Why did the PS1 succeed so much?

I'd like to hear why, do you think, did the PS1 succeed as much as it did.

The console was actually a little weaker than the Saturn (not to mention the N64) and Sony was a new player without any rich gaming background like Sega and Nintendo.

So why did it manage to trash the competition sales-wise?

I personally think the main reason was Sony's advertising power.

Sega and Nintendo, while gaming veterans, did not have the money Sony had and their appeal only reached childern and core gamers-alike.

Sony, on the other hand, advertised their console to everyone.

You were a "cool" guy if you had a PlayStation.

Of course, ease of development also helped.

The Saturn and N64 were notorious for being hard to develop for.

I also think Sega owes a lot to Sega of America for the failure of the Saturn due to bad advertising (they should keep the Segata Sanshiro commercials imo).

They also sold PlayStation consoles in all Sony stores which was another advantage and when the Saturn faded it had the CD format advantage over the N64 with it's carts (the "kiddy" image N64 had also didn't help).

Furthermore it had heavy-hitter exclusives like Gran Turismo, Tekken 3, MGS, FF VII and the like and a ton of games and cheaper games than the N64.

And lastly it was also a modable console.

half of it is marketing, half of it is games.

Games baby...pure and simple Their relationship with 3rd party developers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than all others in that generation No one cares what a system can do. People only care about the games on it. So having great games from so many sources + so many new things done/innovations = perfect formularawsavon

It's debatable whether PS1 games were the best though.

Although there is no denying it had the most of them.

Also I don't see that many innovations on the PS1 apart from the dual analog and built-in rumble (it's debatable which company had that first).

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Games baby...pure and simple Their relationship with 3rd party developers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than all others in that generation No one cares what a system can do. People only care about the games on it. So having great games from so many sources + so many new things done/innovations = perfect formulanameless12345

It's debatable whether PS1 games were the best though.

Although there is no denying it had the most of them.

Also I don't see that many innovations on the PS1 apart from the dual analog and built-in rumble (it's debatable which company had that first).

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Games baby...pure and simple Their relationship with 3rd party developers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than all others in that generation No one cares what a system can do. People only care about the games on it. So having great games from so many sources + so many new things done/innovations = perfect formularawsavon

It's debatable whether PS1 games were the best though.

Although there is no denying it had the most of them.

Also I don't see that many innovations on the PS1 apart from the dual analog and built-in rumble (it's debatable which company had that first).

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Games baby...pure and simple Their relationship with 3rd party developers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than all others in that generation No one cares what a system can do. People only care about the games on it. So having great games from so many sources + so many new things done/innovations = perfect formularawsavon

It's debatable whether PS1 games were the best though.

Although there is no denying it had the most of them.

Also I don't see that many innovations on the PS1 apart from the dual analog and built-in rumble (it's debatable which company had that first).

No, I said it's debatable whether PS1 games were trully better than the games on the other consoles.

As for what the PS1 did - I think the most it did was make 3D gaming and consoles mainstream.

Like I said the Saturn had better raw processing power and the N64, despite the carts, was a lot stronger.

The earlyer 3DO and Jaguar also held a candle to it (even if they couldn't really compare).

[QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

It's debatable whether PS1 games were the best though.

Although there is no denying it had the most of them.

Also I don't see that many innovations on the PS1 apart from the dual analog and built-in rumble (it's debatable which company had that first).

Darkman2007

We can decide on w/e measure you want.
I think no matter what measure you choose, we will find at least 100 great games on PS1 and less than 20 on N64.

It is not that Sony's 1st party games were so great (though there were some great ones)...it was mostly 3rd party developers making all the hits for them

Back to what you were saying though.
I did not like Majora's Mask. But i can see how people call it a great game...so I would count it as one for the N64

[QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

It's debatable whether PS1 games were the best though.

Although there is no denying it had the most of them.

Also I don't see that many innovations on the PS1 apart from the dual analog and built-in rumble (it's debatable which company had that first).

nameless12345

No, I said it's debatable whether PS1 games were trully better than the games on the other consoles.

