Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment Technology

PlayStation Earns An Emmy 66

Posted by Zonk from the nice-trophy-considering-it's-inanimate dept.
Appropriate considering the PS1's 10 year anniversary, the PlayStation has been awarded an Emmy for Outstanding Achievement in Technology and Advanced New Media. Eurogamer reports: 'When the concept for PlayStation was in its infancy in the early 1990s, we had a dream to elevate the quality of computer graphics from a 2D-based environment to a rich, realistic 3D experience,' said uberbigwig Ken Kutaragi. 'At the same time, we intended to bring in a new form of entertainment through the living room in a manner that would allow people all over the world to enjoy the pleasures of interactive entertainment ... Even with this lofty goal in mind, the achievement and market acceptance for PlayStation have exceeded my wildest expectations. We are honoured to be awarded a prestigious Emmy to commemorate the significant role PlayStation played in creating a new computer entertainment world."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PlayStation Earns An Emmy More

PlayStation Earns An Emmy

Comments Filter:
  • Emmys were awards for TV shows.
    • As did I. Apparently, the organisation's name that sponsors the awards is the "Academy of Television Arts and Sciences" which, at least in its name, awards it a certain lattitude in giving awards out to things like this.

      Question in my mind is does the PS2 really deserve the Emmy? Sure it's a great platform and we all enjoy playing on it, but seems to me they're end result has fallen significantly short of their goal. When they came out with the PS2, it was supposed to usher in an era of entertainment in w
      • PS1's getting the award, not the PS2.
      • The PlayStation brand is getting the Emmy, rather than the PS2. Or that's how I would see it.
    • if you have enough dough they're for anything - and you can claim crap like that your crap graphics were lightyears more advanced than what was available on pc & other consoles.

      psx games as a rule of thumb were uuuugly(with few exceptions), even considering the time(warping textures etc).
      • For the most part, I can stand looking at PS1 graphics easier then N64 graphics. PS1's CD medium allowed higher resolution textures compared to N64's, which looked like someone had smeared vasoline on the lens/object.

        • Re:I thought (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Actually that isn't true, the PS1 could not display anywhere near the texture resolution of the N64. However, the N64 supported linear texture filtering, which blended adjacent pixels on a face. While not so noticeable in first party titles like Starfox and Mario 64, it was very apparent in many other titles.

  • Sharing? (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by Rydia ( 556444 )
    And I'm sure they'll share it with Nintendo, since the original PSX started as a jointly-designed disc drive for the SNES!

    Wait....

  • I'd Like To Thank.... (Score:4, Funny)

    by HappyCycling ( 565803 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @05:56PM (#13689775)
    Sega: For releasing the Saturn early, without a proper launch, at a huge price and with few games.

    Nintendo: For endlessly delaying the underpowered N64 while we gained the majority of the market.

    ...oh...and Satan.

  • BS (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    we had a dream to elevate the quality of computer graphics from a 2D-based environment to a rich, realistic 3D experience

    Yeah, Ken, too bad everyone else was ahead of you on that one.

  • There were actually three gaming awards... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    http://www.emmyonline.org/emmy/advanced_media_winn ers_release_2005.html [emmyonline.org]

    For "Development and Impact in 8-Bit Consoles," Atari won for the Atari 2600.

    For "Development and Impact in Polygon Consoles," Sony won for the PS1.

    For "Development of Multiplayer Console Technology," Microsoft won for XBOX Live.
    • Hmm, i find it funny since most of the nintendo fanboys like to think of there overlord as the most innovative company to ever grace the earth. But where is there emmy? Where is there award? hehehe..might show them a few things actually. Not saying nintendo isnt great, but this just proves there not as innovative as the fans think.

      • Re:There were actually three gaming awards... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by AuMatar ( 183847 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:17PM (#13689976)
        An award given out by a television show proves anything about the video game industry? I don't think so.

      • Hey, Kiddo... (Score:1, Troll)

        by LKM ( 227954 )

        Based on your writing style, and assuming your post isn't supposed to be a joke, I guess that you weren't born yet way back when the PS was released in 1994, so maybe I should clear up a few things for you. The only thing the PS achieved was a huge market share. Maybe that's the "Outstanding Achievement" for which it got the Emmy, I frankly don't know. Nothing about the PS was revolutionary in any way. 3D consoles like the 3DO or the Atari Jaguar were available before the PS came out. CD-Based consoles like

        • PS1 was the first system with a combination of software and hardware that rivals the arcades. Every other console before it tried to make arcade games or had arcade-like chipsets and didn't know what to do with it. CDrom had little to do it.

