Were Most PlayStation Games Rushed

[pineapplehead2]

To me PSX was a bit like Atari, they had a number of good games but it mostly had a crap load of crap games, also were people just slapping together some games just to make a few buucks so they could finish of they number 1 company project.

[Ernster]

Yep I feel that too, thats why I think PSX sucks. I could never understand why the world loved it over the N64. x_x

[pineapplehead2]

You were not able to do that with N64 because it cost too much and it will be just a waste of money so thats why with N64 company were forced to do they best to make a game so every one would like so they will but they games in future and so on.

[Aussie2B]

Well, when a system has over 1200 games in the US alone, it's bound to have a ton of stinkers.

Also keep in mind that many titles were designed as budget titles and released at MSRPs as low as $10. You can't expect those games to be as good as the ones released for $50.

[Zing]

Nintendo controlled the cartridge production and charged third parties $10 per cart produced. It was no suprise that they decided to continue with cartridges. Although I haven't done any research to see if they control the Gamecube disc production, so maybe they are still running developers through the wringer.

[PapaStu]

I dont feel that most of the PS games were rushed. However it does have a fair amount of crap on it (I know I own a lot of it), but so does any system that is as popular as the PS has been, and has sold as many units as it has.

Many games still had long R&D's on them but there are just alot of poorly executed games and ideas that were released (including ones by major companies, Sony included). I can see some rush to release, but most developers realise that if they are putting out complete crap, it does stop selling so that does zero good for the game. I remember seeing a sales chart for the 5 Tomb Raider PS games released, seeing that TR sold a good amount, TR2 sold a ton, TR3 was back near TR numbers, and TR4+5 were complete shit and sold nothing compared to the earlier ones and by then the Franchise was dead, which even carried over into the PS2's TR:AoD game.

I think its probably just a little higher than the average system, but at the same time there are an extra 500+ games released, so it should end up being a push.

[chrisbid]

i think in a few more years, the PSX generation will be seen as some of the ugliest video games ever made. early polygon 3D games (Virtua series, Starfox, I Robot, etc) had that surreal, but clean look to them. However, once textures were added and quickly grew as a way to add detail and keep polygons down, graphics started to look like garbage. I didnt mind a few textures here and there to highlight certain objects, but when entire playfields are filled with huge flat polygons with asstastic oversized textures the charm of early 3D had evaporated. Add to that, the fact that most games of the era ran well under 30fps, and i really doubt that very many action games will be considered true classics when the time comes. for me the best PSX games were 2D games, or 2D/3D hybrids. 3D didnt become beautiful until the Dreamcast.

[SkiDragon]

I agree with the above poster.

Also, I wonder why it is that loads of crappy games for the Atari was the blame for the videogame crash, but loads of crappy games for the Playstation is seen as "good third party relationships" and "being a game console for a larger audience".

[pineapplehead2]

Has any one played Bubsy 3D, the SNES was good but talk about crap when it entered the PSX era, boy that was a crap game, it made Action 52 look like Zelda.

[chrisbid]

I agree with the above poster.

Also, I wonder why it is that loads of crappy games for the Atari was the blame for the videogame crash, but loads of crappy games for the Playstation is seen as "good third party relationships" and "being a game console for a larger audience".

atari had no relations with their third parties, they had zero control over anyone making VCS games. Sony actually does have some quality control, in fact for people like us that still appreciate 2D games, this issue has quickened the death of 2D games on consoles, as a 3D game with terrible controls and shoddy camera work will get an approval while a tight 2D game with above average gameplay will be denied or forced to be released in a compilation or a budget price point.

[Ed Oscuro]

i think in a few more years, the PSX generation will be seen as some of the ugliest video games ever made.
As people slide into forgetfulness and the common "the developers r idiots!!!1" mode of thinking, this doubtlessly will become the prevalent opinion.

I'm going to disagree with that, though - clever designers could take affine texturing and nearly make it into an asset (could you imagine Medievil with smooth textures?). It's Super Nintendo/Sega Genesis scanlines all over again.

While flat-shaded texture games do have a classic clean look, PlayStation games have a very unique marking that stamps them - I see that as a good thing.

Besides, since when does G-Darius look bad?

[digitalpress]

I'm with you on this one, Ed.

