N64/PS1/Saturn/DC sales - US NPD

[A Black Falcon]

wtf kind of source is that.

A guy who has access to the real NPD sales database, that's what.

So let me get this straight, A Black Falcon you'd prefer to buy Metal Slug 3 and MS 4 and 5 on the Xbox rather than the compilation on the PS2?

3, and then 4 and 5, released on PS2 (in Japan/Europe) and Xbox several years before the PS2/Wii anthology release. So yes, I would -- it would mean the games years before their Metal Slug Anthology!

Also, while 4 and 5's PS2/Xbox releases are disappointing in how they add almost nothing other than maybe better quality audio, Metal Slug 3 for PS2/Xbox has a bunch of new features, including CD-quality music (as with earlier CD Metal Slug games), several bonus modes you can unlock if you can beat the game including Fat Island and one or two other ones, and, I think maybe exclusive to the US Xbox release, an excessively high difficulty level because you can't continue without restarting the level, and Metal Slug 3's Final Mission is crazy long and impossibly punishing. I think that the JP/EU PS2/Xbox versions might just let you continue where you are? That'd be nice, a challenge is good, but they made this oen too hard in the US version. Still though, I think that Metal Slug 3 (Xbox US, or PS2 import) is a must-have for any series fan. It has a much of stuff you can't find anywhere else, and it's a fantastic version of the game. I love it, and have probably played that more than my PS2 copy of the Metal Slug Anthology...

MK3 certainly did a great job at showing off the 3D power of the PSx as did Rayman, Street Fighter: The Movie, Discworld, WWF: Arcade game, Worms and Myst. To be so anti 2D SCEA sure did allow a shit ton of 2D games out there in year one.

However, most of the games they were pushing the most early on were 3d, not 2d. 3d was what peop[le wanted, and most of those 2d games were much lower in prominence (Console Myst wasn't that big of a deal, for instance, compared to the PC game... though a CG-rendered game like that isn't something all people would call "2d" even if it really is.). Worms also was pretty obscure, and Discworld. Rayman was a hit, but it was a clearly "next-gen" 2d game, that could not have been done on SNES or Genesis. And it released before the first wave of popular 3d platformers; this is also quite important.

That's the myth that's been spread by some on this board too. The fact of the matter is SEGA America would pick and sign up what games they thought would or not work in their market and pay SEGA Japan for the rights; for sure SOJ would have games it really wanted to bring to the west , but it would need SEGA America to agree to it . Sonic X-Tream needed to be changed and needed action taken, having a team working on up to 2 different engines and on 3 different platforms is a complete mess from start to finish and as SONIC was a SOJ IP they would be calling the shots now and again on that title , but SEGA America made massive changes to the look and style of Sonic which SOJ went with (but hardly anyone ever talks that up ). As for EC 3 SOJ never cancled it , they just wanted SEGA West to promote VF 2 more in Arcades and home

So are you saying that Sega of America cancelled EC3? I can't believe that that happened, no... and it's clear that Sega of Japan had control over Sonic X-Treme too, with how they forced them to get rid of the "levels" engine (which probably doomed the project), then didn't allow them to use the NiGHTS engine, etc.

That isn't a 2D game - Its uses 3D polygons as well . SONY America were anti 2D games in terms of art and where the game used no polygons at all has to SONY America that didn't show off the system and in SONY America eyes 'if it wasn't 3D it wasn't a game'

Yeah. "If it's not 3d, it's not a game" is something a Sony guy said to the press in 1995; their preference was clear and stated.

[gamevet]

Isn't NFL Gameday 2d scaling sprites stuff? That's a bit different from being entirely 2d, if it's using some hardware power that 4th gen systems couldn't do (without a 32X or maybe Sega CD), such as lots of sprite scaling. Those other three were popular fighting games, Sony was going to allow those. Later in the generation 3d took over for fighting games, but in '95-96, many of the top ones were still 2d. As for In the Hunt, I don't know why they approved that one, and Raiden Project as well. Obviously those fell into that "approve a few 2d games even though we generally don't like them" category.

Where are you coming from? So, any games that couldn't be done on the Genesis or SNES doesn't count. WTF?!

The walls of the stadium are large flat polygons with a blurry audience texture slapped onto them. The rest of the game looks like your typical Madden game from the 16-bit consoles, with better resolution, coloring and player scaling. 90% of the game, all you see is the field and the players; not a polygon in sight. When NFL Gameday went full-on polygon, it looked like ass.

In the Hunt is a pretty obscure title for the Playstation, which means it didn't sell very well. Raiden has a history with shooter em' up fans and has appeared on just about every console, including the Jaguar, so the choice seems like a no-brainer.

So, let's have a look at most of the 2D games that did make it to the NA Playstation. I'd say that it is more than what the GC and N64 had combined.

