The Playstation Was Originally A SNES add-on

I never knew that the original Playstation was originally a CD-based add-on for the SNES. Interesting eh? I knew that Sony and Nintendo had worked together before but I never knew that bit of information.

http://www.thegameconsole.com/videogames94.htm

On a side note, that website is pretty interesting. Just a little flashback on where home gaming consoles came from.

Sony's Playstation started as a revenge project after Nintendo back stabbed them for another company in the project you mentioned.

Makes you wonder what would have happened if Nintendo did not get greedy and stuck with Sony.

On a side note a similar thing happened with coke and pepsi. Pepsi actually offered to sell themselves to coke, but coke rejected the offer saying it lacked profitability for them. Pepsi was outraged by this so started a sales campaign in their home town to rub in cokes face, and the rest is history.

The younger forum users might not know about this, but this news is decades old.

Sony's Playstation started as a revenge project after Nintendo back stabbed them for another company in the project you mentioned.

Makes you wonder what would have happened if Nintendo did not get greedy and stuck with Sony.

On a side note a similar thing happened with coke and pepsi. Pepsi actually offered to sell themselves to coke, but coke rejected the offer saying it lacked profitability for them. Pepsi was outraged by this so started a sales campaign in their home town to rub in cokes face, and the rest is history.

dercoo

I can't even imagine if Nintendo hadn't been so arrogant, how much the modern industry would be different. Hell, we'd still probably be running some cartridge-based systems that weren't handhelds. Maybe even both at the same time.

Sony's Playstation started as a revenge project after Nintendo back stabbed them for another company in the project you mentioned.

Makes you wonder what would have happened if Nintendo did not get greedy and stuck with Sony.

On a side note a similar thing happened with coke and pepsi. Pepsi actually offered to sell themselves to coke, but coke rejected the offer saying it lacked profitability for them. Pepsi was outraged by this so started a sales campaign in their home town to rub in cokes face, and the rest is history.

dercoo

And I believe that the Xbox was an idea that was created when MS's interest grew in gaming consoles after helping Sega out with the Dreamcast. Correct me if I am wrong.FatedX360

Now now I know it's "in" to be fashionably late to a party but it's rude too yakno.:P

Yeah it's true but back then Nintendo thought they were "all that" and tried to flick off Sony as if they were the Neo Geo or Sega when they heard that Sony was thinking about getting into the console market but oh boy was it a bad idea. They basically insulted and disgraced Sony by making them announce that they will be partnering up with Nintendo while Nintendo themselves get up on the stage to tell everyone to ignore Sony.:P Now that's one hell of a slap to sucha big company.:P

Not only that, Nintendo signed a contract with Philips and they got the rights to make those horrible Zelda & Hotel Mario games... Tsk tsk.

Oh well.. Revenge is bitter sweet sometimes.:P

[QUOTE="FatedX360"]And I believe that the Xbox was an idea that was created when MS's interest grew in gaming consoles after helping Sega out with the Dreamcast. Correct me if I am wrong.Nintendo_Ownes7

I can't even imagine if Nintendo hadn't been so arrogant, how much the modern industry would be different. Hell, we'd still probably be running some cartridge-based systems that weren't handhelds. Maybe even both at the same time.

foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

I can't even imagine if Nintendo hadn't been so arrogant, how much the modern industry would be different. Hell, we'd still probably be running some cartridge-based systems that weren't handhelds. Maybe even both at the same time.

SparkyProtocol

Yeah if it wasn't Sony then it would've been either Microsoft or Sega that would've pushed the industry forward with disc's.

Yes, this is true. Nintendo wanted to have a disc based add-on, most likely to compete with the Sega CD. They chose to work with Sony, who began working, but for some reason Nintendo decided not to go with Sony. Nintendo went behind Sony's back and made a deal with Phillips. Sony found out about this with the rest of the world, when it was announced publicly. It was a pretty bad snub, and Nintendo didn't get an add-on anyway. And we had to end up with the horrible CD-i Zelda games because of the deal.

Yea supposedly it had a lot to do with Sony wanting rights for all software produced for the cd add-on and wisely Nintendo said no thanks. Sounds like Sony was being greedy but I am sure there is more to the story none of us will ever know. Either way I can't imagine Sony having rights to Zelda and Mario games and how different they may be nowadays.

