Support NeoGAF

[nial]

And no, I'm not accepting any Xbox Series response as that at the very least had Gears Tactics and those next gen SKUs of previous gen games.
Anyway, it's kind of weird (or maybe not), that no one has ever noticed this, but upon the original launch of PS2 in Japan on March 4, 2000, SCE didn't publish any single game on that same day. The first game published by SCE on the platform was Fantavision, which was released five days later on March 9, 2000; it was originally slated for release alongside the console launch, but it was pushed back for unknown reasons.
So basically, if you bought a PS2 on its launch day in Japan, there wasn't any software published by Sony Computer Entertainment available for it.

No deep meaning to it tho, just a quirky and unimportant, but curious gaming fact. =P

 

[64gigabyteram]

third parties drive the gaming industry. true back then and it's true now :3

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

third parties drive the gaming industry. true back then and it's true now :3

Not the question, homie.

 

[March Climber]

There's probably another out there. Are we allowed to count Pre-Nintendo or any of the oddball stuff like the Atari Jaguar, Stadia, and Ouya?

 

[64gigabyteram]

Not the question, homie.

I mean, you're not answering yourself moreso getting triggered by my statement

also, why PS2 and not also PS1? nial

 

[Alexios]

That's what Sony did to enter (buy) the industry, pay the media for hype and the actual devs and pubs for game exclusivity with their warchest from electronics and other stuff. Or do you think PS1 became a success because of "Crime Crackers" (in Japan, maybe 0 first party in the West) or something?

 

[Lokaum D+]

Do we count Sony Pictures as first party content for PS2 ?

 

[Sooner]

It felt like PS1 went the entire generation without first-party games. And it had, by far, the largest library of great exclusives for the generation.

It was Nintendo 64 for Nintendo first-party games and PlayStation for pretty much everything else.

Now that Microsoft is putting all their games on PS5, it's pretty much the same all over again.

 

[nial]

I mean, you're not answering yourself moreso getting triggered by my statement

also, why PS2 and not also PS1? nial

PS1 launched with Crime Crackers on December 3, 1994, SIE's first ever release.

 

[nial]

There's probably another out there. Are we allowed to count Pre-Nintendo or any of the oddball stuff like the Atari Jaguar, Stadia, and Ouya?

Yes, but I'm sure all of those had something at the very least.

 

[ManaByte]

In the PSX and PS2 gens, Tekken and Ridge Racer were seen as first party games as the arcade games ran on PS derived hardware and were exclusive.

 

[nial]

In the PSX and PS2 gens, Tekken and Ridge Racer were seen as first party games as the arcade games ran on PS derived hardware and were exclusive.

Normal consumers don't know what 'first-party' means, lol. Do you mean that they were seen as Sony games? Hell no, it's Namco we're talking about here.

 

[PeteBull]

First party or not, no1 cared and no1 cares today either, what counts is exclusive of high quality, not timed, not some deluxe version, but true exclusive which ps2 had crazy amount of.
Those 160m consoles sold wouldnt be possible otherwise.
It doesnt matter when xbox series has many games made for it from first party studios when 0 of them are exclusive...
TLDR: Results matter, and in ps2 case result was hundreds of top quality exclusive games over the lifespan of the console, thats how u get crazy numbers of consoles sold, which we get proof even with switch, which has so many flaws yet its close to 150m already(super weak/outdated hardware, reduced amount of multiplats and adult/mature games)...
U can even make hypothethical experiment, imagine all switch exclusives(including ones shared with wiiu so mk8 and botw) were xbox series exclusives instead(true ones, no pc port ever), u would have by now xbox series close to 100m console sold ezpz

 

[TGO]

Sony heavy published 3rd Party exclusives more than actually developing their own back in the PSX/PS2 era.
And those wasn't just 3rd Party Exclusives, the had them too.
They picked up during the PS2 era and was pretty much self developing by time PS3.
But Namco & Square all published under the Sony Computer Entertainment label during that period and they provided the bulk of titles for launch.

 

[Burning Blade]

When did Gran Turismo come out? I think a lot of us bought it for the DVD player too.

