-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Does the Playstation Classic prove that Sony has no classics?
- Thread starter Brhoom
- Start date
What?
The PS1 classic has a dog shit selection, but that's not because there wasn't enough choices. The PS1's library is incredible, Sony just didn't put most of the best ones in the package.
The PS1 classic has a dog shit selection, but that's not because there wasn't enough choices. The PS1's library is incredible, Sony just didn't put most of the best ones in the package.
Well there's a time and a place for that, and right now your gifs tilt your "question" into a smug rhetorical where you're fishing for "weak brand" type answers, especially with a baiting, baiting title like that.
Back on topic, reviewing the final list of titles hold many that were generally niche releases. Many on my list either outsold, or were more identifiable to the PS1 brand than what was offered, and when you ask the general public to fork over that kind of cash and they can't recognize a good half of the selection, you're in trouble. Puzzle Fighter, Jumping Flash, Toshinden, Intelligence Cube, Rayman and GTA1 aint turning any heads.
On one hand yeah the PS1 era has not aged well.
On the other hand there was no Hot Shots Golf, so...
On the other hand there was no Hot Shots Golf, so...
Well, the title is not wrong. Sony has no classics.
Third-Parties do. The big ones. Aside from Gran Turismo.
Third-Parties do. The big ones. Aside from Gran Turismo.
It, like PS All Stars Battle Royale, just shows that Sony has one, very small in the big picture, Achilles Heel of trying to appeal to nostalgia with a system built on the promise that third party games would be the star of the show. It turns out that the third party games of any value 20+ years later are expensive to license. The same reason PSABR had to go for the "who?" pile a lot sooner than Smash Bros did (okay, Smash 64 had Ness but that was by choice, not the desperation of trying to spin Big Daddy as a PlayStation All Star while Solid Snake and eventually even Cloud go to Nintendo).
Nintendo gets away with it because most of the big NES franchises are now abandonware or close to it, like Castlevania and Megaman, whereas Konami will still make folks shell out for MGS or Square Enix still commanding decent money for the FF games, or Resident Evil being remade rather than simply ISO-dumped.
It's to PlayStation's credit, ultimately, that the big hits of their first console are too hot for packaged-emulator re-release, it just hurts them in the few cases they try to follow Nintendo down memory lane.
Nintendo gets away with it because most of the big NES franchises are now abandonware or close to it, like Castlevania and Megaman, whereas Konami will still make folks shell out for MGS or Square Enix still commanding decent money for the FF games, or Resident Evil being remade rather than simply ISO-dumped.
It's to PlayStation's credit, ultimately, that the big hits of their first console are too hot for packaged-emulator re-release, it just hurts them in the few cases they try to follow Nintendo down memory lane.
NES classic was relatively praised for its emulation quality compared to the PS Classic. Plus it was cheaper, and earlier. I also think Nintendo fans are more rabbid with their appreciation of "classic" games.
But, you threw down the gauntlet for 20 actual classic PS1 games. Well, here's a list:
- Metal Gear Solid
- Tekken 3
- Final Fantasy 7
- Final Fantasy 8
- Final Fantasy 9
- Gran Turismo 2
- Wipeout 2097
- Wipeout 3
- Rage Racer
- Ridge Racer Type 4
- Castlevania SOTN
- Klonoa
- Tomba
- Mega Man Legends
- R-Type Delta
- Einhander
- Tobal 2
- IQ: Intelligent Cube
- Kula World
- Um Jammer Lammy
- Resident Evil 2
Well, the list is more than 20 games and we could surely keep going. The success of the Playstation was largely built on third party games, but these games have aged just as well as Nintendo's in my honest opinion.
"What does that tell us about the Playstation brand in terms of a strong catalogue that endures generations? Did the system need more the 24 years for it to be considered classic? "
*thinking*
rpm states the obvious.
Duds (imo) they included on the system: Mr Driller, Battle Arena Toshinden, Intelligent Qube, Jumping Flash, Revelations: Persona, Wild Arms, Rainbow Six, Grand Theft Auto
These games either weren't just not popular, they flat out sucked or have aged terribly. Some were included because of the brand name appeal.