As for what the PS1 did - I think the most it did was make 3D gaming and consoles mainstream.

Like I said the Saturn had better raw processing power and the N64, despite the carts, was a lot stronger.

The earlyer 3DO and Jaguar also held a candle to it (even if they couldn't really compare).

Also, you gloss over the 3-d part. THAT WAS A HUGE REVOLUTION (versus the previous gen).

As I said, system specs don't matter for s***, really (other than in extreme examples). That explains the 3DO People care about games.

I gave you very specific reasons why the PS1 succeeded
1. relationship with 3rd party developers
2. qty of great games
3. 3-d

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="rawsavon"] You think the number of great games is debatable? -the N64 had some truly great ones...but only like 10-15 of them -the PS1 had probably 100 legit great games Also, compare what the PS1 did versus the generation beforerawsavon

We can decide on w/e measure you want.
I think no matter what measure you choose, we will find at least 100 great games on PS1 and less than 20 on N64.

It is not that Sony's 1st party games were so great (though there were some great ones)...it was mostly 3rd party developers making all the hits for them

Back to what you were saying though.
I did not like Majora's Mask. But i can see how people call it a great game...so I would count it as one for the N64

the N64 has more then 20 great games..... then again , if youre not a fan of the N64's games, its understandable.

and 3D was only a product of the popularity, Saturn and N64 did 3D, in some cases better, didn't help them in the long run.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] depends by what you would consider great. Ive heard people calling Tekken great, but I think its mediocre on the whole. Ive heard Toshinden being called great, but its pretty iffy. I remember hearing Crash Bandicoot was amazing, but I find the first game to be overrated.Darkman2007

We can decide on w/e measure you want.
I think no matter what measure you choose, we will find at least 100 great games on PS1 and less than 20 on N64.

It is not that Sony's 1st party games were so great (though there were some great ones)...it was mostly 3rd party developers making all the hits for them

Back to what you were saying though.
I did not like Majora's Mask. But i can see how people call it a great game...so I would count it as one for the N64

the N64 has more then 20 great games..... then again , if youre not a fan of the N64's games, its understandable.

and 3D was only a product of the popularity, Saturn and N64 did 3D, in some cases better, didn't help them in the long run.

People like quality games. The PS1 had a lot more quality games on it than its two competitors.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

We can decide on w/e measure you want.
I think no matter what measure you choose, we will find at least 100 great games on PS1 and less than 20 on N64.

It is not that Sony's 1st party games were so great (though there were some great ones)...it was mostly 3rd party developers making all the hits for them

Back to what you were saying though.
I did not like Majora's Mask. But i can see how people call it a great game...so I would count it as one for the N64

rawsavon

the N64 has more then 20 great games..... then again , if youre not a fan of the N64's games, its understandable.

and 3D was only a product of the popularity, Saturn and N64 did 3D, in some cases better, didn't help them in the long run.

I have no idea because Im not aware of every single game that came out for the PS1.

I own around 45 PS1 games (I need to recount them) , nearly 20 N64 games , and 80 or so Saturn games.

are these the only good games for those systems? absolutly not.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"] You think the number of great games is debatable? -the N64 had some truly great ones...but only like 10-15 of them -the PS1 had probably 100 legit great games Also, compare what the PS1 did versus the generation beforerawsavon

No, I said it's debatable whether PS1 games were trully better than the games on the other consoles.

As for what the PS1 did - I think the most it did was make 3D gaming and consoles mainstream.

Like I said the Saturn had better raw processing power and the N64, despite the carts, was a lot stronger.

The earlyer 3DO and Jaguar also held a candle to it (even if they couldn't really compare).

Also, you gloss over the 3-d part. THAT WAS A HUGE REVOLUTION (versus the previous gen).

As I said, system specs don't matter for s***, really (other than in extreme examples). That explains the 3DO People care about games.

I gave you very specific reasons why the PS1 succeeded
1. relationship with 3rd party developers
2. qty of great games
3. 3-d

Still doesn't explain why the PS1 literally ran over the Saturn. That console had much more than just 1 good game and was also superior in 2D graphics yet people ignored it almost completely.