http://www.digitpress.com/forum/show...ystation-Games


Activision Classic Games
Adventures of Lomax, The
All-Star Slammin' D-Ball
Alundra
Arc the Lad Collection
Arcade Party Pak
Arcade's Greatest Hits: The Atari Collection
Arcade's Greatest Hits: The Atari Collection 2
Arcade's Greatest Hits: The Midway Collection
Arcade's Greatest Hits: Williams
Asteroids (classic mode)
Atari Anniversary Edition Redux
Baldies
Battle Hunter
Beyond the Beyond
Blades of Blood: Samurai Shodown III
Blazing Dragons
Bomberman Party Edition
Breath of Fire III
Breath of Fire IV
Brigandine: The Legend of Forsena
Bubble Bobble Also Featuring Rainbow Islands
Builder's Block
Bust-a-Move 2: Arcade Edition
Bust-a-Move 4
Bust-a-Move '99
Buster Bros. Collection
Castlevania Chronicles
Castlevania: Symphony of the Night
Centipede (classic mode)
Cleopatra's Fortune
Command & Conquer
Command & Conquer: Red Alert
Command & Conquer: Red Alert Retaliation
Crossroad Crisis
Dance Dance Revolution: Disney Mix
DarkStalkers
DarkStalkers 3: Jedah's Damnation
Digimon World 3
Discworld II: Mortality Bytes!
Discworld, Terry Pratchet's
Disney's Hercules
Dragon Tales: Dragon Seek
Earthworm Jim 2
Final Fantasy Anthology
Final Fantasy Chronicles
Final Fantasy Origins
Final Fantasy Tactics
Gekioh: Shooting King
Gex
Grand Theft Auto
Grand Theft Auto 2
Grand Theft Auto Expansion Pack #1: London 1969
Guilty Gear
Heart of Darkness
Hello Kitty's Cube Frenzy
Herc's Adventures
In The Hunt
Intellivision Classic Games
Jigsaw Madness
JoJo's Bizarre Adventure
Kartia: The Word of Fate
King of Fighters '95, The
King of Fighters '99, The: Millenium Battle
Konami Arcade Classics
Legend of Mana
Lemmings & Oh No! More Lemmings
Lode Runner: The Legend Returns
Lunar 2: Eternal Blue
Lunar: Silver Star Story Complete
Machine Hunter
Magic: The Gathering - Battlemage
Marvel Super Heroes
Marvel Super Heroes vs. Street Fighter
Marvel vs. Capcom
Master of Monsters: Disciples of Gaia
Mega Man 8
Mega Man X4
Mega Man X5
Mega Man X6
Metal Slug X
Mobile Light Force
Mortal Kombat 3
Mortal Kombat Mythologies: Sub-Zero
Mortal Kombat Trilogy
Mr. Driller
Ms. Pac-Man: Maze Madness (classic mode)
Namco Museum Volume 1
Namco Museum Volume 2
Namco Museum Volume 3
Namco Museum Volume 4
Namco Museum Volume 5
Next Tetris, The
Norse by Norsewest
Oddworld: Abe's Exoddus
Oddworld: Abe's Oddyssey
Ogre Battle Limited Edition
One Piece Mansion
Pac-Man World (classic mode)
Persona
Persona 2: Eternal Punishment
Pifall 3D (classic mode)
Pinobee
Pocket Fighter
Point Blank
Point Blank 2
Point Blank 3
Pong: The Next Level (classic mode)
Punky Skunk
Puzznic
Q*Bert (classic mode)
Qix Neo
Raiden Project, The
Rampage 2: Universal Tour
Rampage Through Time
Rampage: World Tour
Rayman
Rayman Brain Games
Revolution X
Rhapsody: A Musical Adventure
Romance of the Three Kingdoms IV: Wall of Fire
Romance of the Three Kingdoms VI: Awakening of the Dragon
RPG Maker
R-Types
SaGa Frontier
SaGa Frontier 2
Saiyuki: Journey West
Sheep
Shooter: Space Shot
Silhouette Mirage
Skeleton Warriors
Skullmonkeys
Sol Divide
Sorcerer's Maze
Space Invaders (classic mode)
Street Fighter Alpha
Street Fighter Alpha 2
Street Fighter Alpha 3
Street Fighter Collection
Street Fighter Collection 2
Street Fighter: The Movie
Strider 2
Strikers 1945
Suikoden
Suikoden II
Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo
Tactics Ogre
Tales of Destiny
Tales of Destiny 2
Tarzan, Walt Disney Pictures Presents
Tetris Plus
Three Stooges, The
Torneko: The Last Hope
Turnabout
Valkyrie Profile
Vandal Hearts
Vandal Hearts II
Viewpoint
Wild Arms
Winnie the Pooh Kindergarten
Winnie the Pooh Preschool
Worms
Worms Armageddon
Worms World Party
Xevious 3D/G+ (Xevious, Super Xevious and Xevious Arrangement)
X-Men vs. Street Fighter
X-Men: Children of the Atom

I don't know if SNK wanted to bring Metal Slug over or not, but why would Sony object to it at $50? It's an amazing game, even if its sequels are even better...

It probably wouldn't have sold more than 20-30k units, considering it was a pretty niche title. If you look at the sales numbers for the SNK games on the Dreamcast, they didn't perform well at all. Considering how poorly In the Hunt appears to have sold in North America, it makes sense for Sony to pass on it as a stand alone title, especially when you consider all of the storage space the CD format had to offer.

True, but the situation wasn't much different in Japan. That was a result of developers just not releasing 2d games for the system, it wasn't because of a first-party policy that openly questioned 2d games. Nintendo didn't do that. It's just that most N64 games were 3d, because that's what the market mostly wanted. Puzzle games were mostly 2d, of course, as were a few others, but that's about it yeah. But again, that's quite different from Sony; Nintendo didn't make releasing 2d games hard, there just weren't many to release.

Why didn't we see Bangai-o for the N64 in North America, considering how rare the 2D titles were for the console? And why not Sin & Punishment? Did NOA have something against Treasure?

No, they aren't. Gottlieb for PSP is a port of the Wii version, not PS2; they have three more tables than the original PS2/Xbox/GC release. Williams has two more tables than the PS2 release, again same as the Wii verison but three less than the PS360 versions, which have the most tables. (Sony banned PS2/PS1 straight ports, not Wii/PSP dual-releases. They did down-port some PSP games to PS2 some time after their original PSP releases, but that went the other way.)

Someone must have jumped into a magic time machine then, because the Gottlieb collection was released on the PSP in 2005, while the Wii version came out 2010.

How is that a bad choice by Sony, to want the PSP games to have something unique over a previously released version of a title?

There were exceptions like Motor Storm Arctic Edge and Ghostbusters: The Video Game.

[A Black Falcon]

Where are you coming from? So, any games that couldn't be done on the Genesis or SNES doesn't count. WTF?!

No, but Sony was definitely more biased against "older-looking" 2d games than "newer-looking" ones.

The walls of the stadium are large flat polygons with a blurry audience texture slapped onto them. The rest of the game looks like your typical Madden game from the 16-bit consoles, with better resolution, coloring and player scaling. 90% of the game, all you see is the field and the players; not a polygon in sight. When NFL Gameday went full-on polygon, it looked like ass.

I think the question about whether it's still "2d" when it's flat sprite characters in a 3d world, where the "sprites" are clearly flat 3d objects moving around in 3d space, is somewhat questionable... but regardless of that, you already said that it has some polygonal elements.

In the Hunt is a pretty obscure title for the Playstation, which means it didn't sell very well.

Probably not, but it did manage to get released in both longbox and small jewelcase formats...

Raiden has a history with shooter em' up fans and has appeared on just about every console, including the Jaguar, so the choice seems like a no-brainer.

True.

So, let's have a look at most of the 2D games that did make it to the NA Playstation. I'd say that it is more than what the GC and N64 had combined.

The Playstation has many, many times more games than the N64 and GC combined, so that shouldn't be surprising. And not all of those "2d" games in that list are entirely 2d. Beyond the Beyond's battle camera is definitely not 2d, for example. The Hercules action game is 2.5d. The Namco Museum collections all have 3d museums in them. Anything released after 2001 (or maybe even after 2000) should be removed from the list if you're talking about the period where Sony was actually enforcing rules against 2d games, too. I'm not going to go through that and find every game that was 2001 or later, but it's quite a few of them. And I already said that Sony must have had a deal with Capcom about allowing them to release about as much 2d stuff as they wanted (because of their success and successful polygonal games as well), and likely had an some kind of allowance for puzzle games. Remove all of that stuff and you'd get a much shorter list, that's for sure.

