PDA

View Full Version : The Sega Saturn Mega Thread



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

j_factor
04-26-2011, 01:15 AM
I think we can all agree on this one...

Black_Tiger
04-26-2011, 01:28 AM
What, no poll? :p

djshok
04-26-2011, 01:29 AM
http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/5438/q1281147042786.png

Baloo
04-26-2011, 01:33 AM
You know I can agree with this one J_Factor.

See:

Definition of Sex: Something most of us aren't getting, unless you're Baloo and your Sega Saturn has a pleasure hole. ;)

But in all seriousness, sorry Playstation but I've gotta admit, Sega Saturn is the greatest system of all time. OF ALL TIME!

http://www.fortunecity.com/underworld/sonic/324/alps.JPG

kool kitty89
04-26-2011, 02:23 AM
I was going to start a long post regarding what the context of "best" in this case would be. (obviously, in some respects, the Saturn was the absolute worst thing to ever happen to Sega as a company/business -regardless of it having lots of "good" games or not, for the time or from a retro perspective today)

However, I decided this was more appropriate to the thread's tone:
No! :lol:

Nuxius
04-26-2011, 08:03 AM
But in all seriousness, sorry Playstation but I've gotta admit, Sega Saturn is the greatest system of all time. OF ALL TIME!

http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/6960/kanyewestsaturn.jpg

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 09:21 AM
Nope, it was a crappy design which cost more to manufacture than Playstation, but had worse graphical results than Playstation 90% of the time, was too difficult to make games for, was released at a retarded time, half of its games were outdated, and many were extremely overrated, and it effectively ended Sega as a force in the videogame market.


I think the following excerpts make that point rather obvious, but message boards exist for disagreement, so, we'll see:

The possibility that its next-gen hardware would face competition simply hadn't figured in Sega's calculations. So when news broke in November 1993 that Sony was developing a system capable of revolutionary performance, all hell broke loose. Those who had seen the machine working claimed that it was far more powerful than anything Sega had planned. Most threatening was the disclosure that it was to be released in late 1994 - the same time was Saturn. To Sega's dismay, a powerful new rival had arisen overnight.
Sega's president, the feared Hayao Nakayama, was among the first to be informed. His reaction was typical. He immediately marched down to his consumer research and development division and proceeded to ridicule the sum of his team's achievements over the previous year.

[...]

Sega's kneejerk reaction was to delay its Saturn development programme by a few months to incorporate a new video processor into the system. Not only would this boost its 2D abilities considerably (something Sony's machine was less proficient at); but it would also provide better texture mapping for 3D. Unfortunately, this played havoc with the Saturn's carefully worked out schedule, to the extent that many pundits thought that Sega wouldn't make it to market in 1994. Some peopel even expected Sega to cancel the Saturn project and concentrate its efforts on something more powerful for 1996..
One prominent developer who visited Sega Of Japan's Saturn division told Edge: 'there's simply no way that Sega will be releasing Saturn this year. They're behind on hardware, they're behind on software, and it's very hard to see how they can do it.'
But, contrary to expectations, Sega has done it. The reality is that its 32bit machine has now been launched in Japan, and the same system is on its way to the US and UK later next year.

It was originally planned that the Saturn would be released in two forms: a CD-ROM-based console, and a cart-only console, developed under the project name Jupiter.

[...]

At around the same time, Sega made another important decision. It recognised that its most important market was America, and that it needed to retain the enormous userbase it had built up with the Genesis. The answer was the Mars project, which resulted in the system we now know as the 32X.
Essentially, Jupiter became Mars.

[...]

EDGE #16, January 1995

Unlike the Playstation, the Saturn does not contain a dedicated geometry engine for calculating polygons - instead, the twin CPUs handle all the calculation, and the VDP1 chip, in conjunction with the frame buffer, draws 3D objects to the screen as distorted sprites.

[...]

"The SH-2 was chosen for reasons of cost and efficiency," claims Kazuhiro Hamada, section chief of Saturn development at the time of the system's conception. "The chip has got a calculation system similar to DSP but we realised that a single CPU wouldn't be fast enough to calculate a 3D world."

[...]

'To be honest, VDP1 is not powerful enough to replicate the latest polygon arcade games,' concedes Hamada, 'but for sprite and scrolling games it's fine.'

[...]

For the most part, the Saturn's complex design has done it few favors. With seven independent processors, getting the whole architecture to operate efficiently is not easy.

[...]

Developer Scavenger [...] recognises the Saturn's strengths, although it had to develop its own set of libraries to exploit the hardware efficiently.
'The Saturn is very fast at drawing pixels using its processor, while the Playstation has to go through its polygon engine,' explained the company's lead Saturn programmer. That gives the Saturn programmer more flexibility. However, the Saturn does have a tendency to draw polygons that are not seen. Overall, though, it has more calculating power than the Playstation.'
CPU throughput is indeed one major are in which Saturn can boast superiority over the Playstation. Granted, the Sony machine is able to calculate more geometry and display more polygons, but in terms of computational power the Saturn definitely has the edge.

Edge #23, August 1995

Saturn was never really cut out for its competition. Originally planned as the ultimate 2D system - a replacement for the aging Genesis towards the end of the 16-bit era - 3D support was added at high cost after the company learned of Sony's plans. Launched early in the U.S., in what was correctly seen as a panicked response to the impending release of Playstayion, with a discouraging price tag of $400 and a limited librabry of solid titles, the machine's head start in the 32-bit race proved ineffective against Sony.

[...]

Second place status and difficulty in programming the Saturn's dual-processor system also hurt third-party support drastically.

[...]

In many ways, the Saturn was doomed from the start - too expensive, too difficult to program for, and launched amid a clearly illogical, if not outright insane, strategy by Sega to market Genesis, Sega CD, 32X and Saturn simultaneously.

Next Gen #36, December 1997

Next Generation #24

Certainly, I think, the machine appears to be 2D-centric, as easy and high-powered results could be provided in that sector, whereas the machine was -- according to source after source, and developer after developer -- a very difficult and abstruse design environment for 3D.

[...]

Edge: How then was Sega able to roll out yje Saturn so quickly in the US, seemingly out of nowhere?
Lincoln: I'm certain that Sega has been working on this introductory launch for a number of months -- this didn't just happen out of the blue. And because they were only working with a limited number of dealers - they were not making this available to all their dealers - they could do it with a certain degree of confidence that it would not leak out.

Edge: What parallels can be drawn between what we're seeing now with the launch of Saturn and U64, and the launch of the Genesis and SNES?
HL: Well, if there were any mistakes made in the launch of the Super NES, the timing - a year and a half after the Genesis - wasn't one of them. By the end of 1991 our installed base in the US 16bit market was greater than Sega's, even though Sega had been there since 1989. It was after that that Sega did very well, in terms of pricing games like Sonic and in terms of marketing - television advertising and whatnot. I think the only parallel is that in addition to the necessity of having a powerful game platform, you have to have good games. It's got to be priced right and it's got to be marketed right.
[b]One major advantage we have over Sega - other than the fact that on a worldwide basis our market share is much greater - is our financial condition. And that financial condition is only going to improve, given the fact that Sega - and, for that matter, Sony - are selling these new hardware platforms under cost, and that they are willing to lose a considerable amount of money. Presumably, they intend to pick it up or get even on the software,[b] and that's a risky strategy because it involves millions and millions of dollars of losses that they will incur in 1995 in the US market.

Edge: Surely the business model that you've just described is the traditional one in the videogame industry?
HL: I don't think it's traditional in our industry - at least, it's not Nintendo's tradition. The tradition is to sell at a smaller profit margin than the profit margin for software. But would Nintendo introduce a hardware product knowing that in the US market it is going to lose 50-100$ per unit? [...] It's clear from the feedback we've obtained and what we've heard from dealers that Saturn is incurring a loss.

EDGE23, August 1995

Edge: Tell us about Titan.
Yu Suzuki: Titan is a new arcade board that's very similar to Saturn, only with a bigger memory and a good serial I/O.

Edge: So Titan is more powerful than Saturn? Is it also more powerful than Model 2?
Yu Suzuki: Yes, the system's more powerful than Saturn, but the performance isn't comparable to Model 2. Model 2 is a pure 3D graphics engine with very high-technology hardware [...] Also, Titan is based on 2D technology hardware.

EDGE9, June 1994

One of Saturn's potential problems is price. [...] It's no secret that the addition of twin Hitachi 32-bit RISC processors, late in Saturn's development, was an expensive (albeit essential) response to the power of Playstation, leaving Sega now facing the highest manufacturing costs of the big three.

Next Generation, May 1995

"If you take a look at the architecture of Saturn, you can see they went around with a shopping cart and basically chose components. Then, having seen the Sony product (if we believe what we read) they re-engineered, got back out their shopping cart, and picked up a variety of Hitachi chips that theyre now using. And these chips are well down the learning curve, there's millions of them made, they're using them in vacuums, pressure cookers and all sorts of things. So they're not as susceptible to the learning curve as our chip set - there's not as much to discover about them."
Steve Race, CEO Sony Computer Entertainment

"Sega is my friend, but I'd still have to say that the Saturn is a pooch. It's a mess inside, and no one in the industry is impressed with the technology of the Saturn."
Sam Tramiel, President & CEO, Atari Corp

"Saturn uses the most powerful processor in the Hitachi family - it's a brand new part, and because it's not a particularly high performance chip, they had to put two in. This creates a strange architecture that has segmented memory for all the different processors, and the coprocessers are from different companies, and so it's not very well integrated. Developers have raised many complaints about Saturn's design."
Trip Hawkins, President & CEO, The 3DO Company

[...]

What is clear is that the new systems can be ranked in order of "overall system power." Sega Saturn falls a little behind Sony Playstation and considerably behind Ultra 64 on all-around performance, especially in the discipline of creating 3D environments.

[...]

It's estimated that it costs Sega roughly $380 to manufacture a Saturn - the parts it uses are expensive, and unlikely to significantly drop in cost in the near future. While this may appear to leave it vulnerable to price undercutting by Sony (it's estimated that the Playstation costs $300 per unit on manufacturing), Sega does have a library of home-produced games, ready for inclusion "free" with the Saturn hardware - increasing the machine's percieved value. This weapon, and the fact that both companies have expressed their readiness to take a loss on hardware sales, with a view to making profit on software sales, will ensure that the pricing of Playstation and Saturn will remain volatile and subject to fluctuation.

Next Generation, August 1995

NG: The problem is that Sega is doing all the hard work of making Saturn, selling it into a very tough market for less than it costs to make it.

[...]

NG: When you talked last year, the focus was on 32X. And at that time you were very keen to stress the importance of price in fighting a hardware war. In defending 32X you said that "the US has always been very, very, very price driven" and that "to sell huge units of anything - it doesn't matter what it is - the price has to be right." It's obviously a philosophy you believe very strongly in, so it must have been heartbreaking for you to release the Saturn at $400.
Kalinske: I've been very vocal that I wanted it at $299 but initially we couldn't do it. Every week I had been arguing for a lower price on Saturn but the manufacturing and production guys couldn't get the price down. In truth, I didn't think we were going to get it till January, I really didn't. I thought I'll keep arguing because I need to and hopefully we'll get it as soon as we can. I thought it would be January and I was quite surprised that we were able to get it down to $299 now. Obviously the competitive pressure didn't hurt. The other thing that didn't hurt was the yen went up to 103. If the yen had stayed at 85 it would have been impossible.

NG: But someone somewhere in a Sega accounting department is having to bite the bullet on the $299 price - you're losing a lot of money selling it that low.
Kalinske: Oh yes.

Next Generation, January 1996

sheath
04-26-2011, 09:27 AM
And, here, we, go!


February 1995:
"Never before has a hardware launch been so...right. Everything from the casing to the sexy black CDs to the brilliantly designed memory cards to the sheer power of the beast. Sony hasn't overlooked a single thing - it has delivered, just like Edge always said it would."

"Even Sega's Saturn, which so impressed everyone when it arrived just a few weeks ago, now faces the most daunting of battles with limited supply of worthy software."

pg7
"Now that Edge has had time to get to grips with the finished system, it's no exaggeration to say that Sony's first games console is a tremendous piece of kit. Even switching on the system is an experience: a sonorous tone booms out as the Sony Computer Entertainment logo fades in onscreen."