And 3D graphics were nothing new. The SNES could do them with the Super FX chip. And the Saturn has a theoretically higher poly count.

People like quality games. The PS1 had a lot more quality games on it than its two competitors.

metswonin69

That answer is too shallow. The Wii sales are also superior to 360 and PS3 sales but I'm not sure if it has a lot more quality games than them combined.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

No, I said it's debatable whether PS1 games were trully better than the games on the other consoles.

As for what the PS1 did - I think the most it did was make 3D gaming and consoles mainstream.

Like I said the Saturn had better raw processing power and the N64, despite the carts, was a lot stronger.

The earlyer 3DO and Jaguar also held a candle to it (even if they couldn't really compare).

nameless12345

Also, you gloss over the 3-d part. THAT WAS A HUGE REVOLUTION (versus the previous gen).

As I said, system specs don't matter for s***, really (other than in extreme examples). That explains the 3DO People care about games.

I gave you very specific reasons why the PS1 succeeded
1. relationship with 3rd party developers
2. qty of great games
3. 3-d

Still doesn't explain why the PS1 literally ran over the Saturn. That console had much more than just 1 good game and was also superior in 2D graphics yet people ignored it almost completely.

And 3D graphics were nothing new. The SNES could do them with the Super FX chip. And the Saturn has a theoretically higher poly count.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

the N64 has more then 20 great games..... then again , if youre not a fan of the N64's games, its understandable.

and 3D was only a product of the popularity, Saturn and N64 did 3D, in some cases better, didn't help them in the long run.

Darkman2007

I have no idea because Im not aware of every single game that came out for the PS1.

I own around 45 PS1 games (I need to recount them) , nearly 20 N64 games , and 80 or so Saturn games.

are these the only good games for those systems? absolutly not.

A lot better marketing then any console before it. And that's really all it is.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"] Individual games IS debatable.
QTY of great games is not
-a system with 10 great tiles < a system with 50 or 100 great games...even if you think those 10 are better than any 10 on the other
(we are talking on the macro level...consumers as a whole will have different tastes...so having many great games = appeal to many more people = more people buy that system = more 3rd party support = more great games = more people buy = etc)

Also, you gloss over the 3-d part. THAT WAS A HUGE REVOLUTION (versus the previous gen).

As I said, system specs don't matter for s***, really (other than in extreme examples). That explains the 3DO People care about games.

I gave you very specific reasons why the PS1 succeeded
1. relationship with 3rd party developers
2. qty of great games
3. 3-d

rawsavon

Still doesn't explain why the PS1 literally ran over the Saturn. That console had much more than just 1 good game and was also superior in 2D graphics yet people ignored it almost completely.

And 3D graphics were nothing new. The SNES could do them with the Super FX chip. And the Saturn has a theoretically higher poly count.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"] If you say the N64 has more than 20, then what do you put the number of PS1 great games at?

rawsavon

I have no idea because Im not aware of every single game that came out for the PS1.

I own around 45 PS1 games (I need to recount them) , nearly 20 N64 games , and 80 or so Saturn games.

are these the only good games for those systems? absolutly not.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Still doesn't explain why the PS1 literally ran over the Saturn. That console had much more than just 1 good game and was also superior in 2D graphics yet people ignored it almost completely.

And 3D graphics were nothing new. The SNES could do them with the Super FX chip. And the Saturn has a theoretically higher poly count.

Darkman2007

That is not what I said at all. I said that the saturn had one game I wanted that I could not get somewhere else...big difference
(just like so many mutiplats today)

I believe that I have said that the main difference b/w PS1 and all others was the 3rd party support :?