The sad thing about the library is that it's the classic "a few bad apples spoil the rest". There are plenty of games that use the texturing properly and while even cutting edge games of their time such as Tomb Raider and Metal Gear Solid look dated today, they don't look ugly either. And other games with a simpler approach to 3D look just fine.

Ultimately, I think the system is BEST for its 2D games and the games that use 3D not so much for realism but for gameplay. Take a look at our forum top 50 list and you'll see a rather large representation from this area:

http://www.digitpress.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1570

[chrisbid]

While flat-shaded texture games do have a classic clean look, PlayStation games have a very unique marking that stamps them - I see that as a good thing.

i totally agree that the look is unique, but the combination of oversized/pixelated textures in combination with choppy animation makes most common PSX games look poor compared to average games on other systems. The gameplay of games like Tony Hawk, Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid are in place, but try playing these games after playing a current generation counterpart, its really hard to do


Besides, since when does G-Darius look bad?

it doesnt look bad, but Darius Gaiden on the saturn is a smoother and more playable game.


i guess my biggest issue isnt graphics only, but the choppiness. Like flicker on the 2600, or slowdown on the NES or SNES, these shortcomings annoy me much more than graphic shortcomings as it affects actual gameplay

[geelw]

hmmm. i've been seeing this "backlash" (more like backwash) going on for about a year or two, and it's getting old. if you look back at enough of the ps library, there's no denying that the quality games outweigh the clunkers, budget titles or no. i'd have to say that a lot of the haters seem to be using the really bad apples as some sort of benchmark (bubsy 3D seems to be a rallying point to most folks- is that because the game magazines always drag that particular cat out when they talk about "bad" ps games?), when one could point out a few hundred games that show off what the hardware could really do. granted, the system's low texture memory and infamous texture warping made for some headache inducing experiences, but some developers managed to do some really amazing things with the system...

g.

[FantasiaWHT]

More so than usual, but definitely nowhere near any Gameboy system ;) I can count the number of GBA games I've enjoyed on one hand...

Well I take that back. I can count the number of GBA games that WEREN'T PORTS on one hand...

[Lady Jaye]

I can count the number of GBA games that WEREN'T PORTS on one hand...

Lessee, just off the top of my head:

Metroid Fusion
Castlevania: Circle of the Moon
Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow
Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance
Golden Sun
Golden Sun 2
Mario and Luigi SuperStar Saga
Wario Ware Inc.
Gradius Galaxies
The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap
Megaman Zero 1, 2, 3

'Nuff said!

[kingpong]

i think in a few more years, the PSX generation will be seen as some of the ugliest video games ever made. early polygon 3D games (Virtua series, Starfox, I Robot, etc) had that surreal, but clean look to them. However, once textures were added and quickly grew as a way to add detail and keep polygons down, graphics started to look like garbage.

I've always felt that the problem was that we skipped a generation of 3D graphics - the shaded polygon era. The earlier polygon games were either flat or very simply shaded non-textured polygons. Early games on the PSX generation of hardware should have just used more sophisticated shading on non-textured polygons. If you look back at the earliest games shown on the PSX (I'm thinking of the first shots of Moto Toon GP and Toshinden that were in Next Generation), they looked very nice - there wasn't a lot of texturing going on. But developers were far to quick to slap textures on the polygons, and the results were some ugly games. They would have been far better off using shaded polygons with higher polygon counts for a while, then moving to texture mapping later on in the system's lifetime. They just weren't ready to jump on the texturing bandwagon, but they did anyways, and skipped a step in what was the logical progression of polygon graphics in games. There were shaded games here and there on various systems, but they were the exception, not the rule.

[Promophile]

Well I take that back. I can count the number of GBA games that WEREN'T PORTS on one hand...

I would say its around 40/60 or maybe 50/50 on original games to ports.

[dbiersdorf]

Has any one played Bubsy 3D, the SNES was good but talk about crap when it entered the PSX era, boy that was a crap game, it made Action 52 look like Zelda.

Hah, what a bad game, to be honest the only good Bubsy game was the original, Bubsy II, Bubsy for Jaguar and Bubsy 3D are all some of the worst games I've ever played.

[Ed Oscuro]

The gameplay of games like Tony Hawk, Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid are in place, but try playing these games after playing a current generation counterpart, its really hard to do
Not for me - the look still is nice (though over time the wow factor has dimmed, of course). I did get a random whanging headache a while back when I started trying to play an N64/PSX game a while back (forget which system it was, actually) but I got over that.