"Sony has delivered an astonishing piece of hardware, and a range of spectacular titles is on the way. Only those UK gamers with exceptional willpower will be able to hold out until the official launch next September..."

pg9
"Loading times are short. The spectacular boot sequence (in which the Sega Saturn logo coalesces from spinning polygon shards) takes five seconds, and you can expect Virtua Fighter to be up and running in another six or seven. This has confounded critics who said that even double-speed CD drives couldn't compete with carts. Sega (and Sony) have proved that with dedicated processors handling the drive (the SH-1 in the Saturn's case), negligible access times are possible."

"Unfortunately, the only reason to buy the Saturn so far is Virtua Fighter. It is indeed a stunningly playable game - although its slightly glitchy visuals imply that the Saturn does have a hard time when asked to shift a load of polygons - but the other software available fails to do justice to the machine."



June 1995
"Five months ago, its strong Japanese design, fast-paced action and cult arcade status would have clinched it for the Saturn. But unfortunately for Sega, Namco pipped it to the post, and Daytona now has a formidable adversary to contend with."

"In an effort to keep up with its arch-rival, Sega has rightly concentrated on maintaining a high level of graphical detail. But Daytona's visuals fall well-short of Ridge Racer's. By any other standards, they're exemplary, but the low resolution, relative lack of colours and less-than-silky update ruins any chance of an overwhelming first impression.
The game;s rough-and-ready looks (the classic symptoms of a rush job rather than evidence of the Saturn's innate technical inferiority) would be acceptable if the track and scenery were drawn to the horizon, but the crucial graphical weakness of AM2's conversion is that it blocks in huge chunks of scenery disturbingly late."

p75, "Although AM2 has managed to replicate the coin-op tolerably well, Saturn Daytona fails to capture the arcade experience that Playstation Ridge Racer so convincingly delivers. Although there's no single factor that cripples it, the game suffers from an accumulation of niggles which ensures that it never quite manages to fulfill its enormous potential."


Answering Tristram Clark about whether Jaguar would get Daytona p97. "Atari does not have carte blanche to copy Sega's titles, but there is an agreement that certain titles can be ported after a set period - usually six months. Were Daytona to appear on the Jaguar it's highly unlikely that it would match the graphical flair of the Saturn game. The Jag is a fast machine but texture mapping eats heavily into processor time."


Next Generation August 1995 p 27
"So why the surprise early launch? Is Sega scared? is Sega over-confident? And just how good is Saturn anyway? The NEXT Generation office has been swamped with these questions and more from perplexed gamers keen to cut through the hype of Sega's $50 million advertising campaign and get to the facts."

p29 "What is clear is that the new systems can be ranked in order of "overall system power." Sega Saturn falls a little behind Sony Playstation and considerably behind Ultra 64 on all-round performance, especially in the discipline of creating 3D environments."

p30 "Anxious about the lack of confidence in its system, Sega set about rebuilding the Saturn's credibility. At the Sega DevCon in the US earlier this year, it showed off its Sega Graphics Library ... "

p32 "Sega knows (although it would never admit it publicly) that of the 'big three' (Saturn, PlayStation, and Ultra 64), Saturn is the weakest machine -- in terms of system power, at least."

I'll repost the articles upon request.

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 09:37 AM
Probably true, but I'm just not sure if there could've been a resurgence in popularity after the PS2 hype died down, I mean lets be fair here library wise the Dreamcast was the best console on the market until maybe even as late as 2003, Dreamcast did actually seem to make a big comeback in popularity a few years after it died anyway, there's a lot of good feeling towards it these days.

and there was still Shenmue 2, Rez, Half Life, and (if they could manage it) Headhunter all finished and ready to release in the US, it would've also been very cheap to keep supporting it with simple Naomi ports, they would've needed to have the hardware price around the actual worth or the hardware as well though to stabilise it, which would probably end with it being niche.

To be fair they probably did do the wisest thing though, they were in now state to continue taking risks at that stage.

sheath
04-26-2011, 09:45 AM
I would say that the Dreamcast was better than the PS2, library wise, well into 2004, but the mass market ate up every game released on PS2. It is odd that the Dreamcast's popularity soared after 2004, because at the same time Sega's third party titles were flopping across the board except for Sonic games and the 2K series (which EA and the NFL would shortly kill). I think the Dreamcast could have left Sega in a great PR position for a next generation console in the US only. But Sega's games were never going to be popular again, no matter what console and no matter how much marketing they received.

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 09:57 AM
Even Sega's Saturn, which so impressed everyone when it arrived just a few weeks ago, now faces the most daunting of battles with limited supply of worthy softwareThey've got that right, a terrible port of Virtua Fighter and worthless junk like Clockwork Knight that can be completed in a matter of hours.


Unfortunately, the only reason to buy the Saturn so far is Virtua Fighter. It is indeed a stunningly playable game - although its slightly glitchy visuals imply that the Saturn does have a hard time when asked to shift a load of polygons - but the other software available fails to do justice to the machine."Dated Feb 1995, yep, this is right on the money too, Virtua Fighter was indeed the only game worth buying at that stage, and yes it was glitchy and unfinished feeling.


Although AM2 has managed to replicate the coin-op tolerably well, Saturn Daytona fails to capture the arcade experience that Playstation Ridge Racer so convincingly delivers. Although there's no single factor that cripples it, the game suffers from an accumulation of niggles which ensures that it never quite manages to fulfil its enormous potential.and yet again EDGE are right on the money, Ridge Racer was an excellent port of the arcade game, Daytona on Saturn was very disappointing.


p29 "What is clear is that the new systems can be ranked in order of "overall system power." Sega Saturn falls a little behind Sony Playstation and considerably behind Ultra 64 on all-round performance, especially in the discipline of creating 3D environments."This is probably incorrect, but EDGE made the assumption in August 1995 based on the games that they had played up until that point, and what developers had told them in interviews, based on the glitchy graphics of both Daytona and Virtua Fighter, I think that at that stage it would be a very realistic assumption that the Saturn was much weaker than the PS1 simply based on results.

It would be interesting to see what EDGE says a few months later at the release of Sega Rally/Virtua Fighter 2/Virtua Cop.


p30 "Anxious about the lack of confidence in its system, Sega set about rebuilding the Saturn's credibility. At the Sega DevCon in the US earlier this year, it showed off its Sega Graphics LibraryThis is also probably true, there was lack of confidence coming from most publications, and when looking at interviews there's certainly lack of confidence (and criticism) coming from many (though not all) developers.

Kamahl
04-26-2011, 10:16 AM
PowerVR was the better choice, actually making it seem like they wanted the alternative and then scrapping that was not a good idea.
I also totally agree with Thenewguy

sheath
04-26-2011, 10:18 AM
Yeah, looking at Ridge Racer, Edge saw that the Saturn was "innately inferior" in February of 1995. Talking to unnamed developers, one of which was definitely EA, Edge just managed to predict that the Saturn was the weakest hardware. It had nothing to do with the temporary paradigm shift to high level development kits right? Edge obviously had all the business in the world promoting the Playstation as uniformly perfect from January 1995 until its western launch in the Fall right? Edge was just being honest with all of these subjective statements about the Saturn before its western launches right?

Daytona:
_2zCMptui70

Black_Tiger
04-26-2011, 12:00 PM
Nope, it was a crappy design which cost more to manufacture than Playstation, but had worse graphical results than Playstation 90% of the time, was too difficult to make games for, was released at a retarded time, half of its games were outdated, and many were extremely overrated, and it effectively ended Sega as a force in the videogame market.

Well, it may have been the first console to have some "outdated" and/or overrated games, but at least it's the only one. :roll:

Why don't you tell us some good things about the Saturn and its games?

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 12:34 PM
Yeah, looking at Ridge Racer, Edge saw that the Saturn was "innately inferior" in February of 1995.Your quote about the Saturn hardware being inferior was from August of 1995, in fact, in your June quote they say -


The game;s rough-and-ready looks (the classic symptons of a rush job rather than evidence of the Saturn's innate technical inferiority) would be acceptable if the track and scenary were drawn to the horizon, but the crucial graphical weakness of AM2's conversion is that it blocks in huge chunks of scenery distrubingly late."So they were still giving the benefit of the doubt.

In August 1995 they would be mainly looking at Virtua Fighter, which looked like crap compared to Toshindon, and Daytona, which looked like crap compared to Wipeout and Ridge Racer, the only game which even looked marginally decent on Saturn at that time was Panzer Dragoon and that was delayed in Britain until August 30th anyway.


Talking to unnamed developers, one of which was definitely EA, Edge just managed to predict that the Saturn was the weakest hardware.They talk to many named developers, its just a question of me remembering stuff from bloody years ago or downloading and re-reading masses of magazines, and anyway some of Sega's own well known staff like Yu Suzuki criticised the hardware themselves which is stupidity of the highest degree.

Adeline - In the end, we felt Playstation was the better bet, it has a very clean hardware design, so its very straightforward to program. Saturn is a very good machine, but it seems like a rush job.


Edge obviously had all the business in the world promoting the Playstation as uniformly perfect from January 1995 until its western launch in the Fall right?They were impressed, enthusiastic, and felt that the system delivered exactly what they wanted it to, I'm not sure why you expect writers to act like robots, video game writers always get carried away and take a long time to change their tune after making initial judgements.


Edge was just being honest with all of these subjective statements about the Saturn before its western launches right?If you read through EDGE you'd know that they went to Japan for both launches in 1994, writing long articles on their experiences with the two machines. Writing for a videogame magazine is pretty much nothing but subjective statements anyway, their job is to make judgements, compare, and recommend to the readership, and as far as I'm concerned they reasonably explained their reasons for prefering PS1.

-------------------------------------------

Here's some more EDGE quotes in regards to the Saturn -


Visually Virtua Fighter 2 has no equal. Using the Saturn's highest screen resolution, and running at the same speed and elegance as the coin op it is, quite simply a staggering achievement. It captures the graphical finesse of the state-of-the-art coin-op with few compromises. In fact, those familiar with the original Saturn game could be forgiven for thinking this was running on an entirely different machine......in terms of faithfulness to the arcade original, VF2 gets closer than Daytona, Ridge Racer, or just about anything else......In many ways Virtua Fighter 2 is the ultimate technical showcase


EDGE - Why do you think the Playstation did so much better than the Saturn in 1995?

Shiny Entertainment - The initial games on the Saturn were disappointing. Ridge Racer was impressive, Magazines, Playground chatter, and the internet quickly spread the news


Why don't you tell us some good things about the Saturn and its games?Hmmm, lets see.

The 3D fighters tended to be the best designed, deepest and most graphically impressive fighters for their times.

Panzer Dragoon Saga is a very ambitious game, the world is very imaginative, the battle system is great, and it has a lot of atmosphere.

The 6 button 2nd revision Saturn controller is one of the best controller's for 2D games I've ever used.

Exhumed was a very fast and impressive game for its time, the level design is clever and interesting, the other Lobotomy ports were also very respectable and competitive for their times.

Panzer Dragoon Zwei was very cool, I like the game but not the graphics very much.

I like the fact that they used a 6-player adaptor instead of a 4-player adaptor

I think thats everything.

sheath
04-26-2011, 12:43 PM
Suzuki's comments about the Saturn are limited to comparing it and Titan to Model 2's 3D hardware. It was a technical discussion and the Model 2 is technically superior to the Saturn and Titan at 3D in every respect. Suzuki also mentioned that they had to get the Saturn's SH-2s working on separate code for Virtua Fighter. These facts cannot be applied to the Playstation versus Saturn, Edge did it anyway without any facts to connect the two discussions.

Black_Tiger
04-26-2011, 12:43 PM
They've got that right, a terrible port of Virtua Fighter and worthless junk like Clockwork Knight that can be completed in a matter of hours.

A terrible port of one of the greatest games of all time.



Dated Feb 1995, yep, this is right on the money too, Virtua Fighter was indeed the only game worth buying at that stage, and yes it was glitchy and unfinished feeling.

Yet the Playstation had no games that compared and arguably never would have a 3D fighter as good.


and yet again EDGE are right on the money, Ridge Racer was an excellent port of the arcade game, Daytona on Saturn was very disappointing.