          • not true. there were plenty of arcade perfect ports to the SNES. even Mortal Kombat 2 was a pretty great port even if they axed a few frames of animation. everything else was arcade perfect. even a good deal of neo geo ports weren't really all toned down graphically. king of monsters and samauri showdown both come to mind. also, for what it is worth, the NES had a few arcade perfect ports as well. granted they were of older games, but still. this argument really hasn't had much clout, since the arcades are
          • EVERY console that has been worth its salt has rivaled the arcades on release.

            The Atari VCS was incredible when it came out, capable of quite accurate renditions of hits like Space Invaders and Bezerk. Sure, by the time Pac Man was popular (4 years later), it was faltering, but that's what happens.

            The NES produced surprisingly accurate versions of arcade hits like Ikari Warriors, Super Dodge Ball and Double Dragon, just to name a few.

            The Sega Genesis was BASED on Sega's System 16 arcade board [wikipedia.org], which was th
          • PS1 was the first system with a combination of software and hardware that rivals the arcades.

            So you're telling me my playing of Pac Man on my VCS 2600 was all an illusion? Oh my god! I never suspected!

    • I guess that goes to show that the Emmys have no idea about anything that goes on in the gameing industry. Next thing we'll hear is that the PSP gets an award for being the best selling handheld console of all time. When it comes to impacting the gaming industry, I think the innovative Nintendo should win some awards. They created the analog controller, creating the 3D platformer, raising the gaming industry from the dead in the 80s, creating the best selling game console ever (Gameboy), and creating the
      • WTF? Nintendo didn't create the analog controller, but they certainly popularized its usage in console game systems. They didn't exactly create the 3D platformer either (there were a number of 3D platformers released at the same time), but theirs was the only one that featured unrestricted movement in most levels. (If I am wrong, correct me. I know Crash was on rails at least 90% of the time, and I think that NiGHTS was, too, but I might be wrong.)

        I'm just having a hard time understanding how anyone could m
        • Nintendo so created the analog controller. Who had it before them? No one. There were joysticks, but not analog sticks like all controllers have now. Also, I think creating the first free-movement 3D platformer is a major achievement, much more so than creating a game on rails.
          • Bull. Analog joysticks was invented several years before the Nintendo put them onto a controller.
            • Do you mean joysticks, as in on an Atari controller, or thumbsticks, as in modern controllers? Because obviously no one has ever claimed that nintendo invented joysticks. And, since you're so knowledgable, why don't you tell me who invented them if not nintendo?
              • Yeah, it's a huge leap from analog stick to analog thumb stick. Those Nintendo guys are really clever. ;)

                I don't know if they were first, but Ataris 5200 controller had an anlog stick, and that was back in 1982. It might not have been very thumb friendly, but the idea was there. I've also seen several devices, not quite controllers and not quite joysticks, for a lot of the micros from the 80s to sticks to 16-bits and the PCs in the nineties - most were used in conjunction with pseudo 3D games, such as fli

          • Nintendo so created the analog controller. Who had it before them? No one.

            Nope, sorry. Here's a quick list of game consoles that used analog sticks before the Nintendo 64. In no particular order:

            Vectrex
            Atari 5200
            Arcadia

            And that is just counting those released in the USA, there are a number of European and Australian systems as well, PLUS a number of computer platforms that used them. And before anybody brings it up, Nintendo wasn't the first to put four controller ports on a console either.

            Nintendo is a ver
            • I don't recall the arcadia, but both the Vectrex and Atari 5200 used analog joysticks. The analog stick(the analog thumbstick) as we know it today is a bit of a different beast.


              • I don't recall the arcadia, but both the Vectrex and Atari 5200 used analog joysticks. The analog stick(the analog thumbstick) as we know it today is a bit of a different beast.

                If you are referring to the fact that modern sticks aren't really analog, then you are correct. But if you are trying to say that modern sticks are different just because you control them with your thumb, then you need to reconsider that Vectrex controller. (Not to mention the 5200 dual stick adapter, but that one was a bit awkward a
                • Well they aren't really analog, but that's not a point. The big nintendo thing was shortening the stick, adding a pad on top for comfort, traction from the top, and ease of use(so you manipulate it by resting your thumb on top as opposed to a joystick where you manipulate it from the sides), and positioning it in a location that forced thumb control. It all seems soooo obvious, but they are fundamental tweaks that changed the analog-joystick into the analog stick we know today.

                  Sorta like the difference be
      • hrm i just realised. Sony owns a big fat international Content distribuiton network, including TV shows if im not mistaken... Oh can anyone say conflict of interest! or vote buying!