Filler I don't really see people caring about that much, starts to get subjective here/ but they're fine. SPTII is dope, but I've never seen anyone hype to play it, Derby and Boarders were cool at the time, but have aged very poorly:
Destruction Derby
Cool Boarders 2
Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo
Ridge Racer Type 4
Twisted Metal (eh, 2 is better)
The classics included:
FFVII
Metal Gear Solid
Oddworld
Rayman
Resident Evil: Director's Cut
Syphon Filter
Tekken 3
Undisputable classics not on the list:
Gran Turismo 2
FFVIII
FFIX
Tomb Raider 1 - 3 (aged fairly poorly, but still good and unique enough to be interesting)
Crash Bandicoot 1-3
Spyro
Dragon Quest VII
Tony Hawks Pro Skater 2 and 3
Crash Team Racing
Silent Hill
Twisted Metal 2
Driver 2 (much better game than the original GTAs, much more of a precursor to current GTA)
WWF Smackdown! or WarZone
Could go on and on into the relatively overlooked classics that play and look great to this day; Alundra, Heart of Darkness, Star Ocean: The Second Story, Tomba!/Tombi! Breath of Fire III and IV, Bomberman, Xenogears, Parasite Eve, Grandia, .
Curation was obviously the biggest killer. PSX is obviously packed with classics. Sentiment for this thing veered toward apathy from the first announcement of the list of games. Sony's biggest strength, strong third party support, was a significant weakness in this case. I think if they managed to release some of the more difficult to obtain classics like Nintendo did with SNES and got a little hype behind the console with it's list of titles it would've done really well despite emulation faults.
*thinking*
rpm states the obvious.
Duds (imo) they included on the system: Mr Driller, Battle Arena Toshinden, Intelligent Qube, Jumping Flash, Revelations: Persona, Wild Arms, Rainbow Six, Grand Theft Auto
These games either weren't just not popular, they flat out sucked or have aged terribly. Some were included because of the brand name appeal.
Filler I don't really see people caring about that much, starts to get subjective here/ but they're fine. SPTII is dope, but I've never seen anyone hype to play it, Derby and Boarders were cool at the time, but have aged very poorly:
Destruction Derby
Cool Boarders 2
Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo
Ridge Racer Type 4
Twisted Metal (eh, 2 is better)
The classics included:
FFVII
Metal Gear Solid
Oddworld
Rayman
Resident Evil: Director's Cut
Syphon Filter
Tekken 3
Undisputable classics not on the list:
Gran Turismo 2
FFVIII
FFIX
Tomb Raider 1 - 3 (aged fairly poorly, but still good and unique enough to be interesting)
Crash Bandicoot 1-3
Spyro
Dragon Quest VII
Tony Hawks Pro Skater 2 and 3
Crash Team Racing
Silent Hill
Twisted Metal 2
Driver 2 (much better game than the original GTAs, much more of a precursor to current GTA)
WWF Smackdown! or WarZone
Could go on and on into the relatively overlooked classics that play and look great to this day; Alundra, Heart of Darkness, Star Ocean: The Second Story, Tomba!/Tombi! Breath of Fire III and IV, Bomberman, Xenogears, Parasite Eve, Grandia, .
Curation was obviously the biggest killer. PSX is obviously packed with classics. Sentiment for this thing veered toward apathy from the first announcement of the list of games. Sony's biggest strength, strong third party support, was a significant weakness in this case. I think if they managed to release some of the more difficult to obtain classics like Nintendo did with SNES and got a little hype behind the console with it's list of titles it would've done really well despite emulation faults.
Playstation probably has more "classic" IPs than anyone else, the issue is it is much harder to license games with music that isn't 8 or 16 bit and has voice actors.
Playstation actually invests in new IPs a lot more than both Nintendo and Microsoft so maybe a lot of their old franchises aren't as well known now as they once were. They could have done what Nintendo did and clung on to the same franchises and IPs for the last 25+ years but one of the best things about Playstation is that they actually mix it up and invest in new IPs.