[QUOTE="metswonin69"]

People like quality games. The PS1 had a lot more quality games on it than its two competitors.

nameless12345

That answer is too shallow. The Wii sales are also superior to 360 and PS3 sales but I'm not sure if it has a lot more quality games than them combined.

and we both know its all subjective.Darkman2007

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="rawsavon"] What about the above does not explain why it killed the saturn :? TBH, I don't understand what you don't understand saturn = not many great games (compared to PS1) saturn = bad 3rd party party support (compared to PS1) the above two point go hand in hand and snowballrawsavon

That is not what I said at all. I said that the saturn had one game I wanted that I could not get somewhere else...big difference
(just like so many mutiplats today)

I believe that I have said that the main difference b/w PS1 and all others was the 3rd party support :?

but then whats the issue with getting the Saturn versions of those games if they are also on another system? in quite a few cases, the Saturn versions are better (and vice versa)

of course the PS1 had the best 3rd party support, but its not like every game was amazing,

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] and we both know its all subjective.rawsavon

well i'd have to say part of it was Timing. the ps1 just came out at the right time. Also, part of it was the fact that Sega had burned everyone (including myself) with the 32x, so we were less likely to buy the Saturn.

and the games that came out at LAUNCH for the playstation were very impressive. My ps1 came with an awesome demo disc with games like Warhawk, Twisted metal, and Loaded. and I just remember seeing more and more quality games coming out, but Sega was too slow at getting many great 3rd party games. All the saturn seemed to have was arcade games like Virtua Fighter, Virtua Cop, Daytona USA, and stuff like that.

I think some people were just sick of Nintendo and sega and wanted to try Sony. and people like myself were even excited to read previews of the playstation in Gamepro. I read a HUGE article in Gameinformer or Gamepro in i think 94 about the playstation. Sony did a good job of having plenty of screen shots for games like twisted metal, warhawk, air combat, and ridge racer available to the magazine. so the hype created by articles and commercials got many of us interested.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] considering you said the Saturn only has one good game as far as youre concerned, I think youre the last person to tell anybody which game is good and which game is bad on the Saturn :P and in its defence, the Saturn had a better 1st party game line up (or 2nd party , since Sony didn't have much in the way of 1st party)Darkman2007

That is not what I said at all. I said that the saturn had one game I wanted that I could not get somewhere else...big difference
(just like so many mutiplats today)

I believe that I have said that the main difference b/w PS1 and all others was the 3rd party support :?

but then whats the issue with getting the Saturn versions of those games if they are also on another system? in quite a few cases, the Saturn versions are better (and vice versa)

of course the PS1 had the best 3rd party support, but its not like every game was amazing,

That is the main point. What motivation does someone have to buy a saturn if
-ps1 has the most games
-ps1 has the most great games only available on that system
-sure the saturn had shared some of the great games...but why buy it if you still need a PS1 to play tons of great games...you don't need the staurn to play many great games, but you need the PS1
-for most people it comes down to owning 1 system...the vast majority of console sales are not made up of people that post on gamesites like us

[QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] and we both know its all subjective.Darkman2007

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

That is not what I said at all. I said that the saturn had one game I wanted that I could not get somewhere else...big difference
(just like so many mutiplats today)

I believe that I have said that the main difference b/w PS1 and all others was the 3rd party support :?

rawsavon

but then whats the issue with getting the Saturn versions of those games if they are also on another system? in quite a few cases, the Saturn versions are better (and vice versa)

of course the PS1 had the best 3rd party support, but its not like every game was amazing,

That is the main point. What motivation does someone have to buy a saturn if
-ps1 has the most games
-ps1 has the most great games only available on that system
-sure the saturn had shared some of the great games...but why buy it if you still need a PS1 to play tons of great games...you don't need the staurn to play many great games, but you need the PS1
-for most people it comes down to owning 1 system...the vast majority of console sales are not made up of people that post on gamesites like us

do you really need me to start listing games which were only on the Saturn ? :P could also start listing games which were better on the Saturn for that matter.

saying the Saturn has not got alot of great exclusives is quite false actually.

• Because they were Sony. Not only do they make video games, but they were already an established electronics giant that made TVs, Stereos, Walkmans, VCRs, CD-Players, you name it. So they had a ton of support and money backing Playstation from the get-go.

• CD-Rom technology. This is what put them ahead of the SNES and N64, at least. With the Cd-Rom technology they could fit more on the disc, resulting in bigger games, more data, and more media-rich games (more CGI, more cutscenes, higher-quality sound, etc.).