Consoles would have still moved to disc. SparkyProtocol

[QUOTE="FatedX360"]And I believe that the Xbox was an idea that was created when MS's interest grew in gaming consoles after helping Sega out with the Dreamcast. Correct me if I am wrong.Nintendo_Ownes7

Yeah... we know. Cows and sheep are related. And even now, people argue over who backstabbed who.

[QUOTE="SparkyProtocol"] Consoles would have still moved to disc. foxhound_fox

the progression to optical storage was inevitable

Vinegar_Strokes

Sony's Playstation started as a revenge project after Nintendo back stabbed them for another company in the project you mentioned.

Makes you wonder what would have happened if Nintendo did not get greedy and stuck with Sony.

dercoo

actually it was sony who was the greedy one. Nintendo cancelled the playstation because in the contract sony was going to receive all the royalties for every game made for the playstation, not nintendo.

Royalties are the bread and butter of the console manufacturing business

You are only just finding this out? :|

You are only just finding this out? :|

SapSacPrime

Actually what happened was the ps1 before dubbed ps1 was supposed to be the next nintendo console. Nintendo knew that disc based games was the future, but did not have the technology so they partnered up with Sony to create the next nintendo console. The original verbal agreement was the Sony would get all royalties from the games produced on cds. Nintendo originally agreed, but had second thoughts so just before the anouncement of the next nintendo console, nintendo went behind sony's back and made a deal with phillips to create the games on disc while sony would create the hardware, sony was upset canceled the deal with nintendo and the rest is history.

I can't even imagine if Nintendo hadn't been so arrogant, how much the modern industry would be different. Hell, we'd still probably be running some cartridge-based systems that weren't handhelds. Maybe even both at the same time.

foxhound_fox

Playstation wasn't the first CD-based console. Sega might have been a lot more successful had they only been competing with Nintendo.

Actually what happened was the ps1 before dubbed ps1 was supposed to be the next nintendo console. Nintendo knew that disc based games was the future, but did not have the technology so they partnered up with Sony to create the next nintendo console. The original verbal agreement was the Sony would get all royalties from the games produced on cds. Nintendo originally agreed, but had second thoughts so just before the anouncement of the next nintendo console, nintendo went behind sony's back and made a deal with phillips to create the games on disc while sony would create the hardware, sony was upset canceled the deal with nintendo and the rest is history.

deebo_x

You honestly think Nintendo would have knowingly forfeited all the game royalties? That's where most of a console maker's profits usually come from!

I already knew that, but yes, good find and read for many who didn't know.

I wish it happened though.

In the words of Sir Bill Shakespeare, Alls well that ends well.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

I can't even imagine if Nintendo hadn't been so arrogant, how much the modern industry would be different. Hell, we'd still probably be running some cartridge-based systems that weren't handhelds. Maybe even both at the same time.

ThePlothole

Playstation wasn't the first CD-based console. Sega might have been a lot more successful had they only been competing with Nintendo.

Actually what happened was the ps1 before dubbed ps1 was supposed to be the next nintendo console. Nintendo knew that disc based games was the future, but did not have the technology so they partnered up with Sony to create the next nintendo console. The original verbal agreement was the Sony would get all royalties from the games produced on cds. Nintendo originally agreed, but had second thoughts so just before the anouncement of the next nintendo console, nintendo went behind sony's back and made a deal with phillips to create the games on disc while sony would create the hardware, sony was upset canceled the deal with nintendo and the rest is history.

deebo_x

You honestly think Nintendo would have knowingly forfeited all the game royalties? That's where most of a console maker's profits usually come from!

That was the point of going behind sony's back. The only way sony agreed to make the next nintendo system was if they got the royalties on all titles created on the disc. It was Sony's technology, the hardware, the medium used so they were in a good position to negotiate, but sony wasn't theonly ones creating disc mediums which is why nintendo chose to make a deal with phillips and why sony canceled the deal.

Sony's Playstation started as a revenge project after Nintendo back stabbed them for another company in the project you mentioned.

Makes you wonder what would have happened if Nintendo did not get greedy and stuck with Sony.

On a side note a similar thing happened with coke and pepsi. Pepsi actually offered to sell themselves to coke, but coke rejected the offer saying it lacked profitability for them. Pepsi was outraged by this so started a sales campaign in their home town to rub in cokes face, and the rest is history.

dercoo

Greedy? Nintendo was afraid the language in their contract would give Sony control over Nintendo's IPs if i recall correctly. Nintendo was the small(er) business trying to cut a huge deal with the bigger business (Sony) to advance their company as a whole, but Nintendo couldn't move ahead with the contract due to it putting doubt in Nintendo's future of owning its IPs.