Playstation actually invests in new IPs a lot more than both Nintendo and Microsoft so maybe a lot of their old franchises aren't as well known now as they once were. They could have done what Nintendo did and clung on to the same franchises and IPs for the last 25+ years but one of the best things about Playstation is that they actually mix it up and invest in new IPs.
The problem was the game selection, as others have said.
For example, even though Final Fantasy VII was a major, major PS1 killer app, there's no novelty in having it on the PS Classic because it's been available all over the place for years. Most of the games on the SNES Classic? Only ever available on the original system or for some the Wii/Wii U virtual console. There's much more novelty in having Yoshi's Island, Mario RPG, Star Fox 2, Super Metroid, Earthbound, etc. Unless you had a Wii or Wii U and delved into the VC, you didn't really have a chance to play any of these since they originally came out.
For example, even though Final Fantasy VII was a major, major PS1 killer app, there's no novelty in having it on the PS Classic because it's been available all over the place for years. Most of the games on the SNES Classic? Only ever available on the original system or for some the Wii/Wii U virtual console. There's much more novelty in having Yoshi's Island, Mario RPG, Star Fox 2, Super Metroid, Earthbound, etc. Unless you had a Wii or Wii U and delved into the VC, you didn't really have a chance to play any of these since they originally came out.
It means that sony doesn't do it's bussiness around the best games of other time. They are only interested in the games that are considered good today.
If it turned out great, it would have sold great. The only lesson to learn here is that people aren't going to buy something just because it's from a brand they like. The product itself has to actually be good.
PS1 is a classic console even if you only include games by Square:
Final Fantasy VII
Final Fantasy VIII
Final Fantasy IX
Final Fantasy Tactics
Vagrant Story
Chrono Cross
Legend of Mana
Tobal No. 2
Bushido Blade
Einhander
Brave Fencer Musashi
Parasite Eve
Xenogears
Final Fantasy VII
Final Fantasy VIII
Final Fantasy IX
Final Fantasy Tactics
Vagrant Story
Chrono Cross
Legend of Mana
Tobal No. 2
Bushido Blade
Einhander
Brave Fencer Musashi
Parasite Eve
Xenogears
lol I forgot to end that sentence with "...as much as I love them". It's a classic for sure, but niche and won't be pulling in the numbers unfortunately. Same for something like Vib Ribbon which I would have adored, but know would elicit crickets in a game collection for the general audience.
I mean yeah, the intention is clear, the motivation even moreso. Just thought I'd call it out and spell out the tone for others just so they understand the level of discourse to be expected from him/her. As if the childish, catty gifs didn't already give it away, OP should know they aren't fooling anyone.
Last edited:
So did I damn... Probably could come up with a list of 50+ really solid PS1 titles.
Anyway, the thread was created in bad faith it seems. The OP has no interest in determining what PS1 games are actually considered classics, just pushing an agenda.
The mass market didn't know, nor do they care about how good the emulation was.
For me PS1 and PS2's best games outside of Gran Turismo (then God of War on PS2) were third party titles like Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, Tomb Raider, GTA and Metal Gear Solid. It wasn't until PS3 that Sony established themselves as a worthy rival to Nintendo in terms of exclusive, first party content imo which is what causes the disparity in sales between the NES / SNES Classic and PS1 Classic.
They can't get rid of PS1 Classic consoles in the UK (a very strong PS1 / Playstation market in general) for £25... That really does say it all.
As I said, it is when every PS Classic conversation was around how bad it played the games. Even if the mass market doesn't know what framerate is, they still look up reviews of stuff.
Some classics for the PSX:
Crash Trilogy
Spyro Trilogy
Medievil
Tomb Raider
Gran Turismo
FF VII
Tekken 3
Resident Evil Trilogy
Silent Hill
Ape Escape
Metal Gear Solid
Ridge Racer
Wipeout
The problem was Sony ignoring 90% of the games people wanted
Crash Trilogy
Spyro Trilogy
Medievil
Tomb Raider
Gran Turismo
FF VII
Tekken 3
Resident Evil Trilogy
Silent Hill
Ape Escape
Metal Gear Solid
Ridge Racer
Wipeout
The problem was Sony ignoring 90% of the games people wanted
No. It proves Sony is either too stupid or too unwilling to capitalize on their classics. (No fucking Ape Escape. On the PlayStation Classic. You've got to be fucking kidding me Sony.)
