the companies they want; it hasn't really helped them this time around outside of Bungie. You also say that the PS2 launching a year earlier made all the difference last time around. Well, you know what's going to make the difference this time around? No, not exclusive software. No, not less gadgets and functionality out of the box (stupid Nintendo). Correct answer: It will be the 26 million and counting PS2s in people's living rooms (just in North America, and not including 75+ million PS1s worldwide) staring them in the face, as well as their 312 million and counting games (PS2 alone). Side note: Microsoft isn't planning on backwards compatibility; Sony is. Even if they didn't have one exclusive title at launch they'd sell out everywhere just based on name recognition; people trust them, as well they should.
After all, 100 million PlayStation fans can't be wrong, can they? :-P
Anyhow, regarding PSM's list. The intro paragraph to the list ends with "Here are our top picks for the 10 best PlayStation game franchises of all time." They don't say "Here is our list of games that have appeared exclusively for the PS1 or PS2." All but one of the games on the list are either literally exclusive, or are considered exclusive by most for all intents and purposes. And even if the game began on another system (which PSM gives a nod to, obviously), they have all defined themselves and found a home on the PlayStation. They are now definitively PlayStation franchises, regardless of where they started or where they're heading or where they made an appearance on. Whether I agree or not with the game choices and ranking for the list (more on that later), they are all completely relevant and are all eligible for a list such as this.
10. "Ridge Racer first made it's jump to multiplatform four years ago with Ridge Racer 64. And don't forget about R: Racing Evolution released for all three systems just last year."
Ridge Racer might have appeared for a one-game stint on the N64, but was defined by Ridge Racer Type 4 on the PS1, and refined in the PS2 launch title Ridge Racer V. And as anyone familiar with the series will tell you, R: Racing Revolution was not part of the Ridge Racer series, it is a separate franchise altogether.
09. "Next up is Tekken. This, it could be argued, is pretty much exclusive. All five major titles have been released for the PSX or PS2. But, then there's that one game: Tekken Advance. Not really exclusive if it's on a Nintendo system as well, eh?"
Well, there were two Zelda games for the CD-i as I remember. One of which is widely considered one of the worst, if not THE worst game ever, mind you. So I suppose Zelda isn't really a Nintendo exclusive series either. Oh, and Mario taught me how to type once on my computer. See how ridiculous this criteria makes things?
08. "Tony Hawk's Pro Skater has appeared on everything from the PC to the N-Gage and the Dreamcast. Not an exclusive."
Yes, Tony Hawk has generally been released on most systems. But the first game debuted on the PS1, and the resulting fuss made the franchise what it is today. And Tony Hawk 3 (and 4 if I recall) both had limited exclusivity periods. Not to mention online gameplay, a big part of the series now, is only available on the PS2. The PlayStation made gaming mainstream, and the THPS series made skating mainstream. No matter how good of a game it was, it wouldn't have caused much of a fuss on a system with a 10 million installed user base.
07. "SSX: Tricky was actually a Gamecube launch title way back in the day."
The series launched on the PS2, and helped make the launch a success. The sequels have indeed seen release on the other consoles, but the PlayStation still carries the defining version (online play, etc.). This is a close one, but this game is so synonymous with the Playstation that I'm not going to let it slide.
06. "Resident Evil 0 was a Gamecube exclusive and Resident Evil 4 will be as well."
In Nintendo's struggle to get decent exclusive non first-party titles they signed an exclusivity agreement with Capcom for a couple of games. They ended up rereleasing three RE titles that were three years old at the minimum (eons in the console business), and managed to get an original game out of it with 0. And I seriously doubt RE4 will stay Gamecube exclusive. Look what happened to Viewtiful Joe. Anyhow, the series has always been on PlayStation first and foremost, and defined a genre now mimicked in countless other games, exclusive and non-exclusive alike across all of the consoles. And I don't think that literal exclusivity means much when a game is released for another platform a year or more later, because it's not competing sales-wise across the board. Same thing for GTA. Alas, I'm getting ahead of myself.
05. "Metal Gear Solid is another obvious example. The first in the Solid series was just re-released for the Gamecube. And don't forget, the series originated on the NES and MSX in 1987."
As I said, PSM respectfully acknowledges that Metal Gear began elsewhere, in a different, gentler time. Though I hardly think this should be taken into consideration considering it picked up again ELEVEN YEARS LATER on the PlayStation. There has never been an original game in the series for another system since then, and the rereleases/remakes have all happened ages after the originals, so as I said, they're not competing. And MGS3 (the most creative, freshest-looking action game I have seen in ages) is only being released on the PS2 this year.
04. "Ok, John Madden Football has been on just about every system."
Indeed. All I can say about this is the same thing I said about Tony Hawk. This series came into it's own because it became mainstream, and the PlayStation made gaming mainstream. But yeah, besides online play (sucks to be you, Microsoft) this one is not exclusive by any means.
03. "Grand Theft Auto was released on the Xbox last year."
A little over a year later, everyone who wanted to own Vice City owned Vice City. Not that it didn't still sell well, but it had been a cultural icon and the malicious addiction of gamers for quite a while already. GTA is Sony's biggest 'exclusive gun', and San Andreas will be no different this year.