It probably wouldn't have sold more than 20-30k units, considering it was a pretty niche title. If you look at the sales numbers for the SNK games on the Dreamcast, they didn't perform well at all. Considering how poorly In the Hunt appears to have sold in North America, it makes sense for Sony to pass on it as a stand alone title, especially when you consider all of the storage space the CD format had to offer.

... You do know that different games require different numbers of sales in order to be profitable, right? Yes? Setting some standard and saying "games which don't sell this well shouldn't be released" sounds like the kind of horrendously terrible policy Sony would do, why would anyone actually DEFEND such a thing? Different companies have different levels of sales needed to make money off of games!

Why didn't we see Bangai-o for the N64 in North America, considering how rare the 2D titles were for the console? And why not Sin & Punishment? Did NOA have something against Treasure?

I'm not sure why we didn't see Bangai-O. The game was third party published in Japan, and obviously no American third parties wanted to take a chance with a 2d game like that. As for Sin & Punishment, that was a real tragedy. That's the game I, and many other N64 fans, wanted so, so badly... and then some idiots at Nintendo decided not to release it overseas because the N64 market was fading, so they wanted to help it along and kill it even faster, or something. Seriously, letting the N64 die like that with no releases at all for six months before the Gamecube came out was a mistake. But anyway, S&P was designed for Western release; this is one of the reasons why all the voice acting is in English. However, because it was a late 2000 release, Nintendo (who did publish that one in Japan) decide to not release it overseas, for the bad reasons I've already stated.

[quote]Someone must have jumped into a magic time machine then, because the Gottlieb collection was released on the PSP in 2005, while the Wii version came out 2010. [quote]
2009 for the Wii version, but yeah, I wasn't looking at the dates. You're right, the Wii version is actually a PSP port. Makes it even clearer why the PSP version was allowed. (Note that the PSP Midway and Capcom classic game collections also have slightly different game lists from their PS2/Xbox/GC predecessors. Neither company made their compilations on PSP straight ports.)

How is that a bad choice by Sony, to want the PSP games to have something unique over a previously released version of a title?

Uh, because it meant blocking games from sale which publishers wanted to release and gamers wanted to buy. Nobody won. Why are you so dead-set in defending companies which refuse to allow games to be released which could have been released and at least some people wanted?

There were exceptions like Motor Storm Arctic Edge and Ghostbusters: The Video Game.

No, Motorstorm: Arctic Edge was one of those "PSP-to-PS2" ports I referrred to earlier. Sony did some PS2 ports of some of their popular first-party PSP games. These include Motorstorm: Arctic Edge, Wipeout Pulse (Europe only release on PS2), Secret Agent Clank, Ratchet & Clank: Size Matters, Jak & Daxter and the Lost Frontier, Twisted Metal: Head-On, and probably some more. Those games all started on PSP, then were released later on PS2.

As for Ghostbusters: The Video Game, I'm not sure why that was allowed. Maybe because the PS2 game it's a port of is actually a down-port of a Wii game? Or because of how late of a release it was for PS2?

[Barone]

Some appointments:
-Sony, in US, almost never pushed 2D games for the PS1. It was not a ban, but it was a very restrictive policy; especially until around 1998. You can list a lot of 2D releases and I also can list a good chunk of left-out-of-US 2D games as well. It's not hard to find JP PS1 2D cames that came out in JP and EU but not in US.
-Most of the 2D PS1 games released in US are from big publishers/developers, which were major partners of Sony in the PS1 boat (Namco, Capcom, Konami, Acclaim...). They probably had a free-pass for 2D games; but smaller companies didn't have the same treatment.
Also, most of those games were either major arcade hits or major franchises by themselves; or smashing hits in Japan which were brought to US several months after.
-Some PS1 anime themed games were "adapted" to the US audience prior to their release in US... So it feels like there's was a cultural barrier in Sony US view's as well, not only for 2D games. Gunbird was severly butchered, but also the 3D Vs. game was atrociously butchered when compared to Fighter's Impact, for an example.
-Strikers 1945 (it's actually Strikers 1945 II) and Raiden Project had their TATE support screwed up in the US releases for no good reason.
-While several arcade collections were released in US, compilations of "bad looking" games (MSX, NES stuff, etc) like Namco Anthology, Sunsoft's Memorial Series and Konami Antiques were left in Japan.
-There's no such a thing like SNK screwing up the PS1 ports on purpose. Most of the early 2D intensive/good looking arcade ports, no matter what developer, suffered on the system. SNK games are actually very well represented on the PS1 by: KOF '96, KOF'98, Real Bout, Real Bout Special: Dominated Mind, Bakumatsu Rouman: Gekka no Kenshi, Samurai Spirits: Amakusa Kourin Special and Samurai Spirits: Kenkaku Yubinan Pack (KOF '99 is just an OK port). Most of the problematic ports were released prior to 1997; but, like I said, you'll find the same pattern with other 2D ports.
-PS2 has some nasty emulated compilations of Neo Geo games; however, it has, by far, the best SNK library of that generation even if you remove all the problematic compilations and ports from your list.

[gamevet]

No, but Sony was definitely more biased against "older-looking" 2d games than "newer-looking" ones.

No, you just choose to think that it was that way. Intellivision lives is a very primitive collection of old-school console 2D games. Atari Anniversary collection has very primitive arcade hits from Atari. Williams Arcade's Greatest Hits is a collection of very old arcade hits from the '80s. Sony didn't snub those releases, because they were a very marketable products. Graphics had nothing to do with it. Now, if Midway had chosen to just release Sinistar at full price, I could understand why Sony would object to that.

I think the question about whether it's still "2d" when it's flat sprite characters in a 3d world, where the "sprites" are clearly flat 3d objects moving around in 3d space, is somewhat questionable... but regardless of that, you already said that it has some polygonal elements.

Overall, it's just an enhanced version of 16-bit football games. The 3D presentation takes a back-burner to the gameplay once you take the field. The game is more 2D than 3D. Do you think Madden 95 (Genesis) is a 3D space game?

The Playstation has many, many times more games than the N64 and GC combined, so that shouldn't be surprising. And not all of those "2d" games in that list are entirely 2d. Beyond the Beyond's battle camera is definitely not 2d, for example. The Hercules action game is 2.5d. The Namco Museum collections all have 3d museums in them. Anything released after 2001 (or maybe even after 2000) should be removed from the list if you're talking about the period where Sony was actually enforcing rules against 2d games, too. I'm not going to go through that and find every game that was 2001 or later, but it's quite a few of them. And I already said that Sony must have had a deal with Capcom about allowing them to release about as much 2d stuff as they wanted (because of their success and successful polygonal games as well), and likely had an some kind of allowance for puzzle games. Remove all of that stuff and you'd get a much shorter list, that's for sure.