• Against the Sega Saturn, it was easier programming capabilities. Many 3rd-party developers simply found it easier to create a game for Playstation than it was to create a game for Saturn. Or so I've read, I personally know nothing about programming other than old-school BASIC programming.

• 3rd-party support. Sony captured many of the top 3rd-party game makers to support their system including big names like Capcom, Konami, Namco, Squaresoft, Electronic Arts, Id Software, and others.

• Advertising, advertising, advertising. Playstation was everywhere back in the day. They were in comic book ads, magazine ads, TV commercials, and major store ads. They even starting publishing their own hype machine that still continues to this day: The Official U.S. Playstation Magazine. The reason they were able to do this goes back to my first point: They are Sony so they had lots and lots of money to work with.

• Quality games. They speak for themselves: Crash Bandicoot, Resident Evil, Final Fantasy VII, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro the Dragon, Einhander, Mega Man Legends, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, and the list goes on and on.

Well, firstly the PS1 was easy and inexpensive to develop for, so it had a lot of third-party support from day one.

Also, Nintendo greatly overstated the N64's power, promising arcade-perfect ports of games like Cruis'n USA and Killer Instinct, which ended up being butchered to run properly on the console. Sticking to cartridges instead of discs was also a poor choice, meaning that many developers that used to support the SNES migrated to the PS1. This greatly hurt the N64's library.

As for Sega, they had lost a lot of money the previous gen with the Sega CD and 32X, so they couldn't afford to continue supporting the Saturn in the West. It would have done better if it hadn't been dropped so early. Obviously poor marketing and not being easy do develop for didn't help at all.

So in the end, you could say the PS1 succeded more due to its competitors' mistakes than for its own merits.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="metswonin69"]

People like quality games. The PS1 had a lot more quality games on it than its two competitors.

metswonin69

That answer is too shallow. The Wii sales are also superior to 360 and PS3 sales but I'm not sure if it has a lot more quality games than them combined.

Same could be said for the PS1. The PS1 was advertised to all sorts of people that weren't dedicated gamers. Sony advertised it in music shows and sports events, something Nintendo didn't do. And PS1 consoles were sold in Sony stores alongside TVs and other tech. They sold N64s only in toy stores.

Also, Nintendo greatly overstated the N64's power, promising arcade-perfect ports of games like Cruis'n USA and Killer Instinct, which ended up being butchered to run properly on the console.

M3tr4nk0

Actually Cruisn USA and KI aren't that impressive games. I think they could run on the 3DO with some sacrifices. I do agree the carts were N64's main drawback though. And you have a point about Nintendo and Sega making mistakes.

@rawsavon

1) its known as having a sense of humor and/or taking things in a light hearted manner, and what exactly do you mean by "this face is the bane of GS' existence"???

1) of course, and the same applies to any other system , so its pretty fair, not every excluisive on the Saturn is good, just like not every exclusive on the PS1 is good.

2) people do care , in fact one of the main reasons for the PS1 being sucessful early on was that the PS1 versions of some key games like Wipeout , Toshinden , Tomb Raider and Die Hard Trilogy (which I thought was rubbish but apparently Im in the minority) were better then their Saturn counterparts early on.

3) when did I ever say I was the norm? in fact, I will admit my tastes in games are fairly unique

4) so youre admitting most people are not "hardcore" gamers (or whatever you want to call them).

as we both know, that crowd is more affected by fancy marketing and gimmicks then actual game quality, and you know that as well as I do.

this just adds to the "half of it was marketing" like I said.

5)sure the Saturn did not have MGS , Final Fantasy, and Gran Turismo , but it had its own exclusive games, quite a few of them in fact.

6) whats so hard to understand? Im saying , that yes , at the end of the day, game quality is subjective, but that does not mean you can't discuss things.

1) its known as having a sense of humor and/or taking things in a light hearted manner, and what exactly do you mean by "this face is the bane of GS' existence"???

Darkman2007

He means you're not fooling anyone by saying something frankly contradictory or confrontational and trying to hide it behind a smiley face. Nothing wrong with saying those things as long as it's not in a disrespectful manner.