02. No Comment.
Gran Turismo has always been completely literally PlayStation exclusive.
01. "And, of course, Final Fantasy has been on every Nintendo system minus the N64 and Virtual Boy."
Final Fantasy VII was the first 3D traditional RPG as far as I know, was treated as quite the revolution in gaming, and has gone on to sell at least eight billion copies. All the FF games since have turned into gaming icons, and made the series one of the few that can compete with Mario. And none of them have been on any other systems, save for a couple of drastically different offshoots. And it's going to stay that way for quite a while I imagine. It's a PlayStation series now, deal with it.
So, you see, whether they are literally exclusive by definition, or released years later on other platforms or remade or bought out or whatever, these games are more than considered "PlayStation game franchises." If you really want to get into technicalities, we can go there too. As I said, Zelda (CD-i) and Mario (PC, Arcade, Atari) have both been released for other platforms. And what about X-box? Well, Halo and KOTOR are both PC games now (superior ones, no less), and Crimson Skies started as a PC game. The only significant one I can think of is Panzer Dragoon Orta, but that's hardly a system seller.
The games I would have liked to see on PSMs list, you ask? Why, how thoughtful of you. Well, it's a shame that the Crash Bandicoot series kinda blew on PS2, because all the PS1 iterations were fucking solid gold. Twisted Metal would have been nice, but then again, two of the games in the series sucked like three miles of cock. The Jak and Ratchet series are both great, but with only two games each it's tough to consider them franchises quite yet (each series on PSM's list has a minimum of 3 titles released on a Sony console, with most having 5+). Castlevania: SOTN is one of my top five favorite games ever, and LOI is cool from what I've played, but they're a bit too spread out. Red Faction and Timesplitters would both be solid entries too (Timesplitters moreso for originality), as would Colony Wars had a PS2 sequel ever been made. The Silent Hill games have been fucking phenomenal when I've gotten up the courage to play them. Also, props to Ace Combat, Medal of Honor and Parappa, it's too bad none of them received PS2 sequels that did the originals justice. Top three, I would have to say MGS, FF, GTA, in descending order.
It's true though, since 1995 Sony has been unable to produce a Mario-caliber mascot. But you know what? I fucking loved my PlayStation. And now I fucking love my PS2. And I'll "settle" for Metal Gear Solid. I'll "settle" for Grand Theft Auto. I'll "settle" for Final Fantasy. Saying that non-exclusive content is what Sony has brought to the industry is just ignorant. You wouldn't even see a fucking X-Box if Sony didn't pave the way into the industry for companies that don't typically make consoles. And clinging to exclusive content is exactly why your precious ultra-superior Nintendo is in hot water right now. Releasing one great game on a system every six months isn't exactly what I'd call a clever business plan. Nintendo wants to sell their systems based solely on exclusive content, and it just doesn't work that way. They need to encourage other people to make games on their system by providing support for things consumers want, such as, I dunno, online play. Exclusive content is their downfall at the moment. And Mr. Tom "Exclusive Content" McNintendo here didn't even play through Metroid Prime or Wind Waker (and if you did play through Mario Sunshine, you can't tell me it was the ride of your life). But we've been over this before.
You say that without a strong in-house development team Sony can't succeed. Well, the only system lagging behind right now is the one with the strong in-house development team. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing to have on your side, because it's obviously not, but encouraging other people to make games for your system, even publishing them, is infinitely more important.
As far as the next generation of systems, the only thing I know for sure is that Sony will come out on top. And I'm not saying that because I'm a fan boy, or because I want them to, I'm saying it based on my educated opinion. Even Microsoft has said that they plan to pull ahead in the next NEXT generation. I don't think a company with hundred of billions of dollars to spend would be shooting for second place if they thought they had a shot at the top spot.
I agree that Sony and Microsoft will launch similarly powerful systems at a similar time, and that Nintendo will launch their next system without any extra doodads. You say that "right now, it doesn't look like Sony has the exclusive firepower of Nintendo, and it seems like MS is still more eager to purchase series/developers to make games their own." Nintendo's 'exclusive firepower' hasn't even been competing with games like Enter the Matrix lately, and unless they get a little more prolific the next time around or drastically alter their plans I see them being a lock for third place. And Microsoft can buy all the companies they want; it hasn't really helped them this time around outside of Bungie. You also say that the PS2 launching a year earlier made all the difference last time around. Well, you know what's going to make the difference this time around? No, not exclusive software. No, not less gadgets and functionality out of the box (stupid Nintendo). Correct answer: It will be the 26 million and counting PS2s in people's living rooms (just in North America, and not including 75+ million PS1s worldwide) staring them in the face, as well as their 312 million and counting games (PS2 alone). Side note: Microsoft isn't planning on backwards compatibility; Sony is. Even if they didn't have one exclusive title at launch they'd sell out everywhere just based on name recognition; people trust them, as well they should.
After all, 100 million PlayStation fans can't be wrong, can they? :-P
// posted by Nick @ 2:08 AM 
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]