Sony has classics but most were third party. Nintendo and Sega can release a classic console on their first party output alone, Sony does not have that luxury. The PS Classic was a lackluster product with a really poor games selection.
I feel that Sony as a company is broken down in 2 halves. The first one covering PS1, PS2 and early PS3 and the current one with late PS3 and PS4. Current Sony does not care about it's past or develops innovative games. They just rely on the revenue brought by PS Plus and the big MTX heavy blockbuster games like Fortnite, FIFA and GTA. Old Sony had quirky and innovative games that did not set the charts on fire most of the time but really contributed to the catalog.
I feel that Sony as a company is broken down in 2 halves. The first one covering PS1, PS2 and early PS3 and the current one with late PS3 and PS4. Current Sony does not care about it's past or develops innovative games. They just rely on the revenue brought by PS Plus and the big MTX heavy blockbuster games like Fortnite, FIFA and GTA. Old Sony had quirky and innovative games that did not set the charts on fire most of the time but really contributed to the catalog.
Last edited:
There are plenty of classic games on the PS1 to choose from. It proved the same thing that the Genesis AtGames mini consoles did: the people who care about retro gaming aren't interested in a half assed piece of shit and are able to smell it from a mile away.
I'd say there are some Sony owned classics on PS1 but the best truly Sony's classics began with the PS2 with GT3/4, God of War 1/2, Shadow of the Colossus, Ico, Twisted Metal Black and others.
PS1 classics are a lot of third parties that Sony didn't put the effort to get.
I think it is obvious Sony has hardly any classics considering everybody's list of great PS1 games are all third party games. Also the general audience does not do any research about the quality of the product before they buy, all you have to do is look at how good Days Gone has sold despite it reviewing poorly.
Uh, no there were plenty of classics on the ps1, its just that they either couldn't or chose not to put most of what people would consider classics on the device.
I would have bought and spent a decent penny to have a "ps classic " that was essentially either connected to a digital psn classic store and pay per game, or a classic streaming service that allowed you to play ps1 and ps2 games with a monthly fee. Maybe a ps2 mini could be created like that instead of how they tackled the original.
It failed because the games they chose were not representative of the PSX era. Crash Bandicoot and Spyro trilogies should have been there, including all PSX Twisted Metal, Syphon Filter, Spider-Man, FF7, FF9, Gran Turismo 1+2, Tekken 2+3, Chrono Cross, Ape Escape, Silent Hill, Xenogears, etc... The NES and SNES mini classics were successful because of the games they put in there.
I think that mid-90s 3D has aged horrifically, it's just an eyesore nowadays. Granted, a slicker package and better selection of classics (who the FUCK though Rainbow fucking Six of all games was acceptable) would have made the product more palatable, but to be frank you can't polish a turd.
Nintendo could make an N64 classic and tick all the right boxes- all the classics, extras, snappy UI, whatever- and the thing would still be shit cause the games just didn't age well.
Nintendo could make an N64 classic and tick all the right boxes- all the classics, extras, snappy UI, whatever- and the thing would still be shit cause the games just didn't age well.
This, when I think about games I loved from the PS1 most of them aren't on the ps classic.
It proves that the large bulk of what we think of as Playstation classics are actually third party games.
The list of games they used would be like the SNES classic not having Mario World, DK Country, Metroid or Mario Kart, among others.
They have tons of classics and exclusives that were amazing. Biggest issue is that much of the library was third party games so it's a licensing nightmare to release a classics console.
I mean Sony's legacy is that of Third Parties. If the biggest in house PlayStation exclusive until like late PS3 was Gran Turismo, a PS1 Classic was dead in the water killed by licensing. Shit if you made a PS4 classic 20 years from now you'd need Marvel/Disney to sign off on arguably its brightest exclusive. PS to me is defined by having all the games, not having stand out exclusives alone. The nostalgia for PS1 isn't Sony's to sell.
True, but there were still a lot of cool Sony published games. :P