Move the goal posts to fit your needs. Sonic Jam is still a collection of 2D games, even with the fancy 3D interface. Namco Museum is still a collection of old-school 2D arcade games, even if it has a 3D interface. The 3D interface has nothing to do with the gameplay experience of those titles.

Capcom was allowed to publish their games, because they were offering 2D products/franchises that were proven sellers. SNK didn't get the same luxury, because they didn't have a proven track record. That's smart business, not bias. What do think retail would have thought, had Sony chose to release every 2D game that was available in Japan? They probably would have been pissed off, having unsold product cluttering their shelves, much like what happened with the Saturn and DC software. I was picking up boatloads of DC 2D games from Gamestop, for pennies on the dollar, because they couldn't sell the product; the same with Best Buy.

... You do know that different games require different numbers of sales in order to be profitable, right? Yes? Setting some standard and saying "games which don't sell this well shouldn't be released" sounds like the kind of horrendously terrible policy Sony would do, why would anyone actually DEFEND such a thing? Different companies have different levels of sales needed to make money off of games!

Why not? Nintendo got away with it for most of the NES's life cycle, until someone called them out in court.

Overall, Sony has allowed more 2D games and RPGs on the Playstation, than the Saturn and N64 combined, yet that isn't good enough? Flooding the market with 2D games that wouldn't sell well in North America isn't a smart decision, no matter how you spin it.

I'm not sure why we didn't see Bangai-O. The game was third party published in Japan, and obviously no American third parties wanted to take a chance with a 2d game like that. As for Sin & Punishment, that was a real tragedy. That's the game I, and many other N64 fans, wanted so, so badly... and then some idiots at Nintendo decided not to release it overseas because the N64 market was fading, so they wanted to help it along and kill it even faster, or something. Seriously, letting the N64 die like that with no releases at all for six months before the Gamecube came out was a mistake. But anyway, S&P was designed for Western release; this is one of the reasons why all the voice acting is in English. However, because it was a late 2000 release, Nintendo (who did publish that one in Japan) decide to not release it overseas, for the bad reasons I've already stated.

Maybe because Nintendo didn't feel there was a strong enough audience to support publishing those titles. It happens with every console.

2009 for the Wii version, but yeah, I wasn't looking at the dates. You're right, the Wii version is actually a PSP port. Makes it even clearer why the PSP version was allowed. (Note that the PSP Midway and Capcom classic game collections also have slightly different game lists from their PS2/Xbox/GC predecessors. Neither company made their compilations on PSP straight ports.)

There are different games available on the Xbox and PS2 versions of Taito Legends 2. Sometimes that's the way publishers handle their games.

Uh, because it meant blocking games from sale which publishers wanted to release and gamers wanted to buy. Nobody won. Why are you so dead-set in defending companies which refuse to allow games to be released which could have been released and at least some people wanted?

The PSP has one of the deepest library of games available. Sony's choice didn't seem to hurt publisher support. I'm glad they made that choice, because it makes buying the PSP version more enticing, over picking up the same title on the PS2.

As for Ghostbusters: The Video Game, I'm not sure why that was allowed. Maybe because the PS2 game it's a port of is actually a down-port of a Wii game? Or because of how late of a release it was for PS2?

The game was published on the same date for the Wii and PS2. Sony published the PS2 version. I doubt that the game was a down-port of the Wii game.

[A Black Falcon]

Some appointments:
-Sony, in US, almost never pushed 2D games for the PS1. It was not a ban, but it was a very restrictive policy; especially until around 1998. You can list a lot of 2D releases and I also can list a good chunk of left-out-of-US 2D games as well. It's not hard to find JP PS1 2D cames that came out in JP and EU but not in US.

Yeah, I think there are quite a few such games. Maybe someone should make a list, in order to prove this already proven point yet again.

-Most of the 2D PS1 games released in US are from big publishers/developers, which were major partners of Sony in the PS1 boat (Namco, Capcom, Konami, Acclaim...). They probably had a free-pass for 2D games; but smaller companies didn't have the same treatment.
Also, most of those games were either major arcade hits or major franchises by themselves; or smashing hits in Japan which were brought to US several months after.

Right. Major partners had a different system from the smaller guys, of course. It's always like that...

-Some PS1 anime themed games were "adapted" to the US audience prior to their release in US... So it feels like there's was a cultural barrier in Sony US view's as well, not only for 2D games. Gunbird was severly butchered, but also the 3D Vs. game was atrociously butchered when compared to Fighter's Impact, for an example.

Yeah, this happened a lot. This wasn't a new thing on the PS1, you saw games getting "adapted" for the US market on NES and SNES too, but it definitely continued on the Playstation.

-Strikers 1945 (it's actually Strikers 1945 II) and Raiden Project had their TATE support screwed up in the US releases for no good reason.

The companies stupidly decided that Americans couldn't tip TVs up on end, or something. Pretty dumb, but yeah, I don't know if any US PS1 shmups have tate mode actually intact... Mobile Light Force definitely doesn't have it either. Galactic Attack on Saturn, though, does.

-While several arcade collections were released in US, compilations of "bad looking" games (MSX, NES stuff, etc) like Namco Anthology, Sunsoft's Memorial Series and Konami Antiques were left in Japan.

Well, we didn't get those NES or MSX collections, but we did get Namco Museum and some Atari stuff (2600 and arcade collections)... aren't those sort of "bad looking"? But it is true we missed out on a lot of PS1 ports or collections of "bad looking" games.

-There's no such a thing like SNK screwing up the PS1 ports on purpose. Most of the early 2D intensive/good looking arcade ports, no matter what developer, suffered on the system. SNK games are actually very well represented on the PS1 by: KOF '96, KOF'98, Real Bout, Real Bout Special: Dominated Mind, Bakumatsu Rouman: Gekka no Kenshi, Samurai Spirits: Amakusa Kourin Special and Samurai Spirits: Kenkaku Yubinan Pack (KOF '99 is just an OK port). Most of the problematic ports were released prior to 1997; but, like I said, you'll find the same pattern with other 2D ports.

The only one of theirs I have on PS1 is KOF '99, and those load times are just too long... otherwise it's good though.

-PS2 has some nasty emulated compilations of Neo Geo games; however, it has, by far, the best SNK library of that generation even if you remove all the problematic compilations and ports from your list.

Yeah, but we missed out on some games in the US because of Sony, and others were forced into collections. But still, yeah, SNK's PS2 library is extensive and impressive... and I think that most of the Neo-Geo ports run acceptably. It's definitely not perfect (like, Metal Slug 3 for Xbox runs better than the collection version on PS2, I think), but it's mostly decent. Which collections are you particularly focusing on for being bad?


Gamevet, are you actually serious here, or is this just a "annoy me and present a devils' advocate position" thing? I really hope it's the latter.