An excellent port of a lackluster games versus a lackluster port of an excellent game. Nevermind that the Arcade of Daytona was a league above Ridge Racer graphically. The Playstation port was closer to the game whose graphics were closer to console quality.

If the Saturn's graphics suck as much as you make it out to be and the Playstation's as awesome... And if graphics are so much more important than gameplay or game quality... Then the Playstation was a ripp off and people were better of buying a vcr instead.

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 12:46 PM
Suzuki's comments about the Saturn are limited to comparing it and Titan to Model 2's 3D hardware. It was a technical discussion and the Model 2 is technically superior to the Saturn and Titan at 3D in every respect. Suzuki also mentioned that they had to get the Saturn's SH-2s working on separate code for Virtua Fighter. These facts cannot be applied to the Playstation versus Saturn, Edge did it anyway without any facts to connect the two discussions.The guy stated that using 2 CPUs was a poor design choice, and that 1 more powerful CPU would've been better.

You don't publicly show reservations about your own companies hardware, that's just stupid

sheath
04-26-2011, 12:50 PM
One powerful CPU would have been better, the PS1's CPU is irrelevant to Suzuki's comment though. Suzuki would have preferred one CPU running at 60Mhz, and who wouldn't?

Kamahl
04-26-2011, 12:57 PM
http://www.hotlikesauce.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/12530444137571.jpg

...

Sega Mega Drive, that is all.
(Although, in all honesty, it could have been designed way better for little extra cost, if any)

sheath
04-26-2011, 01:15 PM
Apparently not while launching in 1994 and thereby giving the Playstation a run for its money in Japan. I can turn this hardware discussion on the Playstation with the same logic. Sony just needed to have more Video RAM and it would have been better than the Saturn in every way but sound. Sony should have waited and put a 60Mhz CPU in the Playstation and it would have been better than the Model 2 tech without 3D acceleration. Sony should have focused on a hardware accelerated 3D GPU so it would have had so much trouble with polygon tearing and texture warping.

Nobody considers these things for one reason, the Playstation ended up dominating after 1997. That actually happened because of exclusive third party software and Sony overmarketing the platform, swallowing losses on each console sold, etc. The Saturn having a 60Mhz CPU instead of two SH-2s, which actually were better than the PS1's CPU even if they "only" managed 1.5x the processing ability of one SH-2, would not have changed the massive financial advantage Sony had.

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 01:16 PM
A terrible port of one of the greatest games of all time.and Namco ripped it off, made it more accessible, lightweight and mainstream and released it on Playstation within months of release, you can paint it however you want with subjective statements, but the harsh reality is that at the end of the day most people prefered Tekken anyway.


Yet the Playstation had no games that compared and arguably never would have a 3D fighter as good.Yeah, because its really arguable that Tekken 3, or Soul Blade aren't as good as the Saturn port of the first Virtua Fighter game :nod:


An excellent port of a lackluster games versus a lackluster port of an excellent game.Pffft, this is the sort of crap I come to expect from this place, Ridge Racer and Daytona were both fantastic arcade games, Daytona was the more impressive game in the arcades, Ridge Racer was the more impressive game in the home.


If the Saturn's graphics suck as much as you make it out to be and the Playstation's as awesome... And if graphics are so much more important than gameplay or game quality... Then the Playstation was a rip off and people were better of buying a vcr instead.This may be an alien concept to the Saturn fanboys of the world, but if a console costs substantially more to manufacture it better damn well create superior results to its competition, why do you expect people to happily pay more, or even the same amount for a machine which is consistently outperformed by one costing the same price/less?!?!

The PS1 had more good games by miles, the Saturn was buried by PS1 software certainly by 1996, the only genre it still put an active fight against was 3D fighting, and Namco were effectively ripping off all of Sega biggest games and releasing them on PS1 anyway.

The PS1 had tons more games, it cost less to manufacture, it was easier/faster to develop for, and its graphical results were usually better, that's not even taking into account that Sony had masses of money to advertise with, how can you guys even begin to argue a case for the Saturn?!!?

Da_Shocker
04-26-2011, 01:24 PM
Sega simply panicked really and let's be real if Sonic was your best selling game on your previous system don't you think you have a Sonic game ready for launch? Oh of course not, Sonic didn't do to well in Japan and SoJ thought that VF would be an even better launch title than Sonic. Sure that strategy worked in Japan but in the US and Europe it was a huge flop.

sheath
04-26-2011, 01:27 PM
Title System Publisher Region Notable

Playstation:
Agile Warrior F-111X Playstation 1995 Virgin
Air Combat Playstation 1995 Namco
Bases Loaded '96: Double... Playstation 1995 Jaleco
Battle Arena Toshinden Playstation 1995 Sony Yes
Criticom Playstation 1995 Vic Tokai
Cybersled Playstation 1995 Namco .
Cyberspeed Playstation 1995 Mindscape
Defcon 5: Incoming Playstation 1995 Data East
Destruction Derby Playstation 1995 Psygnosis Yes
Discworld, Terry Prachett's Playstation 1995 Psygnosis
Doom Playstation 1995 Williams Yes
ESPN Extreme Games Playstation 1995 Sony
FIFA '96 Playstation 1995 Electronic Arts
Geom Cube Playstation 1995 Amer Technos
Gex Playstation 1995 Crystal Dynamics
Hi-Octane: The Track Fights Back Playstation 1995 Electronic Arts
Jumping Flash! Playstation 1995 Sony Yes
Jupiter Strike Playstation 1995 Acclaim
K-1 Revenge Playstation 1995 Jaleco
Kileak: The DNA Imperative Playstation 1995 Sony
Lemmings 3D Playstation 1995 Psygnosis
Loaded Playstation 1995 Interplay
Mortal Kombat 3 Playstation 1995 Midway
NBA In the Zone Playstation 1995 Konami
NBA Jam Tournament Edition Playstation 1995 Acclaim
NFL Full Contact Playstation 1995 Konami
NFL GameDay Playstation 1995 Sony
Novastorm Playstation 1995 Psygnosis
Off-World Interceptor Extreme Playstation 1995 Crystal Dynamics
Panzer General Playstation 1995 SSI Yes
PGA Tour '96 Playstation 1995 Electronic Arts
Power Serve 3D Tennis Playstation 1995 Ocean
Primal Rage Playstation 1995 Time Warner
Raiden Project, The Playstation 1995 Sony
Rayman Playstation 1995 Ubi Soft Yes
Ridge Racer Playstation 1995 Namco Yes
Road Rash Playstation 1995 Electronic Arts
Shockwave Assault Playstation 1995 Crystal Dynamics
Space Griffon VF-9 Playstation 1995 Atlus
Tekken Playstation 1995 Namco Yes
Theme Park Playstation 1995 Electronic Arts Yes
Total Eclipse Turbo Playstation 1995 Crystal Dynamics .
Twisted Metal Playstation 1995 Sony Yes
Viewpoint Playstation 1995 Electronic Arts
Warhawk Playstation 1995 Sony Yes
Wipeout Playstation 1995 Psygnosis Yes
WWF Wrestlemania: The Arcade Game Playstation 1995 Acclaim
X-Com: UFO Defense Playstation 1995 Microprose Yes
Zero Divide Playstation 1995 Time Warner Yes
Zoop Playstation 1995 Viacom

Saturn:
Astal Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Bases Loaded '96: Double... Sega Saturn 1995 Jaleco America
Black Fire Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Bug! Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Center Ring Boxing Sega Saturn 1995 JVC America
Clockwork Knight Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Corpse Killer: Graveyard Edition Sega Saturn 1995 DigitalPictures America
Cyber Speedway Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Cyberia Sega Saturn 1995 Interplay America
D Sega Saturn 1995 Acclaim America
Dark Legend Sega Saturn 1995 Data East America Yes
Daytona USA Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Double Switch Sega Saturn 1995 DigitalPictures America
Gex Sega Saturn 1995 Crystal Dynamics America
Ghen War Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
High Velocity: Mountain Racing... Sega Saturn 1995 Atlus America Yes
Horde, The Sega Saturn 1995 Crystal Dynamics America
Mansion of Hidden Souls, The Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
NHL All-Star Hockey Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America
Off-World Interceptor Extreme Sega Saturn 1995 Crystal Dynamics America .
Panzer Dragoon Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Pebble Beach Golf Links Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America
Primal Rage Sega Saturn 1995 Time Warner America
Quarterback Attack with Mike Ditka Sega Saturn 1995 DigitalPictures America
Rayman Sega Saturn 1995 Ubisoft America Yes
Revolution X Sega Saturn 1995 Acclaim America
Robotica Sega Saturn 1995 Acclaim America
Romance of the Three Kingdoms IV:... Sega Saturn 1995 Koei America Yes
Sega Rally Championship Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Shanghai: Triple Threat Sega Saturn 1995 Activision America
Shellshock Sega Saturn 1995 US Gold America
Shinobi Legions Sega Saturn 1995 Vic Tokai America Yes
SimCity 2000 Sega Saturn 1995 Maxis America Yes
Solar Eclipse Sega Saturn 1995 Crystal Dynamics America
Street Fighter: The Movie Sega Saturn 1995 Acclaim America
Theme Park Sega Saturn 1995 Electronic Arts America Yes
Virtua Cop Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Virtua Fighter Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Virtua Fighter 2 Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Virtua Fighter Remix Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
Virtual Hydlide Sega Saturn 1995 Atlus America
VR Virtua Racing Sega Saturn 1995 Time Warner America Yes
Wing Arms Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America Yes
World Series Baseball Sega Saturn 1995 Sega America


Yeah, the Playstation just destroyed the Saturn in total software numbers and better games.

Playstation true believers seem to conveniently forget that it took the PS1 1.5 years to sell 1 million units in the US as well. We are talking about scraps of the video game industry that established the PS1's "dominance" in software releases early on.

-edit-

1996 saw 158 PS1 games versus 127 on Saturn. Sorry, but the evidence suggests that developers griped but didn't really have all that much trouble making games quickly on the Saturn.

j_factor
04-26-2011, 01:31 PM
The Sega Saturn was God's gift to humanity. This is inarguable fact!

Da_Shocker
04-26-2011, 01:56 PM
The Sega Saturn was God's gift to humanity. This is inarguable fact!

QFT!

Mr Smith
04-26-2011, 02:17 PM
This thread is full of lies. The Saturn was tosh, an abject failure by even Sega's standards. You people and your precious Saturns should be sent away to some island somewhere.

sheath
04-26-2011, 02:21 PM
By the way, I don't think the Saturn was the greatest thing to happen to our idiosyncratic dirt ball, Virtual On is.

Kamahl
04-26-2011, 02:23 PM
This thread is full of lies. The Saturn was tosh, an abject failure by even Sega's standards. You people and your precious Saturns should be sent away to some island somewhere.

I love you Mr. Smith.

Sega Mega Drive FTW.

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 02:49 PM
Notable.....Revolution X...Street Fighter the Movie....Corpse Killer...Solar EclipseHonestly, is this a practical joke? :p

Iron Lizard
04-26-2011, 02:56 PM
I love the Saturn. You may have lost my vote Mr.Smith. My only real complaint is the cost of the software keeps going up. $15 for Clockwork Knight is crazy.

Kamahl
04-26-2011, 03:02 PM
Well the saturn is filled with great shooters... So is the PCE, what puts it above such masterpieces as the MD, SNES, NES, Atari 2600?
I'd say any of those is the best thing to happen to planet earth.
No, not even any of those.

This was the greatest thing to happen to planet earth:

http://www.old-computers.com/museum/photos/fairchild_channel-f_1.jpg

TrekkiesUnite118
04-26-2011, 03:05 PM
Honestly, is this a practical joke? :p

Solar Eclipse actually isn't that bad of a game.

4mU10RM1uOQ

Gameplay starts at around 5:40.

Really it doesn't look any worse than a lot of the crap on the PS1 during that time frame.

Revolution X and Street Fighter the Movie have Playstation ports as well, so you can use them for direct comparisons.

Also pay attention, it's copied from a generated report from a database. The top displays the column names and then they are listed but are not blocked properly. If it has "Yes" next to it then it's deemed notable. If it doesn't have "Yes" next to it then it isn't deemed notable. When we read it properly we see that none of those 4 games are deemed Notable.

sheath
04-26-2011, 03:10 PM
Honestly, is this a practical joke? :p

Apparently, Revolution X, Street Fighter the Movie, Corpse Killer and Solar Eclipse have not been recommended for the notable game lists. Those lists are the entire release lists for that year, if it doesn't say "Yes" as the last thing in the row it hasn't been recommended.