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

1) its known as having a sense of humor and/or taking things in a light hearted manner, and what exactly do you mean by "this face is the bane of GS' existence"???

Emerald_Warrior

He means you're not fooling anyone by saying something frankly contradictory or confrontational and trying to hide it behind a smiley face. Nothing wrong with saying those things as long as it's not in a disrespectful manner.

@rawsavon

1) I dont understand, whos face and what about it.

2)never said the PS1 had less great exclusives, but saying it had " waaaay more" is false , the Saturn has more then enough great exclusive games.

3) the vast majority of people do care, because thats what they see in the adverts, or in the rare screenshot they do look at , or at the demo display in the shop, the effect the visuals of the initial PS1 games vs the rushed Saturn launch games cannot be overlooked

4) the "casuals" like to play what they see as cool , not necessarily what is great (and the two things are not always interchangable)

think about it, the PS1 sold over 100 million copies worldwide, yet FF7 for instance , sold 10 million , so the majority of people did not own one, instead they went for what they thought was cool.

5) you want me to give you a list of great Saturn exclusives? I could do that if you want.

and I think its a bit more then "some" just like there are more then "only 20 great N64 games)

6) why select when you can have both? like I said, its fine to discuss things, as long as the discussion is an educated one.

7) I still don't see what the problem is with that icon, if someone could explain , I would appreciate it, I certainly don't take offense to it when its used in any way.

5)

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

1) its known as having a sense of humor and/or taking things in a light hearted manner, and what exactly do you mean by "this face is the bane of GS' existence"???

Emerald_Warrior

He means you're not fooling anyone by saying something frankly contradictory or confrontational and trying to hide it behind a smiley face. Nothing wrong with saying those things as long as it's not in a disrespectful manner.

The original Sony Playstation was the first videogame console to make a success out of CD Rom Based games. Which had been available since 1989. But it took until December 4th 1994.

Sega had the Sega CD/Mega CD and NEC had the 699.99 CD Rom add on. Plus others like Phillips and 3DO and the Sega Saturn.

Sony just managed to make a decent CD based console Which they perfected out of the SNES CD ROM failure partnership with Nintendo.

Sony just stuck with it and were detrimined to make the Playstation work.

Plus great games did come out for the PS1. (N64) just could keep up with Sony.

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]

1) its known as having a sense of humor and/or taking things in a light hearted manner, and what exactly do you mean by "this face is the bane of GS' existence"???

Darkman2007

He means you're not fooling anyone by saying something frankly contradictory or confrontational and trying to hide it behind a smiley face. Nothing wrong with saying those things as long as it's not in a disrespectful manner.

@rawsavon

1)whatever, nevermind, not sure if it was meant to be any sort of insult beforehand, but I will let it go for the sake of keeping things civil

2) please name them , and only games that you personally played for a decent amount of time, it would be wrong to talk about games you didn't play

3) its known as display stands in the shops, as well as screenshots on the cover of the game , Ive got both versions and I can tell the difference just from those, let alone from actually seeing the game

and while most people were not subscribed to a game magazine (heck , Im not) , people do occasionally get to read them.

4) yes, and that was the exception , Metal Gear sold 6 million , Reisdent evil sold less, Tomb Raider didn't sell 10 million either , neither did wipeout, Tekken or most other amazing exclusives, thats just the case with most consoles

5)sure

first off, western exclusives that I would consider good, from my own personal library.