        Or even WHy the hell do i care about an EMMY... if anything i think it makes everything but the atari look even more pathetic that their getting given petty little statuets for things that have NOTHING to do with what the awards are for (realy... if it was so related then why wasnt this given out 5 years ago?)
  • I wouldn't give this any more merrit than the winners of the SpikeTV Video Game Awards.

  • Meanwhile, 10 years earlier... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by derrickh ( 157646 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @08:40PM (#13690887) Homepage
    Atari, the makers of I Robot and Hard Drivin, say hello.

    D
  • Like 'most ferocious dragon costume' award going to some 3-year-old or 'best 17th century whore' to that chick that showed some leg.

    Not knocking the award, just saying it comes off as one of those last-minute awards.

  • It's only sensible to reward TV ads. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Hitto ( 913085 ) on Saturday October 01, 2005 @03:25AM (#13692209)
    PSX sold thanks to its marketing. It began the long downfall of videogames thanks to TV ads, MTV ads, and supposedly "cool" games, while they tried to appeal to a "mature" audience. And by "mature", I mean 12-year-olds who thought they'd look badass because they didn't play mario games anymore.

    Video games have now turned into something weird. You have people who base their manliness on what console they own. On a *toy*. And they keep swallowing that shit up!

    So, yeah, emmy awards for ads. Maybe.
    • Decent marketing is only one of the many reasons why the PSX sold as well as it did. To be frank, the biggest reason was, as it's always been in the console industry, that they had the games. They had the kit that let third party developers make the games they wanted (compare this with how Nintendo lost Square over the optical drives issue) and they didn't impose much in the way of content restrictions. Games like Wipeout and Ridge Racer were visually stunning and beat anything that had previously been avai

      • Re:It's only sensible to reward TV ads. (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Because we are better than you guys. Most Nintendo fans have been playing consoles since the NES ressurected the US market(or earlier), before most Sony and MS fans were born. We're the old guard of the oldest still in existance console/game maker. The guys responsible for: The analog stick, rumble, the d-pad, shoulder buttons, the platform most modern franchises started on, the first decent 3D platformer, etc. etc.

        20+ years of gaming, quality, nostalgia and innovation... against what?

        Sony never seriousl
        • This post proves my point entirely.

          Let me give a little background. I've been playing games since the mid 1980s. Along the way, I've owned (or had access to when owned by parents) umpteen home computers (C64, Amiga, several PCs) and at least one console from every generation (NES, SNES - later a Genesis as well, although after the generation had ended, Playstation, all 3 of the current gen consoles). Gaming has been my "main" hobby since about 1990. When I was at school, most of my pocket money went on game
          • Okay, now we've got two statements: Nintendo does everything right and everybody else sucks and Nintendo does everything wrong and everyone else is better. Hm, how likely is it that either of these is correct?

            Isn't it more likely that Nintendo, just like everyone else, has a number of good and bad games? Double Dash happens to be one of the more mediocre ones, Metroid Prime and Wind Waker are much better games. Neither is flawless but neither is Halo and that was heralded as the second coming. Or how about
          • I was just sitting here enjoying myself playing games, and you have to come along and try to make it all mean something. If I wanted to be a soldier in an intractable war, I would've signed up for the military right off. Thanks for killing my buzz, asshole.
          • Old guard indeed, excelent way to put it. And its right.

            For a start stop it with the game company makes good and bad games rhetoric, its obvious. but the ratios are the true signs, I see the same number of "amazing" games on the PS2 and Xbox as i see on the Gamecube and :O there are less gamecube games, so that means the ratio of good games to mediocer and worse games it better. Better gaming quality!

            And the crap about "Playing Double Dash rather than Burnout Revenge or Gran Turismo 4 (yes, both franchises
    • Bah, that's a load of crap. The whole MTV mainstream gaming is more recent than the release of the PSX. Why did I switch to Sony? I followed the Final Fantasy series. The console had good games made by good companies. They went with a disc based system rather than carts which allowed them to have larger games with cut scenes and better graphics (with the draw back that load times were longer and you needed a memory disc for saved games).

      You come off as a bitter fan boy. You could market the living
  • Back in 1977 the Academy split in two: The Academy and The National Academy. The regular ol' ATAS is the one that organizes the primetime emmy awards and the creative arts emmys. These cover all the primetime shows for both in front of and behind the camera folks.

    The national academy (NATAS) controls all the regional sites. These are the ones that give out "local" emmy awards for things like your local TV news show. They are supposed to run the Daytime emmys but they screwed it up so badly one year that ATA

Slashdot Top Deals

No spitting on the Bus! Thank you, The Mgt.

Close