As this is obviously (another?) attack on the notable/noted game list idea I will use it as a point. I can think of reasons to add these to both to the lists, but nobody has mentioned their gameplay as unique or especially well done, so they are not on there. Solar Eclipse, for example, should be added by merit of it being a competent rail shooter in 1995.

On lists not formatting properly, I would love to know how to keep the cells aligned if that is possible.

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 03:19 PM
Apparently, Revolution X, Street Fighter the Movie, Corpse Killer and Solar Eclipse have not been recommended for the notable game lists. Those lists are the entire release lists for that year, if it doesn't say "Yes" as the last thing in the row it hasn't been recommended.Ah ok, so you just listed a whole load of crap Saturn games, fair enough, the set-up was fairly confusing but I guess that's because it was taken from a database.

Its interesting to see that Sega's library was still fairly emphasising interactive movie/FMV games during 1995, there definitely seems to be less of that in your PS1 list, were Sony refusing releases for that sort of game?

There's also lots of shovelware Astal, Clockwork Knight etc, games which were extremely short, with little to no content, and seemed to be pushed out as fast as possible to make up the numbers.

sheath
04-26-2011, 03:24 PM
These lists were taken by combining gamefaqs and digital presses databases into a spread sheet. They should be the final release list for that year, though I have found errors, especially with games dated January 1st of each year being released in December of the previous by some accounts.

We've danced the dance of negating games before I think. A good chunk of the PS1 list was already on the 16-bit consoles and 32X. Even more of its best titles were on PC in better form.

You said the Saturn had a dearth of software that legitimized Next Generation's paraphrased and uncited developer complaints. The actual release list shows otherwise, regardless of your genre preferences or assumptions about mass marketability on a new platform.

Didn't you give me a list of PS1 games last year to review for the notable games list? I still have that list and am slowly working my way through reviews on each. Most don't talk about gameplay at all, and almost all of the games listed are from 1998 onward.

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 03:28 PM
I would be happier with a metacritic set-up where every game listed had a score based on the average of reviews of at least 6 major publications were counted, but I'm sure you would just say the magazines were all biased against Sega with that set-up.

sheath
04-26-2011, 03:35 PM
Actually, I say that scores are a foolish way to judge a game. People should focus on what they enjoy the most about games and find games with those characteristics. For me that is what I am doing while I am actually interacting with the game using a controller of some sort. For others that is the cutscenes and voice acting, and camera angles while playing the game. Still others like to hear about how one of the side character's grand mother used to take her down by the river and feed her peanuts. If you like some things more than others, then find games with those things, the score is not going to reflect whether or not the game has them.

Oh, and the media is corrupt and caters to their advertisers and owners, that is just true.

Da_Shocker
04-26-2011, 03:52 PM
Actually, I say that scores are a foolish way to judge a game. People should focus on what they enjoy the most about games and find games with those characteristics. For me that is what I am doing while I am actually interacting with the game using a controller of some sort. For others that is the cutscenes and voice acting, and camera angles while playing the game. Still others like to hear about how one of the side character's grand mother used to take her down by the river and feed her peanuts. If you like some things more than others, then find games with those things, the score is not going to reflect whether or not the game has them.

Oh, and the media is corrupt and caters to their advertisers and owners, that is just true.

That makes me wonder how much money was these companies paying for advertisement and how often they were.

Crackdown
04-26-2011, 03:53 PM
I really LOVE my Saturn, its a really tough choice between that and the Megadrive for my favourite console.

Team Andromeda
04-26-2011, 03:56 PM
If anything all you're doing is proving what I said, Alex Kidd in Miracle World was an extremely popular game in large parts of Europe, and yet Sega didn't give two shits about it, they made one total crap game which seemed to have nothing in common with the original (Lost Stars), then they threw him into an unrelated game simply changing the main sprite (High Tech World), and they threw him into the unrelated Shinobi Kid game (another sprite change), Enchanted Castle was the closest the game came to an actual sequel, and there's no way that game had a high profile development budget, he then dissapeared for what? 10 years?!!

And Enchanted Castle sold pretty poor hence why we don't get sequels , NCL do the same to any game that doesn't sell in the millions and NCL have them self's been just as guity of messing around with IP for their 'home' consoles - Like they've done for Star Fox (when fans just want a straight out sequel) the complete lack of a Pilotwings sequel since Pilotwings N64, the lack of a F-Zero Update this gen , no sequel to Yoshi Island/Story.


If you're going to compete with Nintendo you have to use the same tactics, they made themselves into the "Disney" of videogames simply by acting smart and taking care of their brands

I take it, we were not a SEGA fan and never really followed SEGA then ? because SEGA tended to go, or do the opposite to NCL and they never tried to be like NCL.. B e that chasing the CD Dream, pushing the boat out on tech (and ready to sell a console at cost price) and when it comes to games both again were very different. Nintendo went public saying they would never have released Night Trap due to it's content , SEGA not only allowed Night Trip on its console, it milked it SEGA allowed full blood and gore in its Mortal Kombat unlike the saintly NCL and bother games companies line ups have been completely different.


With a license you create a base, and then you build on it incrementally with each release, you look to the fans of the game and find out what it is that they like about it, you keep improving and improving with each console generation, you don't just milk and water down the experience, that just weakens the brand

Shame NCL never listed to its own fans then , when it came to what Star Fox fans really wanted, The way NCL let down fans with the piss poor Metroid Other M, the way its dumped F-Zero and did Pilotwings fans really want the 3DS game ? or would have rathered a full-on meaningful sequel on the Wii ? Where's the sequels to Stunt Racer FX, Mother 2 ?, Wave race BS , 1080 avalanche, Doshin The Giant



Streets of Rage disappeared entirely, Wonder Boy disappeared entirely, Opa Opa disappeared,

The lack of Streets of Rage for the Saturn was a screw up (more so given the 2D power) Wonderboy was never SEGA's and we had countless sequels, all of which selling less and less with each new version (despite a high quality bar) Opa Opa well did that game ever sell well on a home system


they didn't even bother making proper Sonic, Ecco the Dolphin, or Phantasy Star games on the Saturn, they didn't bother using the Outrun name anymore

SEGA are making proper Sonic games ,and sequels to PS: you may not like or agree with the direction but it whats sells. We've had countless spins off's and a direct sequel to OutRun - And to SEGA's credit they tried both on the X-Box and PS2 and PSP and were meant with poor sales, again with Ecco; SEGA tried once on the DC and then on the PS2 and again were meant with poor sales and hence why we don't get sequels.

Next you'll be expecting SONY to make sequels to Ghost Hunter, Getaway II, Primal , Medevil II, Dropship . You see it not just SEGA, that lets go of poor selling IP


I thought they'd finally got the idea with Outrun Coast 2 Coast/Superstar Racing/Superstar Tennis in recent years, but all those games are actually made by a British company, trust a British company to work on fanservice before it even occurs to Sega.

Oh Dear GOD , try and get your facts straight: OutRun 2006/C2C is a AM#2 game they developed and designed the game ; Sumo Digital just ported it to the home
You want me the list the developers that's made games for NCL using thier IP?, what companies programmed Blue Storm, Pilotwings 64, F-Zero GX (or my the irony) Donkey Kong 64, Star Fox Adventures, Star Fox Assault, Wario World, Excitebike 64 becasue it sure as hell wasn't NCL.


the "panicked and released early" was in regards to PS1/Saturn

Again given the Saturn was 1st shown off in January 1994 , the 1st to go public with its final design of the console, the 1st to show actual games running on the system, the 1st to get a street date of Nov 94. To make out the system was rushed out is utterly preposterous.


Don't get me started on RARE, they're another company who ultra mismanaged their brands and licences.

They're own by MS. What did MS panic too ?. What about all those In-House teams and the IP MS left to rot ?. Again ! You see.... it's not just SEGA, that drops poor selling IP

sheath
04-26-2011, 04:06 PM
All we have to do for print magazines is catalog the advertisements by company. It's not a fun task but it is doable, I stopped somewhere in 1991 though. NES games were the majority of advertisements in Gamepro and EGM by far at that point. Just glancing at Edge and Next Generation issues from 1995, Playstation ads seriously outweighed Saturn ads in the summer issues.

This doesn't paint a picture of what was going on in the background though. Did Sony pay for Edge to be at the Playstation launch? Did Sega do the same for the Saturn launch? We know that Sony paid Michael Jackson to play at Sony booths during E3 1995, Edge made that sound like a totally cool thing and showing how much they were backing the Playstation. Really, if you're just a casual or non-gaming writer trying to keep ahead of your work and some company pays to fly you to some expo or to their offices, giving you swag in the process, are they going to dig in their heels and say "I'm not saying anything positive until I see and play it for myself?"

The answer is no.

Da_Shocker
04-26-2011, 04:12 PM
Sheath, are you talknig about all the ads including 3rd party ads or just first party ads? I have a couple of older issues Gamefan, Ultra Gameplayers and Next Generation under my bed right now. Actually I bought the very first issues of Next Generation last year so whenever i am free I will try and take a gander at them.

sheath
04-26-2011, 04:17 PM
That is a great question. In the case of NES games it was unclear whether the ad was paid for by Nintendo or the third party that "published"the game. I would catalog them by platform, the first party stuff seems to emphasize only first party titles and the platform itself.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-26-2011, 05:09 PM
Ah ok, so you just listed a whole load of crap Saturn games, fair enough, the set-up was fairly confusing but I guess that's because it was taken from a database.

Its interesting to see that Sega's library was still fairly emphasising interactive movie/FMV games during 1995, there definitely seems to be less of that in your PS1 list, were Sony refusing releases for that sort of game?

There's also lots of shovelware Astal, Clockwork Knight etc, games which were extremely short, with little to no content, and seemed to be pushed out as fast as possible to make up the numbers.

I only see 2 FMV games on the Saturn's game list. And they are both ports from the Sega CD. That doesn't really say emphasizing that genre. As for the shovelware, I see tons of it on the PS1 list as well.

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 05:34 PM
And Enchanted Castle sold pretty poor hence why we don't get sequelsSega had left the licence to lose popularity for years whilst they milked the name, Sega put no effort, funding, or advertising into the game, the game was crap, this is why it sold poorly.


NCL do the same to any game that doesn't sell in the millionsNo they don't, lessor known series characters are always making cameo's in Nintendo games.


and NCL have them self's been just as guity of messing around with IP for their 'home' consoles - Like they've done for Star Fox (when fans just want a straight out sequel) the complete lack of a Pilotwings sequel since Pilotwings N64, the lack of a F-Zero Update this gen, no sequel to Yoshi Island/Story. :? Yoshi's Island got a sequel a few years ago on DS, Star Fox DS was based on the original unreleased SNES Star Fox 2 game, and Pilotwings has just recieved a sequel too, this isn't backing up your argument that Nintendo dumps their licenses as much as Sega very well

Also, trying to incorporate new gameplay elements isn't the same as passing along one of your premier licenses like Shinobi to a dog-shit company like Tose, effectively the go to company when you want a fast and unnotable game made.


I take it we not a SEGA fan and never really followed SEGA then? because SEGA tended to go or do the opposite to NCLPfft, having more lax censorship policies doesn't make them the opposite, Sega have more in common with Nintendo than they ever did with Sony/Microsoft

Nintendo weren't even like that in Japan, it was only the western branches which heavily censored games.

and Nintendo has their own ridiculous ideas with add-ons and CD units, they just never went anywhere, or stayed in Japan.


Shame NCL never listed to its own fans then , when it came to what Star Fox fans really wanted, The way NCL let down fans with the piss poor Metroid Other M, the way its dumped F-Zero and did Pilotwings fans really want the 3DS game? or would have rathered a full meaningful sequel on the WiiOther M got pretty solid reviews from what I recall, and if anything I'd imagine that Nintendo were listening to it fans, its Japanese fans, being that the Japanese hated the Metroid Prime games.


where's the sequels to Stunt Racer FX, Mother 2 ?, Wave race BS , 1080 avalanche, Doshin The GiantFirstly Mother 3 came out on the GBA over 4 years ago, and Stunt Racer 64 was on N64

Secondly this is ridiculous, Nintendo can't create sequels for every single game they've ever created, Doshin the Giant is not the same as big series' like Streets of Rage, or Wonder Boy, its not like I criticised Sega for not making a sequel to some unnotable game like Bonanza Bros, or Greendog or something.