 

[nial]

But Namco & Square all published under the Sony Computer Entertainment label during that period and they provided the bulk of titles for launch.

Um, no, they didn't. You're probably from Europe/Australia considering that SCEE used to pick up their games for localisation in its regions.
Also, Square didn't publish any game for PS2 at launch.

They picked up during the PS2 era and was pretty much self developing by time PS3.

Eh, Resistance: Fall of Man and Genji: Days of the Blade were both developed by external studios, what you're saying is just not true.

When did Gran Turismo come out? I think a lot of us bought it for the DVD player too.

Gran Turismo 3 was released in April 2001 (13 months after launch) and July 2001 (8 months after launch) in Japan and the West respectively.

 

[TGO]

Eh, Resistance: Fall of Man and Genji: Days of the Blade were both developed by external studios, what you're saying is just not true.

Never said they stopped with external studios, just that they were actually making games and less dependent on 3rd Party.

 

[DonJimbo]

The PS2 was so hyped because of the glorious Psone that was a behemouth and there was no need for First Parties to release at launch

 

[Mattyp]

PS5.

 

[Three]

PS5.

No. PS5 launched with Demon's Souls and Sackboy a big adventure (and Spiderman: Miles Morales).

 

[Cakeboxer]

No. PS5 launched with Demon's Souls and Sackboy a big adventure.

According to the thread title correct. But if we start nit-picking you could say those are also on PS3/PS4 and therefore no system seller material. I think that's what he meant.

 

[JohnSpartanLee]

The CD32 released without a single Commodore-game.

 

[Three]

According to the thread title correct. But if we start nit-picking you could say those are also on PS3/PS4 and therefore no system seller material. I think that's what he meant.

Ridiculous criteria really if that's what we're nit-picking, especially counting DS as a PS3 game.

This was ps3 launch

1. Resistance: Fall of Man

That was it. I'd rather take Demon's Souls, Sackboy and Miles Morales as system sellers thanks.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

PS1 launched with Crime Crackers on December 3, 1994, SIE's first ever release.

I had never seen this game before:
My first reaction: “Judging by the cover, this looks way more fun that Ridge Racer.”
After Googling some images: “Welp, no wonder they launched PS2 without first-party games.”

 

[Sintoid]

I actually never heard the term "First Party" before PS3
There was no reason in my mind to look for the source of a game, if it was made by Sony or someone else

 

[Banjo64]

What did the Series S and X launch with?

Just seen the first line Nvm

 

[Fafalada]

First party or not, no1 cared and no1 cares today either, what counts is exclusive of high quality, not timed, not some deluxe version, but true exclusive which ps2 had crazy amount of.
Those 160m consoles sold wouldnt be possible otherwise.

I don't think that really holds either - 'true exclusivity' is just as meaningless as the whole '1st party' label - most people don't care. Perceptions are usually the only thing that matter - if something is associated with the system, people buy it there the most.
Just like noone cared that Switch heavy hitters were not Switch exclusive for first 3 years(it's funny how that only became a sticky point to debate for Series and PS5), neither did people care that for PS2 - its top 20 best sellers had - 2 'true' exclusives - and both of them were Gran Turismo.

I expect quantity and variety in general PS2 does offer more (though it's more on niche side of the library, not the big IPs) - but again, looking at Switch, which is perhaps the only modern console to rival the size of PS2 library, noone particularly cares, that all of it is multiplatform outside of 1st party.

 

[ManaByte]

But Namco & Square all published under the Sony Computer Entertainment label during that period and they provided the bulk of titles for launch.

SCEA never published Namco's games. They were exclusive because the arcade hardware was based on the PSX and they were fast near-arcade-perfect ports.

SCEA only published Square games until 1998 when Square formed an alliance with EA called Square Electronic Arts (Electron Arts Square in JPN). FFVIII was published by EA.

By the PS2 era Square was publishing their games on their own under the Squaresoft name again.

 

[Holammer]

Funny observation, especially when PS2 is remembered for tons of first party Sony games, some of them top-notch.