[pineapplehead2]

How many games for realised for the PSX in Australia and how many were in USA.?

[jdc]

I don't feel as if the majority were rushed at all.

It was a very limited 32-bit system. Time seems to make people forget. There were some phenomenal games made by some incredibly talented studios. Of course it's hard to look at the system in the same light after several years of 128.

"Why doesn't this Edsel go very fast? My Ferrari hauls ass."

[Dangerboy]

Seeing how I bear the mark of the Biggest PSX fan, I'd add some small observations.

1. This conversation isn't new. It's just a rehash of another conversation that has had the topic system changed. In 10 years we'll be having the same thread, but with questions like, "I just can't go back to Halo 2 and Chronicles of Riddick, those bump mapping ideas look so bad now...." :D

2. When the you have the *largest* library in gaming history, you're of course going to have a larger amount of dud games than the competition. If you want to compare largerst amount of duds to available titles let me show you my Game.com collection. :)

2a. Also, consider the time the PlayStation came out. Sony is the new boy on the block, and has Sega and Nintendo to deal with. Their strategy was to basically get every possible game they could on their system and only on their system, and it worked, regardless of it was quality or not. We (as in the main DP folks) may turn our nose at games series like "Mary-Kate and Ashley's whatever Game" and the like, but it brought over the kids who once used Nintendo as their 'cool word'. Now-a-days 'playstation' is the new brand name and cool word. Like it or not, the strategy worked.

2b. Also, a lot of people seem to forget that it wasn't until later in the PlayStation's life that Sony suddenly decided that 2D was 'outdated'. It is Sony's name that appears on killer 2D titles like Raiden Project, experimental 2D games like Philosoma, and did anyone else notice they bought the exclusive US rights to King of Fighters and Samurai Shodown III at the time?

3. Between the N64 and the PlayStation, I'll take the PSX version of the game anyday. The N64 had way too many fog issues or insanely blurry graphics in the 3D realm, and absolutely shit 2D. Compare MK Trilogy, and then games like Nightmare Creatures, Gex, Ridge Racer, etc.

The N64 had a lot of great games just like the PlayStation, but it suffers from the "looks terrible now" syndrome on a higher scale. The most perfect example is Zelda 64. I couldn't focus on it real well at launch, and after playing it again on the Game Cube collector's disc, it is a really, really shitty looking game with some of the worst palette choices ever.

4. As for games being rushed, most likely not on the high majority of the library. Realize that the system had what, 2 megs of Ram at most to work with? I'm quite impressed with how many of the games turned out. If we want to talk about aging badly, how about the entire 3DO library, full of sprite based 3D games, flat renders (the #1 suspect in showing an aged game), etc etc etc.

There are far more of today's games being rushed. While there are way too many examples, I give CSI Xbox the exhibit A: In the last 2 cases I played the 'movies' of the characters moving on the background do not match up with the background, there are huge jumps in animation, and there are even mis-programmed links in the bonus areas! Wtf? Do I even need to bring up Tomb Raider PS2 or Crapcom De-Evolution?

5. To reply to one of the posters about "Why the loved PSX over N64?"

Easy. Sony did to Nintendo what Nintendo did to Sega. Sought out exclusives, made their system the 'hip one', marketed the hell out of it, etc. Think about the majority of players at that age; they were the Nintendo-kids who were now becoming teenagers, etc. What system would you want on your shelf: the sleek grey system with the snazzy black jewel cases, or the big hulking black deck that has rainbow colored boxes and buttons?

[chrisbid]

Seeing how I bear the mark of the Biggest PSX fan, I'd add some small observations.

1. This conversation isn't new. It's just a rehash of another conversation that has had the topic system changed. In 10 years we'll be having the same thread, but with questions like, "I just can't go back to Halo 2 and Chronicles of Riddick, those bump mapping ideas look so bad now...." :D

i dont really see that as the case. tomorrows' games may have better graphics, but the framerate will probably not exceed 60fps, and even if it does, the difference will not be as obvious as the difference between 60fps and 20fps (or less). This is the reason why Dreamcast games still look fairly close to current generation games, the smooth animation.

though the n64 had obvious problems, it was able to keep a little better and more consistent framerate than the PSX


you can also give sony praise for their early strategies, but lets face facts, after Final Fantasy VII came out, Sony was a different company. They had a firm grip on the business and the events of 95 and 96 were just a warm up for them. Just like Genesis games before Sonic the Hedgehog, the pre 1998 PSX lineup is quite eclectic and has some hard to find diamonds in the rough (intelligent qube for example). but the PSX explosion started in late 1997 and the scrutiny laid on the machine really started with the games developed with the FMV/3D only mentality that ensued shortly after...