The lack of Streets of Rage for the Saturn was a screw up (more so given the 2D power)Who said anything about 2D?!?! that would've been yet another retarded move for Sega, nobody was interested in 2D in the mid to late 90s, that would've pissed away yet another license, something like Dynamite Deka only longer and with branching pathways, possibly Guardian Heroes style upgrade elements, a great atmosphere, and a Yuzo Koshiro soundtrack was what was needed.


Wonder Boy was never SEGA's and we had countless sequels all of which selling less and less with each new version despite a high quality barWonder Boy was Sega's, that was the entire point of all the sprite changes, they owned the actual character but not the gameplay.

I don't think Sega could've advertised Wonder Boy in Monsterworld that well, I certainly remember Dragon's Trap coming out but not Monster World, it seems to me that a game like Monster World would've had sales potential if it had proper exposure


Opa Opa well did that game ever sell well on a home systemYeah, I think it must've done fairly well in Japan, it was ported to quite a number of different systems there, the SMS version must've done decently in Britain I think, as the game isn't that rare here, either way thats the sort of character which I think would do better with cameo's than actual new games.


SEGA are making proper Sonic games ,and sequels to PS you may not like or agree with the direction but it was sellsI said on the Saturn


we had countless spins off's and a direct sequel to OutRunI'm sure there was like a 10 year gap, and again loads of those spin-offs really sucked.


to SEGA's credit they tried both on the X-Box and PS2 and PSP and were meant with poor salesNot surprising being that the Outrun name meant jack to just about everyone under the age of 20 by the time the game arrived, Sega let interest in the brand die, resurecting it after so much time is only marginally better than starting over.


Oh Dear GOD, try and get your facts straight: OutRun 2006/C2C is a AM#2 game they developed and designed the gameThat was my mistake, I originally just read the Coast 2 Coast section on Wiki.


You want me the list the developers that's made games for NCL using thier IP?, what companies programmed Blue Storm, Pilotwings 64, F-Zero GX (or my the irony) Donkey Kong 64, Star Fox Adventures, Star Fox Assault, Wario World, Excitebike 64 becasue it sure as hell wasn't NCL.As is often the case with you, this section is completely irrelevant to what you're replying to.


Again given the Saturn was 1st shown off in January 1994 , the 1st to go public with its final design of the console, the 1st to show actual games running on the system, the 1st to get a street date of Nov 94. To make out the system was rushed out is utterly preposterous.It had next to no software, the software it had was glitchy, and retail thought it was getting released months after its actual release date.


They're own by MS. What did MS panic too ?. What about all those In-House teams and the IP MS left to rot ?. Again ! You see.... it's not just SEGA, that drops poor selling IPAnother non-sequitor from you, what have Rare's inability to capitilise on their gaming heritage got to do with Microsoft panicking?

and yes, Sega aren't the only one to muck up their brand and licenses, they are however, one of the most notable ones, as they have both mucked up their brand, and have one of the richest and oldest pools of gaming heritage and licenses out there, they have masses of stuff in storage that was once popular but has been left to rot, or get unceremoniously chucked into a collection of 30 other games and sold for 50p.

Baloo
04-26-2011, 05:59 PM
To be honest, I've got to agree with Team Andromeda. While SEGA has done a terrible time of managing their popular IPs over the years, I do like how during the Saturn era they cranked out a ton of quality games without milking the series like Streets Of Rage, Ecco, Golden Axe, Shinobi, etc. And they made new IPs that could have easily been brand recognizers if given more of a chance. Just look at NiGHTS, Burning Rangers, Virtua Fighter, Daytona, Panzer Dragoon, Sega Rally, Virtual On. Come on! With as many fantastic games as SEGA was pumping out onto the Saturn, nobody would have given a shit if people actually gave the system a chance and played the games.

Sonic is probably the one who really did deserve a new game on the Saturn, and as much as I like Sonic R, between that Jam and 3D Blast, it wasn't cutting it for Sonic. He needed an all-new game for the Saturn. IMO if anything they should've released Knuckles' Chaotix on the Saturn. It wasn't the fact that IPs weren't continued onto the Saturn that made it fail, it was the mess of a marketing, high price, not as many 3rd party games, hard to develop for, and the fact that SEGA was freakin' bankrupt and couldn't afford advertising during the Saturn era. THAT is what killed SEGA and the Saturn, and led to where it was now. You don't need to whore out IPs to be a successful game company. Hell, look at 360 and PS3, the only one I can really think of between the two are Halo and MAYBE Metal Gear Sold.

However, after they Dreamcast SEGA just whored out Sonic and maybe 1-2 other IPs and it went downhill from there. The sports games were good but the arcade game quality went into the shitter and after that nonexistent, and that was the end of all the IPs of Sega. Except for Sonic, but we all know how that turned out...

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 06:05 PM
FMV games I can recognise are Double Switch, Corpse Killer, Quarterback Attack, D, and Mansion of Hidden Souls, not sure if thats all of them though, I'm not really an expert on FMV games.

Team Andromeda
04-26-2011, 06:20 PM
Sega had left the licence to lose popularity for years whilst they milked the name

No, the series never sold that great to begin with.


No they don't, lessor known series characters are always making cameo's in Nintendo games

LOL, Lets talk about full games can we. There's plenty of SEGA cameo's in the likes of Fighting Megamix, Segagaga but they're just Cameo's.


Yoshi's Island got a sequel a few years ago on DS, Star Fox DS was based on the original unreleased SNES Star Fox 2 game, and Pilotwings has just recieved a sequel too, this isn't backing up your argument that Nintendo dumps their licenses as much as Sega very well

I made a point of saying 'Home Consoles' As I'm sure the likes of Shining Force, House of the Dead, Virtual Cop ECT have all had sequels to them in the Arcades (not seen in the home)Not much good if you're a home console users. So don't come it .


Also, trying to incorporate new gameplay elements isn't the same as passing along one of your premier licenses like Shinobi to a dog-shit company like Tose

I take it you never played Yoshi's Universal Gravitation, Link: The Faces of Evil, The Wand of Gamelon, Zeldaís Adventure, Hotel Mario ? All of which, make Shinobi on the Saturn look like an all time classic and it doesn't get any more premier NCL IP, than Mario or Zelda does it ?


Pfft, having more lax censorship policies doesn't make them the opposite

Of course it does. NCL went for the family friendly image and SEGA the complete opposite. Be that for Night Trap or Mortal Kombat, What did SEGA like to say , "Genesis does what Nintendon't ".


Other M got pretty solid reviews from what I recall

The game is utter crap and an insult to any Metroid fan and the series it's self, and I'm a big Metroid fan btw


Wonder Boy was Sega's, that was the entire point of all the sprite changes, they owned the actual character but not the gameplay

Next you'll be saying Frogger was SEGA's. Wonderboy was not a SEGA developed game, and that is also looking over the many sequels it had, all of which sold worse with each new entry


Yeah, I think it must've done fairly well in Japan, it was ported to quite a number of different systems there

???. That was back inthe days of when making games cost peanuts, given that the Master System was a bit of flop in Japan, I think it's safe to say the game didn't sell that great in the Home.


the SMS version must've done decently in Britain I think

Then you'll be thinking wrong . It was a very niche title


I said on the Saturn

Sonic Yeah that was a mistake for sure , but PS ? well NCL never made a new Mother for the N64 and that was a game with far more fans


I'm sure there was like a 10 year gap, and again loads of those spin-offs really sucked

A 10 year gap between OutRun and OutRun Turbo? Try no, There wasn't even a 10 year gap between Outrun and OutRunners. So lets get our facts straight shall we ?


Not surprising being that the Outrun name meant jack to just about everyone under the age of 20 by the time the game arrived

Funny , So NCL is wasting its time with Kid Icarus for the 3DS then , like it was with the Excitebike update for the N64 (Give the passing of time) by all means keep the double standards coming.


I originally just read the Coast 2 Coast section on Wik

Oh dear, oh Dear . Another Google and Wiki searcher, how I love it (or should that read hate it) .


this section is completely irrelevant to what you're replying to

No we tried to be funny and overlooked the fact, that NCL have outsourced plenty of its own IP to 3rd party developers


It had next to no software, the software it had was glitchy, and retail thought it was getting released months after its actual release date

LOL. NCL had next to no software ready for the CUBE lauch or the N64 (just 3 games) . SONY PS and PS2 lauches were hardly any better either and its hardware and software was .. how shall we say glitchy. Now the the simple fact of the matter is the Saturn was not rushed out or a Panic reaction.


what have Rare's inability to capitilise on their gaming heritage got to do with Microsoft panicking

Spending over $370 million (not some massive over reaction ?) only to let RARE rot and not even try and update most of its classic IP , How many IP have MS dropped and how many In-House team have MS shut down or sold off , in an effort to reduce costs and become profitable?, and there's you just going about SEGA.

Look at SONY too you're still hoping SONY going to make sequels to IP like Ghost Hunter, Getaway II, Primal , Medevil II, Dropship and lets look over how SONY Worlwide Studios have let lots staff go and cancelled a lot projects


and have one of the richest and oldest pools of gaming heritage

pfft don't make me laugh . SEGA only ever had one console, that can be classed a world wide hit and there are numerous 3rd parties with a history as rich as SEGA's for IP (like Konami and capcom) but even they have to let go of some of the Old IP due to poor sales and lack of interest.
It's the way of the world

j_factor
04-26-2011, 06:42 PM
I don't know if I'd call Mansion of Hidden Souls an FMV game. It's an adventure/puzzle game that happens to have a lot of CG animation. More like The 7th Guest than Night Trap.

sheath
04-26-2011, 06:50 PM
D is a detective game like Myst. It just happens to be done with pre-rendered CGI.

Thenewguy
04-26-2011, 07:35 PM
Honestly, I don't know why I even waste the time to reply to your posts


No, the series never sold that great to begin with.The series is still mildly popular in Britain now, I still hear people over 25 bring Alex "the" Kidd up all the damn time, and I mean all the damn time, even the slightest mention that I'm into old games has people often bringing it up, what's more Alex Kidd is pretty much the only Sega character that female's in Britain actually like. I'm constantly surprised by how well remembered the game is, though I guess it shouldn't be that surprising since it was built into like 70% of the bloody Master System's in Britain.

The Master System sold over 1 million units in France, not all would have AKIMW built in obviously but there should be enough in those two countries alone to have put AKIMW into over 1 million houses in Europe, that's not taking into acount all the friends and family of those owners, not amazing in the worldwide scheme of things I know, but thats a pretty solid base for them to have built on during the Mega Drive era if they'd actually made some effort.


LOL, Lets talk about full games can we. There's plenty of SEGA cameo's in the likes of Fighting Megamix, Segagaga but they're just Cameo's.Sega Gaga didn't even come out in the west at all, and where the hell is Fighters Megamix now?! that was effectively Smash Bros, before Smash Bros even existed.


I made a point of saying 'Home Consoles' As I'm sure the likes of Shining Force, House of the Dead, Virtual Cop ECT have all had sequels to them in the Arcades (not seen in the home)Not much good if you're a home console users. So don't come it.Irrelevant nonsence "it doesn't count because its on a handheld" what a load of old rubbish.


I take it you never played Yoshi's Universal Gravitation, Link: The Faces of Evil, The Wand of Gamelon, Zeldaís Adventure, Hotel Mario ? All of which, make Shinobi on the Saturn look like an all time classic and it doesn't get any more premier NCL IP, than Mario or Zelda does it?This is a fair point, I think Nintendo were mildly pushed into it due to breaking off their deal with Philipps but I'm not really sure.


Of course it does. NCL went for the family friendly image and SEGA the complete opposite. Be that for Night Trap or Mortal Kombat, What did SEGA like to say , "Genesis does what Nintendon't ".Sega didn't go for the complete opposite, they went for a more open stance, they didn't even make those games, and they bought the disney licences ffs


The game is utter crap and an insult to any Metroid fan and the series it's self, and I'm a big Metroid fan btwI'd imagine that's what the Japanese said about the American made Metroid Prime games.