No, you just choose to think that it was that way. Intellivision lives is a very primitive collection of old-school console 2D games. Atari Anniversary collection has very primitive arcade hits from Atari. Williams Arcade's Greatest Hits is a collection of very old arcade hits from the '80s. Sony didn't snub those releases, because they were a very marketable products. Graphics had nothing to do with it. Now, if Midway had chosen to just release Sinistar at full price, I could understand why Sony would object to that.

No, it's because they are collections of lots of games. Are you even listening to me? I've only said every single time you've said something like this that Sony allowed collections. I guess I'll have to keep doing so, because you aren't paying attention (or are just trolling).

Overall, it's just an enhanced version of 16-bit football games. The 3D presentation takes a back-burner to the gameplay once you take the field. The game is more 2D than 3D. Do you think Madden 95 (Genesis) is a 3D space game?

Madden 95 for Genesis isn't, no, but FIFA '96 for the 32X definitely is.

Move the goal posts to fit your needs. Sonic Jam is still a collection of 2D games, even with the fancy 3D interface. Namco Museum is still a collection of old-school 2D arcade games, even if it has a 3D interface. The 3D interface has nothing to do with the gameplay experience of those titles.

Wandering around in the museum is a form of "gameplay", though. You're moving around, controlling a character, looking at things... sure, the actual games are mostly 2d, but there is that 3d museum part of all of the PS1 Namco Museum collections, that you won't find in any other Namco Museum releases on newer platforms. They are kind of pointless, but also kind of interesting...

Capcom was allowed to publish their games, because they were offering 2D products/franchises that were proven sellers. SNK didn't get the same luxury, because they didn't have a proven track record. That's smart business, not bias. What do think retail would have thought, had Sony chose to release every 2D game that was available in Japan? They probably would have been pissed off, having unsold product cluttering their shelves, much like what happened with the Saturn and DC software. I was picking up boatloads of DC 2D games from Gamestop, for pennies on the dollar, because they couldn't sell the product; the same with Best Buy.

Why are you bothering with such critically flawed arguments? I don't need to reply to this for two reasons.

First, you don't know if SNK tried to localize more PS1 games, and I don't either. Either prove that they were trying to localize more games and Sony blocked them, or drop this point; I wouldn't be at ALL surprised if Sony DID block them, but there is no proof that it happened that has been presented here, certainly. Perhaps SNK just didn't try to localize more because the few games they did release on PS1 in the West didn't sell too well, I have no idea.

And second, your counter-argument, "releasing every 2d game released in Japan", is even more silly. Uh, most of those 2d games were third party. Sony wasn't going to release mountains of third-party games overseas for no reason, of course. And anyway, Sony of America said how it thought that only 3d games were "real games", in the 5th generation.

As for Dreamcast sales, few DC games sold well, as has already been proven. That SNK's games didn't either means little.

Why not? Nintendo got away with it for most of the NES's life cycle, until someone called them out in court.

I thought everyone agreed that Nintendo's NES restrictions were too harsh. Having some limits, in order to reassure retailers and consumers that the Crash-era flood of games wasn't going to happen again, makes sense, but Nintendo went way too far of course, and those "and you can't release games for our competition" requirements were obviously illegal and bad.

Overall, Sony has allowed more 2D games and RPGs on the Playstation, than the Saturn and N64 combined, yet that isn't good enough? Flooding the market with 2D games that wouldn't sell well in North America isn't a smart decision, no matter how you spin it.

Once again, the absolute number of titles means nothing, because the PS1 had so many times more games than the N64 and Saturn. Hundreds more at minimum, maybe thousands more worldwide. And a lot of those 2d games we did get were either released after Sony loosened the restrictions in 2001, or were puzzle or Capcom games which they always had allowed in. Not all, but a lot. After the early days when there was more 2d stuff, those few others were the exceptions, 2d games Sony graciously allowed in in order to throw a few bones to those silly people who hadn't gotten with the picture that 3d games were the only ones you should want to play. ( )

Maybe because Nintendo didn't feel there was a strong enough audience to support publishing those titles. It happens with every console.

Once again, Bangaioh wasn't a first-party-published title in Japan, so Nintendo had no obligation to publish it anywhere. As for S&P, I think it did have an audience here. The fact that the game is, and always has been, by FAR the best-known Japan-only N64 game shows that it has an audience. Plenty of people who probably couldn't name even one other of the 80+ Japan-exclusive N64 games knew, and know, about Sin & Punishment.

There are different games available on the Xbox and PS2 versions of Taito Legends 2. Sometimes that's the way publishers handle their games.

Almost all games in Taito Legends 2 are the same on both platforms; each system only has about four exclusives. The Capcom and Midway collections, though, make many more changes. And most PS2/Xbox(/GC) collections do NOT change the game lineup between platforms. Taito Legends 2 is very much an exception there.

The PSP has one of the deepest library of games available. Sony's choice didn't seem to hurt publisher support. I'm glad they made that choice, because it makes buying the PSP version more enticing, over picking up the same title on the PS2.

All I can do is say once again that your insistence in defending companies' banning games is absolutely ridiculous. Fortunately Sony has since abandoned these policies, and allow ports on the Vita.

Now, yes, exclusives are better, and console-to-handheld downports aren't ideal on handhelds. But both the PSP and Vita have libraries centered around more "console-style" experiences, so restrictions or no, you end up with a lot of more consoley games on PSP than you do on DS. One of the many reasons why the DS is the better console by far (though yes, PSP is pretty good as well).

The game was published on the same date for the Wii and PS2. Sony published the PS2 version. I doubt that the game was a down-port of the Wii game.

IGN's review makes it clear that that yes, the PS2 game is a port of the Wii one. Which makes sense; the game does use motion controls competently on Wii. And Atari published the game on all platforms, not Sony. Looking it up apparently Sony published the European PS2 version for some reason, but Atari, the publisher on all other platforms, published the game in the US and Japan.

[bultje112]

A guy who has access to the real NPD sales database, that's what.

says who?

[Team Andromeda]

So are you saying that Sega of America cancelled EC3? I can't believe that that happened, no... and it's clear that Sega of Japan had control over Sonic X-Treme too

Yes SOA dropped EC3 and Bernnie canceled Sonic X after the team wasn't allowed to use the NiGHTS engine and so the game would miss the Christmas 96 deadline (that why Bernie dropped the game) ; silly on Naka and SOJ part , but SOJ didn't cancel the project they just stoped them using the NiGHTS engine (which is different) . Mind you after developing a game for nearly 2 years on 3 different platforms , the fact that the team need to use an outside engine after all that - and a engine that wasn't made for that style of game . Tells you all you really need to know , what sort of mess the project was in . For me Sonic X engine looked more than good enough anyway .

