Originally posted by Lord Nicon
Well NSS. I was just pointing out the fact. And i wouldnt say Jag because it was two 32 bit processors . I know what im talking about. There is no need to provide the facts for me . Psh i have one (and no i didnt pay for it).
All valid points. But if the N64 was truely better then it could have survived almost this long. Of course it logically wouldnt and so it didnt.
(1) I also have a Jaguar and I did pay for it.
(2) The N64 was doomed. Spec wise, it was superior, as was the Saturn. Infact, Psone was the worst of all consoles, spec wise, however the cartridge format killed N64 and Sega\'s sketchy past and lack of American support hurt them. Not to mention a surprise launch.
If anything, the Psone did nothing \'cept capatalize on the other two companies mistakes. The N64 was delayed constantly, was cartridge based , so developers didn\'t want to develop for it. The Saturn had a surprise launch, Sega\'s sketchy past and was hard to develop for.. Where else was developers going to go ?
In my opinion, Sony really done nothing to get so succesful. It was a matter of developers not having any other viable platform to develop for. So what did they do? They went with a product that had a brand name and decent advirtisements (if not overly sexual, or so \'Sophia Says\').
This may sound like I am not giving credit to Sony and I guess I\'m not. I am not though, saying that the Psone was not a good console. It was and it provided me with pleny of great games (namely CastleVania: SOTN - a game that oddly enough Sony did not want to happen at first due to its 2D nature).