I'll admit that this thread is giving me a lot to think about
One thing we have to go on, regarding FF7, is being able to "follow the money," regarding the development and advertising budgets. It was produced during a time when companies - especially in the tech area - were more than happy to tell you how much they had [over]spent to delivery a product as part of their overall marketing strategy. But Sega and Nintendo had plenty of their own marketing and merch throughout the 80s and 90s.
For example, I had this same Sonic Chaos window cling (brought to you by Hidden Valley Ranch??) when I was younger, as well as this same "GET CHERRYFIED" temporary tattoo:
Tying in video games with junk food was certainly nothing new
The biggest difference, I feel, is that Sony pretty much said "eff the budget," and went all out, spending much more to promote FF7 though print and TV than either Sega or Nintendo were likely to - at least, in regards to one single title. They needed the attention, and they needed to announce that they were here to stay. To make that much noise when you're the relatively new kid on the block, you have to spend.
Had I seen print and TV ads for video games before FF7? Absolutely! But something about Sony's marketing for that one game really felt suffocating and inescapable.
As far as my own little list of AAA games prior to FF7:
Daytona USA (for using incredibly advanced, expensive tech)
Super Mario 64 (for being visionary and groundbreaking in true 3D gameplay)
Wing Commander III (for having a massive budget and using Hollywood actors)
If we're going purely on advertising spending and media influence? Sure, FF7 probably wins the day. But if we're going into development costs and the challenge of the developers genuinely trying to produce something state-of-the-art, that no one had ever seen or experienced before? Then I think there's some room for debate