SEGA Japan never shared tech or engines with their own In-House Teams or AM# Teams so anyone expecting them to share a engine with a western Team was expecting a lot really

[Barone]

Yeah, I think there are quite a few such games. Maybe someone should make a list, in order to prove this already proven point yet again.

I can give you a few that I can easily remember right now (released both in JP and EU but NOT in US):
Hebereke's Popoitto
SunSoft SLPS-00044 05/26/95 JP
SunSoft SLES-00156 03/01/96 EU
SunSoft SLPS-02051 06/03/99 JP
SunSoft SLPS-03299 10/04/01 JP

Puchi Carat (a.k.a. Petit Carat)
Taito Corporation SLPS-01435 06/25/98 JP
Event Horizon Software SLES-02070 2000 EU
Event Horizon Software SLES-02070 2000 EU
Taito Corporation SLPS-01435 06/22/00 JP
EON Digital Entertainment SLES-02070 04/13/01 EU
Taito Corporation 09/24/08 JP

Magical Tetris Challenge
SCEE SCES-02154 1999 EU
Capcom SLPS-01786 03/18/99 JP

Namco Tennis Smash Court (it uses 2D floors/backgrounds and it's a simple looking game)
SCEE SCES-00263 1996 EU
Namco SLPS-00450 09/06/96 JP
Namco SLPS-91053 03/12/98 JP
Namco SLPS-91407 12/27/01 JP
Bandai Namco Games NPJJ-00676 06/26/13 JP

Smash Court 2 (Anna Kournikova's Smash Court Tennis)(it uses 2D floors/backgrounds and it's a simple looking game)
Namco SLPS-01693 11/12/98 JP
SCEE SCES-01833 06/18/99 EU

Love Game's: Wai Wai Tennis 2 (Yeh Yeh Tennis in Europe) (it uses 2D floors/backgrounds and it's a simple looking game)
SunSoft SLPS-02510 12/22/99 JP
SunSoft SLES-02272 2000 EU
SunSoft SLPS-02983 12/07/00 JP

One could say that tennis games weren't so hot in US, but, heck, atrocious fully 3D games like Power Serve 3D Tennis were released in US.


You also had stuff like:
Earthworm Jim 2 Virgin Interactive Canceled US K-A
Earthworm Jim 2 Virgin Interactive SLES-00343 November 1996 EU

International Superstar Soccer Deluxe Konami SLES-00511 February 1997 EU

Mickey's Wild Adventure SCEE SCES-00163 March 1996 EU 3+
Mickey's Wild Adventure (Platinum) SCEE SCES-00163 1998 EU 3+
Mickey's Wild Adventure (PSOne Classics) SCEE 12/14/11 EU 3+ PlayStation Store release
Mickey Mania: The Timeless Adventures of Mickey Mouse (PSOne Classics) SCEA 07/10/12 US E PlayStation Store release

Well, we didn't get those NES or MSX collections, but we did get Namco Museum and some Atari stuff (2600 and arcade collections)... aren't those sort of "bad looking"? But it is true we missed out on a lot of PS1 ports or collections of "bad looking" games.

Namco Museum is arcade ports only and while we do have stuff like Pac-Man, we also have Ordyne and some other games which are quite good looking.
Namco Anthology which was a old consoles compilation was never brought to US.

2600 and Intellivision stuff is easier to find in late US releases. During 1995-1997 you'll hardly find anything like that.

[A Black Falcon]

says who?

If those numbers were fake, the posts would probably be deleted, and he might even get banned; NeoGAF has no tolerance for fake or manipulated numbers.

Namco Museum is arcade ports only and while we do have stuff like Pac-Man, we also have Ordyne and some other games which are quite good looking.
Namco Anthology which was a old consoles compilation was never brought to US.

2600 and Intellivision stuff is easier to find in late US releases. During 1995-1997 you'll hardly find anything like that.

You're right, the 2600/Intellivision/early Atari arcade game collections were late releases, weren't they.

[A Black Falcon]

Yes SOA dropped EC3 and Bernnie canceled Sonic X after the team wasn't allowed to use the NiGHTS engine and so the game would miss the Christmas 96 deadline (that why Bernie dropped the game) ; silly on Naka and SOJ part , but SOJ didn't cancel the project they just stoped them using the NiGHTS engine (which is different) . Mind you after developing a game for nearly 2 years on 3 different platforms , the fact that the team need to use an outside engine after all that - and a engine that wasn't made for that style of game . Tells you all you really need to know , what sort of mess the project was in . For me Sonic X engine looked more than good enough anyway .

(Note -- X-Treme was initially going to use two engines, one for the levels, another for the boss fights. A different team was working on each engine.)

Uh, you've forgotten several key details. First, the only reason that they were looking to use the NiGHTS engine was because Sega of Japan had forced them to abandon their old "Levels" engine, and told them to find something else instead, because of that incident described in various places where some Sega of Japan execs came to America, looked at the game, saw an old version of the "levels" engine, didn't like it, and told them they couldn't use that. The "levels" team had a better version of the engine than the old one that had been shown, and tried to get the execs to look at it, but they refused; decision already made.

And that is why they then wasted two weeks working with the NiGHTS engine, because Sega of Japan had already kind of doomed the project through mismanagement by forcing them to abandon a good engine. For the next incident, see below.

SEGA Japan never shared tech or engines with their own In-House Teams or AM# Teams so anyone expecting them to share a engine with a western Team was expecting a lot really

It wasn't Sega of Japan that blocked them from using the NiGHTS engine. How do you think STI got it in the first place? They were blocked from using the NiGHTS engine because Yuji Naka heard about it, basically threw a fit, and said that if they allowed anyone other than him to use one of his engines, he'd quit. Naka of course was a huge pain to work with, and they wanted him in, so they told STI that they couldn't use the NiGHTS engine after all.

Then, they started work redoing the whole game into the "bosses" engine. This was hard work, though, and both lead programmers got sick and had to take time off because of overwork. THAT was why the game missed Christmas '96. It is true that Sega of America are the ones that cancelled the game, though. But given that the game would mostly have sold in the West anyway, and that it was being developed here, it kind of makes sense that they'd have a say. I'm sure that Sega of Japan had to approve the cancellation though, they had the ultimate control.

[MrSega]

(Note -- X-Treme was initially going to use two engines, one for the levels, another for the boss fights. A different team was working on each engine.)

Uh, you've forgotten several key details. First, the only reason that they were looking to use the NiGHTS engine was because Sega of Japan had forced them to abandon their old "Levels" engine, and told them to find something else instead, because of that incident described in various places where some Sega of Japan execs came to America, looked at the game, saw an old version of the "levels" engine, didn't like it, and told them they couldn't use that. The "levels" team had a better version of the engine than the old one that had been shown, and tried to get the execs to look at it, but they refused; decision already made.