• Daytona USA
• Virtua Fighter 2
• Virtua Cop 2
• Fighters Megamix
• Last Bronx
• Dragon Force
• Panzer Dragoon
• Panzer Dragoon Zwei
• Panzer Dragoon Saga
• Athlete Kings (known as Decathlete in the US)
• Winter Heat
• Clockwork Knight 2
• Manx TT Superbike
• Sega Rally
• Steep Slope Sliders
• Nights Into Dreams
• Astal
• Albert Odyssey
• Burning Rangers
• Virtual On
• Sega Worldwide Soccer 98
• Gungriffon
• Deep Fear
• Die Hard Arcade
• Shining Force 3
• Shining The Holy Ark

as for the Japanese exclusives (since the PS1 outsold the Saturn in Japan , its a valid topic)

• Daytona USA CE
• X - men vs Street Fighter (there is a PS1 version , but its awful)
• Marvel Superheroes vs Street Fighter (Same as Above)
• Bulk Slash
• Zero Divide : Final Conflict (technically there was a very similar game on the PS1 called Zero Divide 2 released a few months prior)
• Shining Force 3 Scenario 2
• Shining Force 3 Scenario 3
• Shutokou Battle 97
• King The Spirits 2
• Saturn Bomberman Fight
• J.League Go Go Goal
• Columns Arcade Collection (which as a then new game on it, Columns 97)
• Anarchy in the Nippon

there are 3 things about this list

1)this is only from the games I played , which totals around 80 , considering there are over 500 games for the Saturn , there are many more like Virtua Cop 1 and house of the dead.

2) I didn't include games like Dead Or Alive, or all of the SNK and Capcom arcade ports which were on PS1, but the Saturn versions were quite a bit better , in some cases significantly better.

3)I couldnt care less if this is a "US website" first of all its not, its a global website, 2nd Im not from the US so I don't care.

just for interest, here is a list of games which I would say are better on the Saturn

• Dead Or Alive
• Street Fighter Alpha 2
• Street Fighter Alpha/Zero 3
• Vampire Savior/ Darkstalkers 3
• Pocket Fighter
• Sillhouette Mirage
• Pandemonium (only slightly though)
• Soviet Strike
• Duke Nukem 3D
• Quake (arguably better then the N64 version)
• Metal Slug
• King of Fighters 97
• Grandia (if you can get by the Japanese)
• Lunar (same as above)
• Lunar 2 (same as above)
• Samurai Spirits 4
• Resident Evil (debatable, both versions have their good and bad)
• Command and Conquer (PS1 version too fast )
• Policenauts
• Mass Destruction

just for interest, here is a list of games which I would say are better on the Saturn

• Dead Or Alive
• Street Fighter Alpha 2
• Street Fighter Alpha/Zero 3
• Vampire Savior/ Darkstalkers 3
• Pocket Fighter
• Sillhouette Mirage
• Pandemonium (only slightly though)
• Soviet Strike
• Duke Nukem 3D
• Quake (arguably better then the N64 version)
• Metal Slug
• King of Fighters 97
• Grandia (if you can get by the Japanese)
• Lunar (same as above)
• Lunar 2 (same as above)
• Samurai Spirits 4
• Resident Evil (debatable, both versions have their good and bad)
• Command and Conquer (PS1 version too fast )
• Policenauts
• Mass Destruction

Darkman2007

@Dark 1. I am going to be honest, I have no idea what you are going on about 2. addressed later 3. This is where you are still thinking inside your box -most consumers do not buy systems at a game store or b/c they decided right there at a display -do the things you mentioned influence hardcore gamers?...of course -but 100 million PS1 units were not sold (on the whole) to people that post on gamesites, read game magazines, or hang out in game stores 4. The numbers you are listing are huge %'s 6% of 100 million people that decided to buy a ps1 bought MGS...that is HUGE 5. Here is why the PS1 killed everyone (thanks mainly to 3 rd party support) FF7 FF8 FF8 FFtactics Suikoden Suikoden 2 Xenogears Chrono Cross Legend of Dragoon (if you are going to list Albert Odyssey) Vagrant Story Star Ocean second story Parasite eve Paasite Eve 2 Legend of Mana Valkyrie Profile Persona Persona 2 Alundra Thousand Arms Wild Arms Tales Of Destiny 2 Blood Omen Dragon Quest 7 Not Sure what all systems the Breath of Fire games were on at that time ...AND THIS IS JUST ONE GENRE Also, for collectors, the lunar games were best on PS1 (b/c of the package)rawsavon

care to list some more.

btw I have/had some of those games and found them boring, like Alundra

and Suikoden is on the Saturn too .