[Dangerboy]

you can also give sony praise for their early strategies, but lets face facts, after Final Fantasy VII came out, Sony was a different company.

Never denying that. Juts pointing out the facts. Sony hasn't been the same since, and it's most likely why my PS2 gets zero play time with actual PS2 games. With the very few exceptions, I haven't really been impressed with the system or Sony's lack of vision and mis-steps.

[ARK1]

Everyone's comparing the PlayStation to the Atari systems. I feel a better comparions would be to compare the PSX to the NES. That system had some gems as well as many awful games as well (Total Recall, Friday the 13th, anything by TH*Q).

Also don't forget Sony, or rather 989 Studios, rushed some games themselves. Case in point is the Twisted Metal series. The first game was good, the second was awesome, but 3 and 4 were below average.

[RCM]

To me PSX was a bit like Atari, they had a number of good games but it mostly had a crap load of crap games

Look at almost any systems library and you will find a majority are crap.


also were people just slapping together some games just to make a few buucks so they could finish of they number 1 company project.

I would say many of the titles were not just "slapped together."

THE ONE, THE ONLY- RCM

[Aussie2B]

Between the N64 and the PlayStation, I'll take the PSX version of the game anyday. The N64 had way too many fog issues or insanely blurry graphics in the 3D realm, and absolutely shit 2D. Compare MK Trilogy, and then games like Nightmare Creatures, Gex, Ridge Racer, etc.

The N64 isn't a great 2D system (wasn't designed to be) and the PlayStation is better at 2D (but Saturn beats them both), but don't judge the N64's 2D capabilities on the extremely poor examples that the US saw. Most people think "N64 2D = Yoshi's Story". Yoshi's Story is an insipid, lifeless game with graphics to match. However, with talented programmers the N64 COULD do beautiful 2D graphics. Just look at Wonder Project J2:

http://www.inverteddungeon.com/triacesuperfan/wpj2review.html


The N64 had a lot of great games just like the PlayStation, but it suffers from the "looks terrible now" syndrome on a higher scale. The most perfect example is Zelda 64. I couldn't focus on it real well at launch, and after playing it again on the Game Cube collector's disc, it is a really, really shitty looking game with some of the worst palette choices ever.

I gotta completely disagree with you on Zelda 64. The game itself isn't one of my top favorites, but the graphics absolutely floored me when I first got the game. It sounds silly now, but at the time, I thought they were incredibly realistic. I couldn't imagine graphics being any better than that. Obviously, I don't think the same anymore, but I still think it's a gorgeous game. Easily one of the nicest looking on the N64.

[Ernster]

I never really noticed the fog in N64 games, I do now in some games, but Ill take a foggy N64 game over a pixelated, jaggedy, slow loading PSX game anyday :)

[pineapplehead2]

Don't get me wrong the PSX did have some good games tho but it also i thik had more kids games too, they were just not well knownm i have a ton of kids games in my PS collection.

[Dimitri]

Also keep in mind that many titles were designed as budget titles and released at MSRPs as low as $10. You can't expect those games to be as good as the ones released for $50.

Most of the time, that is. The PSX had some really great budget releases...

Battle Hunter, Board Game Top Shop, Tall: Infinity, Gekioh Shooting King.

And if you go into the arena of games you never actually see anywhere anymore, it had quite a diverse library of interesting and innovative games...

Devil Dice, Intelligent Qube, Felony 11-79, Carnage Heart, Mr. Domino.

These boundaries are extended even moreso when you consider the uncharted realms of import gaming. But I digress...yes, the designers of many games used textures where they really were not needed...but some games used them brilliantly. Final Fantasy Tactics is one that comes to mind.

All this coming from someone who didn't own a Playstation until the PS2 came out. "It's got too many buttons" I thought, plugging Mario 64 in again...

[crazyjackcsa]

I think that whole generation was one of the worst. All three were plagued with poor frame rates, ugly 3d and great 2d. I think the hardware wasn't up to what people really wanted. In the end of the cycle there was some really good 3d but I think it was a transition period from 2d to 3d.