 

[PeteBull]

I don't think that really holds either - 'true exclusivity' is just as meaningless as the whole '1st party' label - most people don't care. Perceptions are usually the only thing that matter - if something is associated with the system, people buy it there the most.
Just like noone cared that Switch heavy hitters were not Switch exclusive for first 3 years(it's funny how that only became a sticky point to debate for Series and PS5), neither did people care that for PS2 - its top 20 best sellers had - 2 'true' exclusives - and both of them were Gran Turismo.

I expect quantity and variety in general PS2 does offer more (though it's more on niche side of the library, not the big IPs) - but again, looking at Switch, which is perhaps the only modern console to rival the size of PS2 library, noone particularly cares, that all of it is multiplatform outside of 1st party.

The difference between just variety of games and variety/big amount of high quality exclusives is- u need to buy specific console if u wanna play them, thats why xbox series is 30m sold consoles only now, and switch despite everything that is wrong with it(and there is plenty) is sitting at official sales data 146m back from 30th sept 2024, by now it will be obviously even more, likely gonna break 150m over its whole lifespan

IR Information : Sales Data - Dedicated Video Game Sales Units

www.nintendo.co.jp

In other words pc crowd (and soon playstation crowd since we getting more and more xbox to playstation games)has 0 reason to buy series consoles but if they wanna play switch(and upcoming switch2) high quality exclusives, we got no other choice- we gotta buy nintendo hardware no matter what(yes there is emulation which ninny fighting hard for this very reason btw).

 

[cireza]

PS1 ? Sony entered the market with a console and bought the games from publishers.

 

[TGO]

SCEA never published Namco's games. They were exclusive because the arcade hardware was based on the PSX and they were fast near-arcade-perfect ports.

SCEA only published Square games until 1998 when Square formed an alliance with EA called Square Electronic Arts (Electron Arts Square in JPN). FFVIII was published by EA.

By the PS2 era Square was publishing their games on their own under the Squaresoft name again.

I'm from the UK.
most if not all Namco games was SCEE published here.
And Final Fantasy X-2 was published by EA here while FFX was published by SCEE
Even games like The Bouncer was published by SCEE

 

[Horseganador]

No, in this same generation Xbox Series came out with nothing first.

 

[near]

I'm from the UK.
most if not all Namco games was SCEE published here.
And Final Fantasy X-2 was published by EA here while FFX was published by SCEE
Even games like The Bouncer was published by SCEE

Yeah, a lot of the early Namco and SquareSoft games got localised by SCEE for us. I can’t think of many devs/publishers from back then that had proper international branches outside of Sega, Capcom, and Konami. Which is also why we had to wait an eternity for JRPGs to get here, and a lot of them never even made it over.

 

[AGRacing]

Ridge Racer and Tekken may as well have been first party in 2000. Boy I’d kill for a launch ridge racer.

 

[RoboFu]

Almost but really Namco and Ridge Racer / Tekken were considered Sony games back then.

 

[nial]

Never said they stopped with external studios, just that they were actually making games and less dependent on 3rd Party.

Which I doubt, what are your favorite games from that gen?
Notable stuff like Resistance 1-3, Motorstorm, Everybody's Golf 5, every Ratchet & Clank game, LittleBigPlanet, Demon's Souls, Infamous 1-2, Heavy Rain, Modnation Racers, Twisted Metal, Tokyo Jungle and Sly Cooper 4 were all developed by external studios.

 

[nial]

PS1 ? Sony entered the market with a console and bought the games from publishers.

PS1 launched with Crime Crackers on December 3, 1994, SIE's first ever release.

Ridge Racer and Tekken may as well have been first party in 2000. Boy I’d kill for a launch ridge racer.

Almost but really Namco and Ridge Racer / Tekken were considered Sony games back then.

Come on now.

 

[Crayon]

In the PSX and PS2 gens, Tekken and Ridge Racer were seen as first party games as the arcade games ran on PS derived hardware and were exclusive.

^^ came to say just this. Hard to overstate how strongly those were associated with ps.

 

[squidilix]

OP discovers that second and third-party games also attract people to buy a console.

 

[nial]

OP discovers that second and third-party games also attract people to buy a console.