Nintendo is not a major electronics company, they are a gaming software company that uses third parties to help make their hardware.

Sony makes everything you see in a Best Buy, if Nintendo lost control of their IPs they'd lose control of their future and their paychecks, and small(er) businesses should always be wary of deals with bigger businesses for reasons like that.

Nintendo screwed over Panasonic with the Gamecube, too. Panasonic was licensed by Nintendo to make the Gamecube's disc drive, and part of their licensing deal was that Panasonic would be allowed to produce their own version of the Gamecube, the Q model, which could play DVD movies in progressive scan. The Q units were much sleeker and designed with a more adult audience in mind.

The big reason Nintendo lost with the Gamecube was because they didn't have DVD playback in the system and it was percieved as a child's toy, and even early on Nintendo was realizing that Panasonic's Q model had a significant edge over their own. Instead of trying to play it up to better compete with the PS2 and Xbox, however, Nintendo started to worry that the Q model would end up competing with their own Gamecube model, and believed that it could potentially put a dent in Nintendo's bottom line, even though Nintendo was collecting royalties from it. Nintendo decided to drum up some BS claims about how the system's full-sized DVD tray made it a vehicle for piracy (which was BS, since games could almost as easily be pirated for the regular Gamecube, and it was not any worse of a problem than on PS2 or Xbox), and therefore demanded that Panasonic only release very limited quantities of the Q. They also forced Panasonic to cancel their plans to release the Q outside of Japan.

The ultimate effect of this was that Panasonic was not able to release enough Q units to make a profit with the operational costs of manufacturing them, and many speculate that that's exactly what Nintendo wanted. If it had been released in the US it likely would have carried a $299 price tag like the Xbox and PS2, but because it was only avalible in limited quantities in Japan, it was very expensive to import in the US-- usually $400 or more, depending on whether or not the region was unlocked. They stopped manufacturing it altogether after about a year. Nintendo was pleased, but gamers were not. Gamecube lost the 6th generation console war, and I can't help but wonder if it would have gone differently if Nintendo had promoted the Q instead of trying to subvert it.

As you can see, Nintendo has a long and sad history of screwing over their manufacturing partners. :(

And I believe that the Xbox was an idea that was created when MS's interest grew in gaming consoles after helping Sega out with the Dreamcast. Correct me if I am wrong.FatedX360

Yes it was. Then after Sony spent time and development on the "playstation," Nintendo became wary of sharing their glory, and cut the project off. It worked really well for them.

That was the point of going behind sony's back. The only way sony agreed to make the next nintendo system was if they got the royalties on all titles created on the disc. It was Sony's technology, the hardware, the medium used so they were in a good position to negotiate, but sony wasn't theonly ones creating disc mediums which is why nintendo chose to make a deal with phillips and why sony canceled the deal.

deebo_x

It wasn't that Sony would have sole ownership of CD based titles, it was that they would also have ownership (in addition to Nintendo). There is no reason why Nintendo would forfeit all ownership of games released for their system and royalties; they never would have signed such a deal in the first place.

It seems to me that this is more or less an "interpretation" by Nintendo fans who just assumed that the reason why the deal was sour was because it meant no royalties.

TC is making me feel old :(

Nintendo screwed over Panasonic with the Gamecube, too. Panasonic was licensed by Nintendo to make the Gamecube's disc drive, and part of their licensing deal was that Panasonic would be allowed to produce their own version of the Gamecube, the Q model, which could play DVD movies in progressive scan. The Q units were much sleeker and designed with a more adult audience in mind.

The big reason Nintendo lost with the Gamecube was because they didn't have DVD playback in the system and it was percieved as a child's toy, and even early on Nintendo was realizing that Panasonic's Q model had a significant edge over their own. Instead of trying to play it up to better compete with the PS2 and Xbox, however, Nintendo started to worry that the Q model would end up competing with their own Gamecube model, and believed that it could potentially put a dent in Nintendo's bottom line, even though Nintendo was collecting royalties from it. Nintendo decided to drum up some BS claims about how the system's full-sized DVD tray made it a vehicle for piracy (which was BS, since games could almost as easily be pirated for the regular Gamecube, and it was not any worse of a problem than on PS2 or Xbox), and therefore demanded that Panasonic only release very limited quantities of the Q. They also forced Panasonic to cancel their plans to release the Q outside of Japan.