And that is why they then wasted two weeks working with the NiGHTS engine, because Sega of Japan had already kind of doomed the project through mismanagement by forcing them to abandon a good engine. For the next incident, see below.


It wasn't Sega of Japan that blocked them from using the NiGHTS engine. How do you think STI got it in the first place? They were blocked from using the NiGHTS engine because Yuji Naka heard about it, basically threw a fit, and said that if they allowed anyone other than him to use one of his engines, he'd quit. Naka of course was a huge pain to work with, and they wanted him in, so they told STI that they couldn't use the NiGHTS engine after all.

Then, they started work redoing the whole game into the "bosses" engine. This was hard work, though, and both lead programmers got sick and had to take time off because of overwork. THAT was why the game missed Christmas '96. It is true that Sega of America are the ones that cancelled the game, though. But given that the game would mostly have sold in the West anyway, and that it was being developed here, it kind of makes sense that they'd have a say. I'm sure that Sega of Japan had to approve the cancellation though, they had the ultimate control.

Chris Coffin got malnutrition and scurvy from trying to complete the game . Chris Senn had already quit by E3 1996. The full interview with Mike Hayes and Chris Senn conduced by Sonic Cult founder and former SEGA tester and coder Eric R. Grey back in 2003 can be found here:
http://sonic-cult.org/dispart.php?ca...ubid=2&artid=1


As for Naka, he had grown hostile towards SOA and had a personal grudge and utter hatred towards Stolar. He wasn't about to let his empire get their hands on his "baby".

[A Black Falcon]

Chris Coffin got malnutrition and scurvy from trying to complete the game . Chris Senn had already quit by E3 1996. The full interview with Mike Hayes and Chris Senn conduced by Sonic Cult founder and former SEGA tester and coder Eric R. Grey back in 2003 can be found here:
http://sonic-cult.org/dispart.php?ca...ubid=2&artid=1


As for Naka, he had grown hostile towards SOA and had a personal grudge and utter hatred towards Stolar. He wasn't about to let his empire get their hands on his "baby".

Thanks for the link; That article corrects one thing I said -- they didn't show the better version to the execs at all, weren't able to. But where did you hear that he'd quit by E3 '96? I don't think that that's true...

[gamevet]

Gamevet, are you actually serious here, or is this just a "annoy me and present a devils' advocate position" thing? I really hope it's the latter.

I'm sorry, but sometimes you are just wrong, even if 3 different people have objected to your statement on Sony's 2D restrictions. You just refuse to listen to anyone that objects with your statement.

No, it's because they are collections of lots of games. Are you even listening to me? I've only said every single time you've said something like this that Sony allowed collections. I guess I'll have to keep doing so, because you aren't paying attention (or are just trolling).

Here's the problem. You say Sony told publishers that they didn't want 2D games and RPGs on their system, and when we bring up 2D games that were brought to North America, you start with you stupid stipulations like "It's a collection!", "It was a popular game!" or "It got released because it was a puzzle game!" That is a bunch of horseshit' and you concoct these weak counterpoints just so you can feel that your point is right.

Wandering around in the museum is a form of "gameplay", though. You're moving around, controlling a character, looking at things... sure, the actual games are mostly 2d, but there is that 3d museum part of all of the PS1 Namco Museum collections, that you won't find in any other Namco Museum releases on newer platforms. They are kind of pointless, but also kind of interesting...

I didn't buy the Namco museum collections because they had a horribly implemented 3D menu system to get to the game you wanted to play. It has nothing to do with the fact that those compilations are filled with 2D Namco titles.

Why are you bothering with such critically flawed arguments? I don't need to reply to this for two reasons.

First, you don't know if SNK tried to localize more PS1 games, and I don't either. Either prove that they were trying to localize more games and Sony blocked them, or drop this point; I wouldn't be at ALL surprised if Sony DID block them, but there is no proof that it happened that has been presented here, certainly. Perhaps SNK just didn't try to localize more because the few games they did release on PS1 in the West didn't sell too well, I have no idea.

Yeah, you don't know if SNK tried to get those games localized. Maybe, SNK didn't try to localize KOF 96, because of how poorly KOF 95 might have sold. There's no proof that Sony blocked SNK on that idea.

And second, your counter-argument, "releasing every 2d game released in Japan", is even more silly. Uh, most of those 2d games were third party. Sony wasn't going to release mountains of third-party games overseas for no reason, of course. And anyway, Sony of America said how it thought that only 3d games were "real games", in the 5th generation.

That's my point. Sony isn't responsible for publishing every 2D game that was made in Japan. Cave/Atlus might not have wanted to try selling Do Don Pachi to the west, because of it's limited fan-base. So why do people assume that it was Sony that held back those titles in the west, base upon the words of a couple of guys that got told no?

Once again, the absolute number of titles means nothing, because the PS1 had so many times more games than the N64 and Saturn. Hundreds more at minimum, maybe thousands more worldwide. And a lot of those 2d games we did get were either released after Sony loosened the restrictions in 2001, or were puzzle or Capcom games which they always had allowed in. Not all, but a lot. After the early days when there was more 2d stuff, those few others were the exceptions, 2d games Sony graciously allowed in in order to throw a few bones to those silly people who hadn't gotten with the picture that 3d games were the only ones you should want to play. ( )

Like I said above: Maybe some of those Japanese developers/publishers just chose to not release their titles in the west, because they didn't feel like there was a market for it, or didn't want to take the risk. You can't blame Sony 100% for that.

Once again, Bangaioh wasn't a first-party-published title in Japan, so Nintendo had no obligation to publish it anywhere. As for S&P, I think it did have an audience here. The fact that the game is, and always has been, by FAR the best-known Japan-only N64 game shows that it has an audience. Plenty of people who probably couldn't name even one other of the 80+ Japan-exclusive N64 games knew, and know, about Sin & Punishment.

I was being sarcastic. Just because a title was popular, or well received in Japan, it doesn't mean that a company will try to release a game in the west. NOA wasn't responsible for that, so why should SCEA be held any more guilty for the 2D games that didn't get published in the west?

All I can do is say once again that your insistence in defending companies' banning games is absolutely ridiculous. Fortunately Sony has since abandoned these policies, and allow ports on the Vita.

Sony's supposed banning seems to be based upon a very questionable Vic Ireland's point-of-view and SNK not getting approval for Metal Slug. This is the very same Ireland that ripped on Sony for causing his company to go bankrupt, because they required him to translate both chapters of Growlanser, yet he didn't seem to have a problem with doing that for the Arc the Lad collection. Atlus didn't have any problems releasing the dated Ogre Battle port of the SNES game to the Playstation, so I don't see why Ireland's rant should be taken seriously. Perhaps Ireland was just being an ass with Sony, so they treated him in accordance to his actions. His history with Sega and Sony should give you some idea that maybe the guy was just an ass and was treated accordingly by those companies. Atlus and NIS have released a ton of niche titles for the Playstation, PSP, PS2 and PS3, so I don't see why people think Sony had some sort of agenda against 2D style games and RPGs. The early 2D titles and RPGs for the PS and PS2 don't show this supposed bias that they unrightfully get accused of. Step back and look at the software that was released early on for the Playstation; it doesn't jive with those accusations.