Funny how people are trying to find some meaning to the thread when I made it clear that it was nothing of that.
Second-party games ARE first-party games and Sony didn't have those at launch either.
Hence:

The first game published by SCE on the platform was Fantavision, which was released five days later on March 9, 2000

 

[Perrott]

What did the Xbox Series consoles launch with? Gears 5: Hivebusters and 4K/120hz updates of Xbox One games doesn't count.

 

[nial]

What did the Xbox Series consoles launch with? Gears 5: Hivebusters and 4K/120hz updates of Xbox One games doesn't count.

And no, I'm not accepting any Xbox Series response as that at the very least had Gears Tactics

Which was a first time console port. Now, I'm not here to talk about the quality of such lineup, just stating that there was at least something.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

That's what Sony did to enter (buy) the industry, pay the media for hype and the actual devs and pubs for game exclusivity with their warchest from electronics and other stuff. Or do you think PS1 became a success because of "Crime Crackers" (in Japan, maybe 0 first party in the West) or something?

Uh, what? No, none of this is true. Even in Japan, the Saturn had a head start in terms of sales, but that was mainly because SEGA were already a known entity in console & arcade gaming, so retailers likely put in more orders early on vs. the PS1. If Sony had the clout to buy out media space as you claim, PS1 would've had the lead in Japan from Day 1.

Also it's not like SEGA didn't do timed exclusives with Saturn, either. Tomb Raider was originally a Saturn timed exclusive for example.

 

[Perrott]

Which was a first time console port. Now, I'm not here to talk about the quality of such lineup, just stating that there was at least something.

Do mid-gen refreshes count as "consoles"?

Also...

Which I doubt, what are your favorite games from that gen?
Notable stuff like Resistance 1-3, Motorstorm, Everybody's Golf 5, every Ratchet & Clank game, LittleBigPlanet, Demon's Souls, Infamous 1-2, Heavy Rain, Modnation Racers, Twisted Metal, Tokyo Jungle and Sly Cooper 4 were all developed by external studios.

... why isn't the superior Sony superhero new IP from the PS3 era not listed among all that "notable stuff"? Of course I'm talking about Beyond: Two Souls

 

[Celine]

3DO launched with just Crash'n Burn by Crystal Dynamics (a third-party game).

 

[nial]

Do mid-gen refreshes count as "consoles"?

Nah, you would have to count a ton of them otherwise.

 

[SweetTooth]

That's what Sony did to enter (buy) the industry, pay the media for hype and the actual devs and pubs for game exclusivity with their warchest from electronics and other stuff. Or do you think PS1 became a success because of "Crime Crackers" (in Japan, maybe 0 first party in the West) or something?

Revisionist history here.

PS1 succeeded because:
Price.
Capable 3D hardware.
Easy to develop for
CD (cheaper for mass)
Friendly relationship with studios.

Meanwhile Nintendo was hell on earth to work with, with limited support and infinite restrictions (logistically and creatively)

 

[TGO]

Which I doubt, what are your favorite games from that gen?
Notable stuff like Resistance 1-3, Motorstorm, Everybody's Golf 5, every Ratchet & Clank game, LittleBigPlanet, Demon's Souls, Infamous 1-2, Heavy Rain, Modnation Racers, Twisted Metal, Tokyo Jungle and Sly Cooper 4 were all developed by external studios.

Wasn't really a fan of those, except maybe Motorstorm & Heavy Rain
They're all second party studios who were in contracts with the platform holder to develop games exclusively for that platform.

Come on now.

It's a common mistake, most don't realise only SCEE published those and elsewhere was done independently.
So they assume like above, but they were 3rd Party Exclusives with distribution support from the platform holder in regions (PAL) that needed it.

 

[squidilix]

Funny how people are trying to find some meaning to the thread when I made it clear that it was nothing of that.

So, what's your point of this thread?
Whether a game is "labeled" SCEE/SCEA/SCEI or not does not change the fact that an agreement has been made with a publisher/developer to release games on PS2. Ridge Racer & Tekken Tag Tournament is a perfect example.