Next you'll be saying Frogger was SEGA's. Wonderboy was not a SEGA developed game, and that is also looking over the many sequels it had, all of which sold worse with each new entryWonder Boy the name was owned by Sega, that why ports of the game had to remove the Wonder Boy name, and replace the character sprites, Sega owned "Wonder Boy" and the character sprites.


That was back in the days of when making games cost peanuts, given that the Master System was a bit of flop in Japan, I think it's safe to say the game didn't sell that great in the Home.Fantasy Zone was an arcade game, it was on Famicom, it was on MSX. it was on X68000, it was on PC-Engine.

any anyway, like you actually know anything about this at all, I'm making a judgement call based on what I've seen in magazines, the fact that the Japanese ported it to loads of things (which didn't happen to just any game), the fact that the character was made Sega's official mascot, and the fact that it got loads of sequels, you on the other hand just make stuff up as you go along as far as I'm concerned, I've seen nothing to indicate otherwise, a lot of what you say is just too ridiculously off base.


Then you'll be thinking wrong. It was a very niche titleThat depends on what you consider "niche" the SMS sold 1.5 million odd in the UK so Fantasy Zone was never going to be a huge seller in the 1st place, its not one of the most common games, but its pretty easy to find, I've run into tons of copies of it over the years.


Sonic Yeah that was a mistake for sure, but PS? well NCL never made a new Mother for the N64 and that was a game with far more fansMother was being made for the N64, the team were over their heads and made a mess of it because they weren't experienced with 3D graphics, it was repeatedly delayed until it was too late to release and was cancelled.


A 10 year gap between OutRun and OutRun Turbo? Try no, There wasn't even a 10 year gap between Outrun and OutRunners. So lets get our facts straight shall we?honestly what the hell are you on about half the time?!?! there was virtually a 10 year gap between Outrun 2019, and Outrun 2


Funny, So NCL is wasting its time with Kid Icarus for the 3DS then, like it was with the Excitebike update for the N64 (Give the passing of time) by all means keep the double standards coming.Kid Icarus was already re-introduced in Smash Bros Brawl, NOM mentions these old games constantly as well.


Oh dear, oh Dear. Another Google and Wiki searcher, how I love itAt least I don't make things up as I go along, like some people


No we tried to be funny and overlooked the fact, that NCL have outsourced plenty of its own IP to 3rd party developersAND?!?!!? what has this got to do with anything that was said?!?!

OH NOES!?!? Nintendo got Retro Studios to make new Metroid games? and they got Sega to make F-Zero!?!?

Or are you actually comparing Nintendo getting dependable companies like Sega/Retro Studios/Namco to make games for them, to Sega getting a crap company like Tose to handle their Shinobi license?!!?


LOL. NCL had next to no software ready for the CUBE lauch or the N64 (just 3 games) . SONY PS and PS2 lauches were hardly any better either and its hardware and software was .. how shall we say glitchy. Now the the simple fact of the matter is the Saturn was not rushed out or a Panic reaction.None of the 1st party releases on Cube or N64 were glitchy at all, they were as polished as they were going to be, Nintendo famously delayed the N64 so that Mario 64 would be ready for launch day and at a high standard.

The Gamecube launch was a pretty good launch anyway, yet again you have no idea what you're talking about, Rogue Squadron and Super Monkey Ball both got very good reviews at launch, Crazy Taxi, and Tony Hawks 3 were solid, though unnotable multi-platform releases, and both Luigi's mansion and Wave Race Blue Storm garnered decent (not amazing) reviews too.

The N64 didn't have a very good launch, or 1st year, but it was launched with two of the highest rated games up until that point in the generation, Mario 64 and Pilotwings both managed selections of 9s and 10s, and Mario 64 was one of the most heavily hyped, and eagerly awaited games of all time.


Spending over $370 million (not some massive over reaction?) only to let RARE rot and not even try and update most of its classic IP, How many IP have MS dropped and how many In-House team have MS shut down or sold off , in an effort to reduce costs and become profitable?, and there's you just going about SEGA.RARE are a mess because of RARE, Microsoft gave them a lot of freedom for years, but like Sega, RARE didn't have any interest in giving people what they wanted, and didn't understand their own strengths, they tried to side step convention and all they did was disappoint their fanbase with admitedly interesting (but unwanted) games like Nuts and Bolts.

Microsoft have reined them in now, so I doubt there's going to be much stuff going on with them in the public eye any more.


Look at SONY too you're still hoping SONY going to make sequels to IP like Ghost Hunter, Getaway II, Primal, Medevil II, Dropship and lets look over how SONY Worlwide Studios have let lots staff go and cancelled a lot projectsThis stuff isn't important at all, I don't know why you keep bringing these types of games up.

Though to be fair yes, I would like a sequel to Medievil.

sheath
04-26-2011, 08:21 PM
I have been thinking about whether the PS1 had a racing game with twenty cars on screen at or near launch, because Ridge Racer had one to five AI cars at a time and that was it. It occurred to me that Destruction Derby was that game.

What would have happened if Edge/Next Generation would have pointed to Destruction Derby as the PS1's Daytona? Since their emphasis was on graphics I mean, and every phrase that included Saturn Daytona included "disappointing" as well, why wasn't Destruction Derby used as proof of the Playstation's superiority?

Destruction Derby (Really really great)
v2iupyi0YcM

Daytona USA (Disappointing, not as good as Ridge Racer)
bsgm3ZjgFK4

Ridge Racer (Really the best thing ever to grace the planet)
EL6i3njf-p4

j_factor
04-26-2011, 10:10 PM
This settles it. The Sega Saturn is better than the printing press, sanitation, universal suffrage, vaccinations, indoor plumbing, and antibiotics combined.

sheath
04-26-2011, 10:14 PM
I think you've gone a little overboard there. Antibiotics have been abused so long that the medical industry has stopped prescribing them to keep them effective. Using the Saturn too much only results in finding more good Saturn games. ;)

j_factor
04-26-2011, 10:15 PM
Hence why Saturn is better!

sheath
04-26-2011, 10:55 PM
Oh, well, that still doesn't explain how Saturn games look better (we don't talk about no playin') than Toshinden or Ridge Racer. So the Saturn is still a horrible mess of a mistake even though it is arguably better than antibiotics.

gamevet
04-27-2011, 12:55 AM
I have been thinking about whether the PS1 had a racing game with twenty cars on screen at or near launch, because Ridge Racer had one to five AI cars at a time and that was it. It occurred to me that Destruction Derby was that game.

What would have happened if Edge/Next Generation would have pointed to Destruction Derby as the PS1's Daytona? Since their emphasis was on graphics I mean, and every phrase that included Saturn Daytona included "disappointing" as well, why wasn't Destruction Derby used as proof of the Playstation's superiority?



Destruction Derby is a great looking game, but those arena rounds didn't have to worry about draw distance, since it was one big arena.




Ridge Racer (Really the best thing ever to grace the planet)


I think the game sucks. It has one track with 6 cars. The replay value was about a couple of hours tops. I've always considered it more of a tech demo, than a real racing game.

Daytona USA may of had pop-up issues, but it was by far a superior game to play.

Team Andromeda
04-27-2011, 04:07 AM
The series is still mildly popular in Britain now, I still hear people over 25 bring Alex "the" Kidd up all the damn time, and I mean all the damn time, even the slightest mention that I'm into old games has people often bringing it up, what's more Alex Kidd is pretty much the only Sega character that female's in Britain actually like. I'm constantly surprised by how well remembered the game is, though I guess it shouldn't be that surprising since it was built into like 70% of the bloody Master System's in Britain.

LOL, Next you'll be demanding sequels to Jet Set Willy and Dizzy and countless UK and much loved classics from the past. I know loads of people wanting and hoping for a sequel to Kung Fu Chaos and Rallisport and even with MS billions and billions that's just not going to happen.


Sega Gaga didn't even come out in the west at all, and where the hell is Fighters Megamix now

The game came out and it was full of SEGA characters, and how knows maybe SEGA is working on a Fighters Megamix II .


Irrelevant nonsence

?. Not everyone that owns a console also owns the handheld by the same platform maker . Its one of the reasons I'm not happy with Val only getting sequels on the PSP rather than the PS3


Sega didn't go for the complete opposite, they went for a more open stance, they didn't even make those games, and they bought the disney licences ffs

SEGA like NCL have the final say on what games could and could not appear on their consoles . SEGA took a completely difference stance to NCL for blood and Violence in its games and even created a Deep Water label for some games and allowed full blood, Gore in Doom, and all the tits and Swearing in Duke (unlike the saintly NCL). Oh and No SEGA did not own the Disney licence at all... becasue Capcom and Co also brought out Disney games for both the NES and Snes and even Mega Drive.


I'd imagine that's what the Japanese said about the American made Metroid Prime games.

The Metroid series has never sold well in Japan , even on the SNES Its main market has been the West. That doesn't change how Other M was very poor and a let down for most.


Wonder Boy the name was owned by Sega, that why ports of the game had to remove the Wonder Boy name, and replace the character sprites

? Owing the name and IP means nothing with out the Team to make it. SEGA still owns the IP to MSR, but Bizzare Creations were able to fly the nest and make the PGR series for MS and the X-Box.


Mother was being made for the N64, the team were over their heads and made a mess of it because they weren't experienced with 3D graphics
:) 'Was'. It never came out and all the fans are still waiting for a direct sequel to appear on a NCL home console , at least PS fans got a sequel and even a story mode in PSU (even if it was crap)


honestly what the hell are you on about half the time?!?! there was virtually a 10 year gap between Outrun 2019, and Outrun 2

I do love how we're trying to change out tune . Out Run came out in 86 and Turbo in 89 and Outrunners in 1992 . Now even with my basic maths that is not a 10 year gap. BTW OutRun 2019 wasn't even a real Outrun game, just a nice sprite and name change for the west, what next if the sequel is any good or not ?


Kid Icarus was already re-introduced in Smash Bros Brawl, NOM mentions these old games constantly as well.

LOL what is this ?. Next you'll be counting Sonic R as a full Sonic title on saturn, even thought it plays nothing like a Sonic game. And play Shenmue you'll see Alex Kid and a host of other SEGA characters make some sort of appearance, does that count too ?. No need to make a sequel to Skies SEGA, a cameo in Valkyria is enough lol


At least I don't make things up as I go along, like some people

Don't make stuff up and btw any silly sod can edit and post on Wiki.


AND?!?!!? what has this got to do with anything that was said?!?!

AND I just making the point that NCL has allowed 3rd parties to work on its IP, even British ones. So lets not have a pop at SEGA for doing just the same as NCL please.


to Sega getting a crap company like Tose to handle their Shinobi license?

Given me Shinobi anyday of the week to the mess that was Mario and Zelda on the CDI .


None of the 1st party releases on Cube or N64 were glitchy at all, they were as polished as they were going to be, Nintendo famously delayed the N64 so that Mario 64 would be ready for launch day and at a high standard.

Nice way to try and worm your way out. Now if I ever said NCL lauch software was glitchy you'll have a point. I never . NCL also famously delayed the N64 for hardware reasons too.


he Gamecube launch was a pretty good launch anyway, yet again you have no idea what you're talking about,

I have every idea was I was taking about since I imported my CUBE. Now lets go on domestic launch software and consoles like the Mega Drive, Snes, N64, Cube, DC, Saturn, PS were all lacking in the number of games ready for launch,and I do love the irony of you highlighting a SEGA game has a good launch game.


RARE are a mess because of RARE, Microsoft gave them a lot of freedom for years,

The same MS that cancelled Kameo II and PDZ II in order for RARE to focus on Natal ?. Not the same MS that killed off Studios like Fasa, Diigital Avil, Nidie Built , Ensemble.

Keep it coming

16bitter
04-27-2011, 12:16 PM
Honestly, is this a practical joke? :p

No. It's sheath's psyche.

There's nothing practical about it -- at least not if practical is being used as a synonym for words like 'realistic', 'rational' or 'sensible'.

That's, really, his game: to confuse his thoughts with fact, and to declare that anyone or any publication that disagrees with him -- including or even because they have industry sources and baseline fact on their side -- 'biased'.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 12:23 PM
This settles it. The Sega Saturn is better than the printing press, sanitation, universal suffrage, vaccinations, indoor plumbing, and antibiotics combined.