The ultimate effect of this was that Panasonic was not able to release enough Q units to make a profit with the operational costs of manufacturing them, and many speculate that that's exactly what Nintendo wanted. If it had been released in the US it likely would have carried a $299 price tag like the Xbox and PS2, but because it was only avalible in limited quantities in Japan, it was very expensive to import in the US-- usually $400 or more, depending on whether or not the region was unlocked. They stopped manufacturing it altogether after about a year. Nintendo was pleased, but gamers were not. Gamecube lost the 6th generation console war, and I can't help but wonder if it would have gone differently if Nintendo had promoted the Q instead of trying to subvert it.

As you can see, Nintendo has a long and sad history of screwing over their manufacturing partners. :(

Timstuff

Wow, I hadn't heard about this. Somehow I doubt they'll be having future business partners any time soon.

Nintendo screwed over Panasonic with the Gamecube, too. Panasonic was licensed by Nintendo to make the Gamecube's disc drive, and part of their licensing deal was that Panasonic would be allowed to produce their own version of the Gamecube, the Q model, which could play DVD movies in progressive scan. The Q units were much sleeker and designed with a more adult audience in mind.

The big reason Nintendo lost with the Gamecube was because they didn't have DVD playback in the system and it was percieved as a child's toy, and even early on Nintendo was realizing that Panasonic's Q model had a significant edge over their own. Instead of trying to play it up to better compete with the PS2 and Xbox, however, Nintendo started to worry that the Q model would end up competing with their own Gamecube model, and believed that it could potentially put a dent in Nintendo's bottom line, even though Nintendo was collecting royalties from it. Nintendo decided to drum up some BS claims about how the system's full-sized DVD tray made it a vehicle for piracy (which was BS, since games could almost as easily be pirated for the regular Gamecube, and it was not any worse of a problem than on PS2 or Xbox), and therefore demanded that Panasonic only release very limited quantities of the Q. They also forced Panasonic to cancel their plans to release the Q outside of Japan.

The ultimate effect of this was that Panasonic was not able to release enough Q units to make a profit with the operational costs of manufacturing them, and many speculate that that's exactly what Nintendo wanted. If it had been released in the US it likely would have carried a $299 price tag like the Xbox and PS2, but because it was only avalible in limited quantities in Japan, it was very expensive to import in the US-- usually $400 or more, depending on whether or not the region was unlocked. They stopped manufacturing it altogether after about a year. Nintendo was pleased, but gamers were not. Gamecube lost the 6th generation console war, and I can't help but wonder if it would have gone differently if Nintendo had promoted the Q instead of trying to subvert it.

As you can see, Nintendo has a long and sad history of screwing over their manufacturing partners. :(

This guy is right. Im sure not everything in nintendo has been them doing wrong, if you look into their history, they have a long long tradition of screwing over hardware manufacturers. Look into the problem between Sony and Nintendo over the soundchip that sony made for nintendo. Look at the the phillips nintendo fiasco. look at what happened with the pre-n64. Nintendo are not the nicest, nor the smartest(seriously signing a contract that gave away all rights and royalties to another company). They have always(other than SNES) lagged behind in technology, and have always been considered a family friendly console. Thats fine, but they have rared interested me, other than their first party titles, and even then, they need something new.dRuGGeRnaUt

Again, it's not that they would forfeit all of their royalties, it was that it gave Sony licensing power.

Watch The History of the Playstation

Part 1

Part 2

Although, thinking on it, the SNES Add on version would have likely put Sony and Nintendo into a competitive scenario on a single console (cartridge vs. CD).

Nintendo screwed over Panasonic with the Gamecube, too. Panasonic was licensed by Nintendo to make the Gamecube's disc drive, and part of their licensing deal was that Panasonic would be allowed to produce their own version of the Gamecube, the Q model, which could play DVD movies in progressive scan. The Q units were much sleeker and designed with a more adult audience in mind.

The big reason Nintendo lost with the Gamecube was because they didn't have DVD playback in the system and it was percieved as a child's toy, and even early on Nintendo was realizing that Panasonic's Q model had a significant edge over their own. Instead of trying to play it up to better compete with the PS2 and Xbox, however, Nintendo started to worry that the Q model would end up competing with their own Gamecube model, and believed that it could potentially put a dent in Nintendo's bottom line, even though Nintendo was collecting royalties from it. Nintendo decided to drum up some BS claims about how the system's full-sized DVD tray made it a vehicle for piracy (which was BS, since games could almost as easily be pirated for the regular Gamecube, and it was not any worse of a problem than on PS2 or Xbox), and therefore demanded that Panasonic only release very limited quantities of the Q. They also forced Panasonic to cancel their plans to release the Q outside of Japan.

