It was the first. It was old school. But it was overrated. Read on why...
Do these "originals" warrant playing again compared to some of the other Playstation games? Most of the time...No.
Of course, you have Legend of Zelda, Metal Gear, Ninja Gaiden, Virtua Fighter, and other games which helped promote the the debut of a new system. This was the case of Toshinden. When I first saw the game, it was impressive looking but hands-on the control was very spotty and the game allowed you to perform super moves with a single button which was not very fun. It was during this time when Street Fighter and its clones were at its peak introducing new mechanics on a 1 vs. 1 fighting system. So when I played Toshinden at that time, I was impressed by the graphics but not by the gameplay. The players were unbalanced and the game was more of a tech demo than it was establishing a series. There was hardly any background to the characters. The stadiums and fighting arenas were decent but didn't really reflect any of the characters' personalities. I realized that Sony wanted to get their system into the hands of consumers and the best way to do that was to launch a game in a very popular genre (fighting) during that time (1995).
So, why am I bashing a game that happens to be one of the first games that debuted in the playstation? Why am I not giving it a chance?
From a hardcore gamer and game collector's point of view, being the first game does not add any enjoyment to the game. The other factor is longevity. There are plenty of titles I can think of that launched new genres and games that launched during a console's debut...but does that mean it gets brownie points for that? No.
I think games like Mario 64 and Metroid warrant better ratings not because they were first but because they became classics. Again, it's all longevity. What game can stand the test of time? Toshinden? No.
If anything, it is a nice little collectable that is worth visiting just to see how far Playstation graphics have been pushed.