It's not like Nintendo has been that graceful with 3rd party publishers either. The only reason why the Gamecube has Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, is because of Nintendo's demands upon Square-Enix. Nintendo pretty much told Square-Enix that if they wanted to publish games on the GBA, they would have to make a game for the Gamecube.

[A Black Falcon]

I'm sorry, but sometimes you are just wrong, even if 3 different people have objected to your statement on Sony's 2D restrictions. You just refuse to listen to anyone that objects with your statement.

You're the one having multiple people object to your ridiculous assertions in this thread, not me.

Here's the problem. You say Sony told publishers that they didn't want 2D games and RPGs on their system, and when we bring up 2D games that were brought to North America, you start with you stupid stipulations like "It's a collection!", "It was a popular game!" or "It got released because it was a puzzle game!" That is a bunch of horseshit' and you concoct these weak counterpoints just so you can feel that your point is right.

Uh, in the real world, almost every rule has exceptions. Is it really too hard for you to understand that Sony's anti-2d bias had some exceptions as well? That there were some exceptions does not mean that there wasn't still a strong bias!

Barone is right that even the "it's a collection" reason was limited, because before ~2001 we didn't see much of anything beyond the Namco and Midway/Williams collections, for ports of older (3rd gen or earlier) titles on the US PS1. Japan got many, MANY more collections of older games that generation than we did. But we don't know if that was companies not wanting to bring games over, or Sony discouraging such things, so I don't know which one to blame. I do know that we saw more collections on PS2, though... but those had many more titles in them on average than the PS1 collections mostly do, which surely helped.

I didn't buy the Namco museum collections because they had a horribly implemented 3D menu system to get to the game you wanted to play. It has nothing to do with the fact that those compilations are filled with 2D Namco titles.

I guess you've never played them, then, or you'd know that you don't really need to spend much of any time in the 3d thing at all. You can access the games all from the pause screen too.

That's my point. Sony isn't responsible for publishing every 2D game that was made in Japan. Cave/Atlus might not have wanted to try selling Do Don Pachi to the west, because of it's limited fan-base. So why do people assume that it was Sony that held back those titles in the west, base upon the words of a couple of guys that got told no?

We don't know which one is responsible for any one case, no. But the Sony statements are there, and the paucity of 2d games is there, versus other regions, or versus even some other platforms that generation (as a percentage of the total number of titles I mean). There's enough there to pretty confidently say that it's quite likely that in some cases companies just didn't try to localize their 2d games here (particularly titles only released in Japan), but in other cases, Sony's bias, or restrictions, warded them off from trying, or blocked them from releasing things perhaps even. All of the details will probably never be known, because that stuff generally isn't public, but there is enough there to prove that it happened, at least, and that's enough.

Sony's supposed banning seems to be based upon a very questionable Vic Ireland's point-of-view and SNK not getting approval for Metal Slug.

Uh, both of those are proof for the PS2-era opposition to 2d, not the PS1-era. I mean, we have no proof that SNK ever tried to localize the first Metal Slug, so of course I couldn't blame Sony for banning it, and WD was allowed to release solo 2d PS1 games, though not the first Arc the Lad, because that was in the Stolar era and he didn't want the system to have many RPGs. But apart from Stolar and Arc the Lad, Working Designs's main problems with Sony were in the PS2 era, not the PS1.

The primary proof that PS1-era Sony was biased against 2d is in the statements Sony itself made that "only 3d games are real games" and such. Those prove it, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that Sony of America (SCEA) was biased against 2d. And of course that bias bled over into game localizations.

This is the very same Ireland that ripped on Sony for causing his company to go bankrupt, because they required him to translate both chapters of Growlanser, yet he didn't seem to have a problem with doing that for the Arc the Lad collection.

That is not true; he had wanted to release the first Arc the Lad as a standalone game, but Stolar didn't allow it. I think that was mentioned in one of the quotes of his you linked. I would guess that he only did Arc the Lad as a collection because that's the only way he could get it actually released, and he obviously really wanted to release it here. It clearly was not his first choice of how to release the series in the US.

Atlus didn't have any problems releasing the dated Ogre Battle port of the SNES game to the Playstation, so I don't see why Ireland's rant should be taken seriously.

Once again, you're (intentionally?) confusing the PS1 and PS2 eras. WD didn't have problems localizing some 2d PS1 games either, most notably the two Lunars. Of course, he also localized some 3d games. Maybe that was SNK's problem (on the PS2 particularly), they wanted to localize almost exclusively 2d games...

His history with Sega and Sony should give you some idea that maybe the guy was just an ass and was treated accordingly by those companies.

The quotes you've posted kind of do the opposite of that, though.

[Atlus and NIS have released a ton of niche titles for the Playstation, PSP, PS2 and PS3, so I don't see why people think Sony had some sort of agenda against 2D style games and RPGs.[/quote]
Atlus and NIS were not releasing RPGs on the PS1 in 1995-1997, which is when Sony of America was opposed to RPGs. I don't know why you still can't remember that they dropped this restriction after FFVII became a hit.

As for 2d, Sony's own statements prove that from 1995, Sony of America didn't like 2d games. The large number of 2d games localized in Europe but not the US, on both PS1 and PS2, provide some hints as to Sony of America's biases as well. SNK and WD's statements from the PS2 era prove that Sony was biased against "old-looking" 2d, and Sony's own statements corroborate that. The proof that Sony had an anti-2d bias, and that this affected game localization choices on both the PS1 and PS2, is incontrovertible.

The early 2D titles and RPGs for the PS and PS2 don't show this supposed bias that they unrightfully get accused of. Step back and look at the software that was released early on for the Playstation; it doesn't jive with those accusations.

See above. And please try actually considering reading up on Sony's comments about 2d. Did you look at Barone's list of Europe-only 2d PS1 games, too? Let's just put it this way: You won't find a list as long for 2d games released in the US but not Europe, for 1995-2000 releases only (again, excluding all of those many 2d games released after Sony dropped PS1 anti-2d restrictions).

It's not like Nintendo has been that graceful with 3rd party publishers either. The only reason why the Gamecube has Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, is because of Nintendo's demands upon Square-Enix. Nintendo pretty much told Square-Enix that if they wanted to publish games on the GBA, they would have to make a game for the Gamecube.

Nintendo was kind of annoyed at how many publishers wanted to support only the GBA and not the GC, so they tried to push some of them to make Gamecube games too. Understandable.