The ultimate effect of this was that Panasonic was not able to release enough Q units to make a profit with the operational costs of manufacturing them, and many speculate that that's exactly what Nintendo wanted. If it had been released in the US it likely would have carried a $299 price tag like the Xbox and PS2, but because it was only avalible in limited quantities in Japan, it was very expensive to import in the US-- usually $400 or more, depending on whether or not the region was unlocked. They stopped manufacturing it altogether after about a year. Nintendo was pleased, but gamers were not. Gamecube lost the 6th generation console war, and I can't help but wonder if it would have gone differently if Nintendo had promoted the Q instead of trying to subvert it.

As you can see, Nintendo has a long and sad history of screwing over their manufacturing partners. :(

Timstuff

And I believe that the Xbox was an idea that was created when MS's interest grew in gaming consoles after helping Sega out with the Dreamcast. Correct me if I am wrong.FatedX360

yep.

and there's something about MS sitting on a lot of money at the time, and the investors wanted them to expand from their OS industry.

not sure if I'm right on that either, I've seen the statement a few times though. had to have originated from some place.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

Nintendo screwed over Panasonic with the Gamecube, too. Panasonic was licensed by Nintendo to make the Gamecube's disc drive, and part of their licensing deal was that Panasonic would be allowed to produce their own version of the Gamecube, the Q model, which could play DVD movies in progressive scan. The Q units were much sleeker and designed with a more adult audience in mind.

The big reason Nintendo lost with the Gamecube was because they didn't have DVD playback in the system and it was percieved as a child's toy, and even early on Nintendo was realizing that Panasonic's Q model had a significant edge over their own. Instead of trying to play it up to better compete with the PS2 and Xbox, however, Nintendo started to worry that the Q model would end up competing with their own Gamecube model, and believed that it could potentially put a dent in Nintendo's bottom line, even though Nintendo was collecting royalties from it. Nintendo decided to drum up some BS claims about how the system's full-sized DVD tray made it a vehicle for piracy (which was BS, since games could almost as easily be pirated for the regular Gamecube, and it was not any worse of a problem than on PS2 or Xbox), and therefore demanded that Panasonic only release very limited quantities of the Q. They also forced Panasonic to cancel their plans to release the Q outside of Japan.

The ultimate effect of this was that Panasonic was not able to release enough Q units to make a profit with the operational costs of manufacturing them, and many speculate that that's exactly what Nintendo wanted. If it had been released in the US it likely would have carried a $299 price tag like the Xbox and PS2, but because it was only avalible in limited quantities in Japan, it was very expensive to import in the US-- usually $400 or more, depending on whether or not the region was unlocked. They stopped manufacturing it altogether after about a year. Nintendo was pleased, but gamers were not. Gamecube lost the 6th generation console war, and I can't help but wonder if it would have gone differently if Nintendo had promoted the Q instead of trying to subvert it.

As you can see, Nintendo has a long and sad history of screwing over their manufacturing partners. :(

hakanakumono

Wow, I hadn't heard about this. Somehow I doubt they'll be having future business partners any time soon.

In February 2008, InPhase Technologies was granted a joint patent with video game company Nintendo for a flexure-based scanner for angle-based multiplexing in a holographic storage system

Link to the patent

inPhase makes the Holographic Versatile Disc format.

Sony's Playstation started as a revenge project after Nintendo back stabbed them for another company in the project you mentioned.

Makes you wonder what would have happened if Nintendo did not get greedy and stuck with Sony.

On a side note a similar thing happened with coke and pepsi. Pepsi actually offered to sell themselves to coke, but coke rejected the offer saying it lacked profitability for them. Pepsi was outraged by this so started a sales campaign in their home town to rub in cokes face, and the rest is history.

dercoo

Interesting indeed. As you said, the rest is history though. Its best to leave the pieces where they fall and leave it at that.

yea i been known this, imagine if there never was a playstation? wow gaming would be so wack.

yea i been known this, imagine if there never was a playstation? wow gaming would be so wack.

GramDubs

Yea supposedly it had a lot to do with Sony wanting rights for all software produced for the cd add-on and wisely Nintendo said no thanks. Sounds like Sony was being greedy but I am sure there is more to the story none of us will ever know. Either way I can't imagine Sony having rights to Zelda and Mario games and how different they may be nowadays.

VladJasonDrac