That's what Sony executives said -- the Saturn was a real godsend for SCE.

nissling
04-27-2011, 01:41 PM
Guardian Heroes is only available on the Saturn, that alone makes the console worth owning imo.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 01:45 PM
Guardian Heroes is only available on the Saturn, that alone makes the console worth owning imo.

There's no doubt it's worth owning. There's no doubt it had some of the best software of its generation.

The problem is the cost to Sega, the loss of the consumer, the losses for the consumer, the inelegant board design -- likely due to the original design being too underpowered to compete with PS1 -- and the terrible spot this put dev teams in.

Add all that up, and Saturn was a massive mistake from a corporate standpoint.

I love the machine, as a gamer. As a Sega fan? I think it was a pretty awful release.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 02:19 PM
01-29-2011 #5
From what I heard, it was a pride thing with Sega of Japan picking PowerVR over 3DFX because they wanted to keep all the development in Japan. This pissed off all the Blackbelt guys which made almost the entire team quit on the spot. Since Electronic Arts had so much money in 3DFX stock, this decision killed them financially which is why they never supported the Dreamcast. I never saw any Dreamcast than the one you know.

What a surprise. Yet more SOJ jingoism, just as it was with Kalinske and the SGI non-deal.

But then, at least PowerVR provided that power; unlike Saturn, it was a very strong chipset, and was the best on the market for over a year.

Olls
04-27-2011, 02:24 PM
Well shit. Here we go again!

Da_Shocker
04-27-2011, 02:35 PM
01-29-2011 #5
From what I heard, it was a pride thing with Sega of Japan picking PowerVR over 3DFX because they wanted to keep all the development in Japan. This pissed off all the Blackbelt guys which made almost the entire team quit on the spot. Since Electronic Arts had so much money in 3DFX stock, this decision killed them financially which is why they never supported the Dreamcast. I never saw any Dreamcast than the one you know.

What a surprise. Yet more SOJ jingoism, just as it was with Kalinske and the SGI non-deal.

But then, at least PowerVR provided that power; unlike Saturn, it was a very strong chipset, and was the best on the market for over a year.

Where is 3DFX now and where is PoweVR now?

16bitter
04-27-2011, 02:36 PM
Default Sega Saturn: Best thing to happen to planet Earth?

Between baloo sitting shivah in response to its unseemly demise, and Trekkiesunite declaring jihad on its behalf, it seems the Saturn even has the power to bring Jews and Muslims into a semi-agreeable alliance.

Then again, are fanboy outbursts their own outliers, or a sign of a new religion of the unwashed and unwanted? Star Wars megachurches ftl.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 02:40 PM
Where is 3DFX now and where is PoweVR now?

Better question: where is Sega now?

Not in the home console business. But to be fair, the clusterfuck that was Saturn gets a great deal of credit for that.

old man
04-27-2011, 03:05 PM
3DFX became NVidia, and PowerVR is focusing on the embedded market. I think their new chipset is going to be in an iPhone or something.

old man
04-27-2011, 03:09 PM
I always thought it cost too much.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 03:12 PM
I always thought it cost too much.

It cost Sega way too much.

Da_Shocker
04-27-2011, 03:23 PM
Better question: where is Sega now?

Not in the home console business. But to be fair, the clusterfuck that was Saturn gets a great deal of credit for that.

Sega still exists granted they are only a shell of themselves but 3DFX was bought out by Nvidia. But unlike Sega, 3DFX was at one point the leading 3D graphics card here. But let's be real Sega wasn't going to beat Sony at all. 16bitter do you think that had Sega did everything right that they would still be in hardware business?

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 03:28 PM
Between baloo sitting shivah in response to its unseemly demise, and Trekkiesunite declaring jihad on its behalf, it seems the Saturn even has the power to bring Jews and Muslims into a semi-agreeable alliance.

Then again, are fanboy outbursts their own outliers, or a sign of a new religion of the unwashed and unwanted? Star Wars megachurches ftl.

Seriously, this is uncalled for. You are very lucky I'm not that deep into religion because someone who was could take great offense to that. Your personal attacks are getting more and more annoying. But I guess that's what you do when you have no real argument and only quote old opinions from magazines.

This thread was obviously made as a joke to make fun of YOU and the countless threads you made on this subject before the forums went down. If you want to continue to make an ass of yourself go ahead, but I don't think anyone in this thread is taking you seriously anymore.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 03:29 PM
If anything all you're doing is proving what I said, Alex Kidd in Miracle World was an extremely popular game in large parts of Europe, and yet Sega didn't give two shits about it, they made one total crap game which seemed to have nothing in common with the original (Lost Stars), then they threw him into an unrelated game simply changing the main sprite (High Tech World)

Best example is, simply, Sonic. Huge in America. Likewise in Europe.

What does Sega do? They effectively kill a character that had become as big as Mario, as big as the House of Mouse, and push Virtua Fighter worldwide.

Huh?

But then, looking at their other, insular and hunkered-down moves, it becomes obvious: the Sega Saturn was built for the Japanese market, period. The markets that gave Sega their greatest success were, relatively, unwanted if we look at the tea leaves. All they seemed to care about was that they weren't winning the home market, even as they were winning the world market!

This type of blinkered outlook is what led to the Saturn being pushed even after they realized that the American arm had a better design waiting, that, with the Playstation its chipset was outmoded, and the costs were unsustainable as a market-rate relative to Sega's fiscal state.

If any of that mattered, it was in a suicidal attempt to stick it to their satellites -- SOA in particular -- and win the Japanese market. Gotta cash-in on VF fever, even if it's only sweeping a single market, and is lacking as a system-seller in the West. Sega(of Japan)'s proudest moment: selling a couple million hardware units in Japan, and even leading the market for a short period.

What a mess.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 03:41 PM
Seriously, this is uncalled for. You are very lucky I'm not that deep into religion because someone who was could take great offense to that.

So, you're basically ranting about things you don't really know about.

Sounds like business as usual.

Nothing like being offended on someone else's behalf. Proxy outrage.

The funniest part is, of course, that you care more about the Saturn being attacked -- far more -- than any joke about religion, or the particulars attendant.

You're a Talmudic scholar of Sega Saturn Sophistry. Yet your ignorance doesn't even appear to be bliss.


Your personal attacks are getting more and more annoying.

What do you provide?

Basically screeds -- and/or Youtube videos -- announcing your hatred of anyone who questions the wisdom of releasing a $400 disaster.


But I guess that's what you do when you have no real argument and only quote old opinions from magazines.

My argument is that the Saturn was a poorly-designed chipset, with lacking software releases for the Western market, that cost too much money to manufacture and effectively killed Sega as a hardware company.

Those quotes and sources you dismiss, are confirmation of these factors.

Your argument? Well, that you don't like it. Oh, I mean that you hate it. That is, these facts and factors being discussed at all.


If you want to continue to make an ass of yourself go ahead,

Personal attack!


but I don't think anyone in this thread is taking you seriously anymore.

Said the clown to the funhouse mirror.

Da_Shocker
04-27-2011, 03:42 PM
How many billions has MS and Sony lost in this market? I'm sure they have incurred the combined losses of what Sega was worth 4X when they were at there peak. Sonic was never that huge, both Mario and even Donkey Kong sold way more units that Sonic did. Hell Crash Bandicoot outsold Sonic 2. Sega games simply don't appeal to the mass market outside of Sonic. 70 million for Shenmue and the game sold like shit.

kokujin
04-27-2011, 03:44 PM
16bitter,were you or someone close to you hurt by the saturn.You seem to have a personal grudge with the system.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 03:47 PM
16bitter,were you or someone close to you hurt by the saturn.You seem to have a personal grudge with the system.

Enough with the fanboy rhetoric.

Really.

My problems with the Saturn have been made clear. Notice that Sega/Saturn fanboys have little interest in those findings, and, largely, parallel facts.

Da_Shocker
04-27-2011, 03:48 PM
16bitter,were you or someone close to you hurt by the saturn.You seem to have a personal grudge with the system.

LOL I luv the Saturn now granted it flopped bigtime but still IMO the best system of that era.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 03:49 PM
Well, too bad Sega had killer 3D hardware in the arcades, only to design a system that was meant for 2D at home.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 03:54 PM
Do you understand basic economics?

Because Sony/MS can afford to pursue markets while bleeding cash. All Sega did was bleed cash while losing its market.

Good job, R&D! Winning!

kokujin
04-27-2011, 03:56 PM
Enough with the fanboy rhetoric.

Really.

My problems with the Saturn have been made clear. Notice that Sega/Saturn fanboys have little interest in those findings, and, largely, parallel facts.

Findings, you didn't find anything.Everyone knows the saturn was a financial failure,some of it was SEGA's fault and some of it was the the indusrtries.The chipset was not as good as it could be, but it was very capable.You seem to hate the fact that people like the system despite it's mainstream performance.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 03:57 PM
About the religion, it had nothing to do with arguing about stuff I don't understand. It was my way of telling you that you were starting to cross over a boundary that some people might not take so lightly. We don't need to stoop so low to petty name calling and insults.

And I didn't call you an ass, I said you were making an ass of yourself. There is a difference between the two. Making an ass of yourself means behaving in a way that makes you look like a fool. Which by the way you are still doing.

Those quotes and sources are not entirely accurate. That's what we are trying to tell you.

And Sega may have lost money on the Saturn, they were not bleeding money like they were with the Dreamcast. That's what effectively killed Sega.

The Saturn chipset may not have been the best design, but it wasn't the worst either. It was no worse than most Arcade Boards at the time, the fact that in its first year we got the same amount of software as the PS1 proves it couldn't have been that hard to develop for. Throw in the fact that the companies who were used to working with Arcade Hardware (Sega, Konami, Capcom, Treasure, etc.) gave us some of the best results from the system also proves that it couldn't have been that much worse than Arcade hardware.

And I don't recall saying I hate people who don't like the Saturn, I simply said I'll defend it when people are deeming it garbage.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 03:58 PM
Findings, you didn't find anything.Everyone knows the saturn was a financial failure,some of it was SEGA's fault and some of it was the the indusrtries.The chipset was not as good as it could be, but it was very capable.You seem to hate the fact that people like the system despite it's mainstream performance.

Jerry Springer had an episode once where a guy married his horse.

I don't think there was ever an episode about some hick shacking up with household appliances, though.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 04:00 PM
Please tell us more about how the Sega Saturn has personally slighted you.

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 04:03 PM
Findings, you didn't find anything. Everyone knows the saturn was a financial failure,some of it was SEGA's fault and some of it was the the industries.Tell that to the people on here, who blame a media conspiracy for the Saturn's failure, make out lists of junk Saturn games are actually lists of golden classics, say that the Saturn made money on every unit sold, and that the system wasn't rushed to market and didn't have a lacklustre launch.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 04:05 PM
About the religion, it had nothing to do with arguing about stuff I don't understand. It was my way of telling you that you were starting to cross over a boundary that some people might not take so lightly.

My point was obvious: your inability to take this lightly at all.

Your point is to create a strawman and push a demogogic angle as an attempt to silence statements you dislike, which has nothing to do with your respect for religion.

Though it may have something to do with your need to push the Saturn as its own religious basis.


We don't need to stoop so low to petty name calling and insults.

As opposed to telling people to get out, shut up, et cetera when you dislike their statements on Saturn.


And I didn't call you an ass, I said you were making an ass of yourself. There is a difference between the two. Making an ass of yourself means behaving in a way that makes you look like a fool. Which by the way you are still doing.

I assume this is your expert opinion.

From personal experience.


Those quotes and sources are not entirely accurate. That's what we are trying to tell you.

There's a difference between disliking findings, and actually disproving them.

Your side has plenty of the former, and little to none of the latter.

Which effectively describes the rest of your post.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 04:08 PM
Tell that to the people on here, who blame a media conspiracy for the Saturn's failure, make out lists of junk Saturn games are actually lists of golden classics, say that the Saturn made money on every unit sold, and that the system wasn't rushed to market and didn't have a lacklustre launch.

Just because YOU didn't properly read the list sheath posted doesn't mean we are listing junk games as golden classics. And there WAS a media bias against the Saturn. This page here proves it:

http://www.superpcenginegrafx.net/blueshadows.html

And the Saturn did actually make money in Japan at least. I doubt it was being sold at that huge of a loss. If it was Sega would have gone bankrupt for sure during that era. And again, the System wasn't really rushed to market, it was just released early. The Hardware was finalized at least a year before it launched, the idea that Sega panicked and slapped some processors on last minute is completely bogus as interviews with people who worked at Sega have proven. I do agree that Sega should have at least waited to launch in September of 1995 when they had more polished software, but the hardware itself wasn't rushed.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 04:10 PM
:rofl:


The possibility that its next-gen hardware would face competition simply hadn't figured in Sega's calculations. So when news broke in November 1993 that Sony was developing a system capable of revolutionary performance, all hell broke loose. Those who had seen the machine working claimed that it was far more powerful than anything Sega had planned. Most threatening was the disclosure that it was to be released in late 1994 - the same time was Saturn. To Sega's dismay, a powerful new rival had arisen overnight.
Sega's president, the feared Hayao Nakayama, was among the first to be informed. His reaction was typical. He immediately marched down to his consumer research and development division and proceeded to ridicule the sum of his team's achievements over the previous year.

[...]

Sega's kneejerk reaction was to delay its Saturn development programme by a few months to incorporate a new video processor into the system. Not only would this boost its 2D abilities considerably (something Sony's machine was less proficient at); but it would also provide better texture mapping for 3D. Unfortunately, this played havoc with the Saturn's carefully worked out schedule, to the extent that many pundits thought that Sega wouldn't make it to market in 1994. Some peopel even expected Sega to cancel the Saturn project and concentrate its efforts on something more powerful for 1996..
One prominent developer who visited Sega Of Japan's Saturn division told Edge: 'there's simply no way that Sega will be releasing Saturn this year. They're behind on hardware, they're behind on software, and it's very hard to see how they can do it.'
But, contrary to expectations, Sega has done it. The reality is that its 32bit machine has now been launched in Japan, and the same system is on its way to the US and UK later next year.

It was originally planned that the Saturn would be released in two forms: a CD-ROM-based console, and a cart-only console, developed under the project name Jupiter.

[...]

At around the same time, Sega made another important decision. It recognised that its most important market was America, and that it needed to retain the enormous userbase it had built up with the Genesis. The answer was the Mars project, which resulted in the system we now know as the 32X.
Essentially, Jupiter became Mars.

[...]

EDGE #16, January 1995

Unlike the Playstation, the Saturn does not contain a dedicated geometry engine for calculating polygons - instead, the twin CPUs handle all the calculation, and the VDP1 chip, in conjunction with the frame buffer, draws 3D objects to the screen as distorted sprites.

[...]

"The SH-2 was chosen for reasons of cost and efficiency," claims Kazuhiro Hamada, section chief of Saturn development at the time of the system's conception. "The chip has got a calculation system similar to DSP but we realised that a single CPU wouldn't be fast enough to calculate a 3D world."

kokujin
04-27-2011, 04:12 PM
Tell that to the people on here, who blame a media conspiracy for the Saturn's failure, make out lists of junk Saturn games are actually lists of golden classics, say that the Saturn made money on every unit sold, and that the system wasn't rushed to market and didn't have a lacklustre launch.

Those people are crazy then, but it doesn't make sense why he has such a distaste for the system.It's not like the Saturn outsold the PSX, I could see why he would be upset then, but that's not the case.

Zebbe
04-27-2011, 04:15 PM
I'm not the biggest fan of the console, but I have to say it has many great hidden gems such as Radiant Silvergun, even more great arcade ports by Sega such as Virtua Cop and Virtua Fighter series and the best controller and soundchip of its generation. If the market only consisted of hardcore players, I think it would have sold a lot better.

sheath
04-27-2011, 04:19 PM
Yup, Edge #16 is at fault for the rumor of Sega adding the second SH2 and the VDP1 to the Saturn after the Playstation announcement in 1993. Did they cite anything but themselves in this assertion? No. Were they there during any of the Saturn's design meetings? Nope. Did 16bitter ever show evidence that suggests Edge was a fair and unbiased magazine in the previous threads he created to bash the Saturn? Nope.

The fact is that Edge was in love, LOVE, with Sony and the Playstation from at least 1994 on. Argue all you want that they saw Ridge Racer and Virtua Fighter and just lost their objectivity. It doesn't affect the fact that every article in Edge/Next Generation prior to the Saturn and Playstation's western launches are negative and critical of the Saturn and positivist or even promotional about the Playstation.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 04:24 PM
I assume this is your expert opinion.

From personal experience.

How's the dictionary?:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/make+a+fool+of

You could also watch Walt Disney's Pinocchio, it's your choice really.




There's a difference between disliking findings, and actually disproving them.

Your side has plenty of the former, and little to none of the latter.

Which effectively describes the rest of your post.

We have pointed out proof, you just refuse to read it or accept it.

And as for what you just posted, the one if I remember correctly comes from a Sega-16 article which I am pretty sure has been deemed inaccurate. More recent interviews has proven that the Saturn's design was pretty much finalized a year or so before it's launch and that Sega of American knew about it. I think it was one of the 32X interviews here if I remember correctly.

As for the Launch I have stated that I think they should have waited to launch it.

As for the rest of your quotes A lot of it is stuff taken out of context and doesn't make sense in comparison to the PS1 as others have said before. Saying they needed 2 SH-2's doesn't say anything bad about the system's design, it just says they put a 2nd CPU in. Bringing up the comment about only getting 1.5x speed out of the SH-2s again doesn't say the Saturn is worse than the PS1. 1.5x the speed of 1 SH-2 is still faster and better than the performance of the PS1's CPU.

And as for lacking a geometry engine, it's kind a funny that without one it's still able to pull of 3D as good as and in some cases better than the PS1.

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 04:33 PM
Just because YOU didn't properly read the list sheath posted doesn't mean we are listing junk games as golden classics.Sheath made two lists of all the games available by the end of 1995, the PS1 list contained multiple good games, Wipeout, Ridge Racer, Doom, Tekken, Twisted Metal, Warhawk, XCom, Zero Divide, Jumping Flash, Diskworld, Mortal Kombat 3 (not a big fan but the game was huge in 1995), there's lightweight, shortlived, but fun fodder like loaded, and impressive tech demo's like Toshinden etc

The Saturn's 1995 list was a list of mediocrity, a handful of multiplatform games, a handful of old 3DO ports, a handful Sega CD FMV games, a load of games like Astal and Clockwork Knight which could be completed in a matter of hours and were clearly rushed out the door to give Saturn release numbers, at the end of the day the Saturn had its decent though disappointing ports of Virtua Fighter and Daytona, the remix of Virtua Fighter (which shouldn't have needed to exist at all if Sega had done the job right to begin with), and Panzer Dragoon, the only high pedigree games worth mentioning in the list were the three which were released right at the end of the year halfway through December, Virtua Cop, Virtua Fighter 2, and Sega Rally.

I think EDGE can be forgiven for saying the Saturn had little worthwhile software in 1995.

sheath
04-27-2011, 04:36 PM
The Dual SH-2's were known about by Sega of America by January 1994 according to Marty Franz and Scot Bayless in their Retrogamer Interview with Damien McFerran. The Saturn's dual SH-2's were the inspiration for the 32X having them as well, according to both interviews.


Edge August 95 pg 51
"The SH-2 was chosen for reasons of cost and efficiency.' claims Kazuhiro Hamada, section cheif of Saturn development at the time of the machine's conception. 'The chip has got a calculation system similar to a DSP but we realized that a single CPU would not be enough to calculate a 3D world."
Hamada and his team knew the Saturn would not use just one SH-2 at the system's conception. The reason had nothing to do with the Playstation, which would have been unknown at the time, the reason as stated was because one SH-2 would "not be enough to calculate a 3D world."


Sheath made two lists of all the games available by the end of 1995, the PS1 list contained multiple good games, Wipeout, Ridge Racer, Doom, Tekken, Twisted Metal, Warhawk, XCom, Zero Divide, Jumping Flash, Diskworld, Mortal Kombat 3 (not a big fan but the game was huge in 1995), there's lightweight, shortlived, but fun fodder like loaded, and impressive tech demo's like Toshinden etc

The Saturn's 1995 list was a list of mediocrity, ...

I think EDGE can be forgiven for saying the Saturn had little worthwhile software in 1995.

Cyber Speedway, High Velocity, Virtua Fighter Remix and VF2, Wing Arms, Panzer Dragoon, Virtua Cop, Sega Rally Championship, and Galaxy Fight, are so very far from mediocre it isn't even worth discussing. Even though Edge couldn't manage to say the name Daytona USA without blurting out "disappointing" they gave it an 8/10 score for its excellent gameplay, do you think it should have been lower?

If you don't like Astal or Bug!, then whatever. Edge didn't like Cyber Speedway for illegitimate reasons, I was playing the game in 1995 no problem, if they found it unplayable their gaming skills are in question. Black Fire, Robotica and Ghen War were both very competent. Ghen War is actually one of the first fully 3D shooters on any platform, before Quake even.

Point being, just because you don't like these games doesn't make them mediocre. Have you actually played them? I haven't played Dark Legend otherwise I'd have tossed it up there as well, but everybody who has told me it was worth playing.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 04:55 PM
Again with Mortal Kombat 3, I don't remember many people running out to buy a PS1 for this game. Most people I knew were content with it on their SNES and Genesis systems.

And talking about mediocrity, some of the games you mentioned are not that great either. Jumping Flash, Diskworld, XCom, etc. are probably some of the WORST PS1 games I have ever seen. I'd rather play Astal, Clockwork Knight, Solar Eclipse, etc. than any of those games. Panzer Dragoon is a far better game than most of those PS1 games you mentioned. Since you guys love reviews and gaming press so much here's a review for you to think about:

http://retro.ign.com/articles/897/897636p1.html

The only games I will give the PS1 for the Saturn not having a good enough game by comparison are Wipeout (Though Gran Chaser/Cyber Speedway is a decent alternative), Zero Divide, Doom, and Twisted Metal. The rest all either had a good enough alternative on the Saturn, or were just bad games to begin with.

Sega Rally if I remember correctly was out in October, Virtua Fighter 2 was out in November, and Virtua Cop was out in November as well.

And I'd rather play Virtua Fighter Remix than Tekken or Toshinden. And Remix was out BEFORE the PS1 launched in the US. I'd rather play the disappointing port of Daytona than Ridge Racer, and I'd definitely rather play Sega Rally than Ridge Racer. As for Doom, all my friends and I played that game on the PC. I don't know a single person who played it on the PS1. For Warhawk we have both Wing Arms from Sega and Solar Eclipse, which is a SEQUEL to the 3DO original, not a port. Both of which I'd say are adequate alternatives.

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 04:57 PM
Yup, Edge #16 is at fault for the rumor of Sega adding the second SH2 and the VDP1 to the Saturn after the Playstation announcement in 1993.No, the person from Sega who told them this in the first place is the one responsible.


Did 16bitter ever show evidence that suggests Edge was a fair and unbiased magazine in the previous threads he created to bash the Saturn? Nope.Did you provide any evidence that the award winning and highly respected EDGE magazine have been taking bribes for years? nope

All you provided was a bunch of quotes all of which look pretty true to me, or at least reasonable conclusions that they could have been reached based on what the writers at EDGE would've seen with their own eyes, its not bias to criticise a machine when said machine is a huge disappointment.


The fact is that Edge was in love, LOVE, with Sony and the Playstation from at least 1994 on. Argue all you want that they saw Ridge Racer and Virtua Fighter and just lost their objectivity. It doesn't affect the fact that every article in Edge/Next Generation prior to the Saturn and Playstation's western launches are negative and critical of the Saturn, positivist or even promotional about the Playstation.Stop talking about the western launches, EDGE made their mind up at the Japanese launch, this is clear as day when reading the articles they wrote, after that nothing that the Saturn did until December of 1995 changed their stance, as soon as Virtua Fighter 2/Sega Rally/Virtua Cop were released they changed their stance, because they had seen with their own eyes that the Saturn was better than they had thought.

Read some stuff from 1996, they start criticising the PS1 for its masses of shovelware, and refer to the Saturn as being powerful but hard to get the most out of.


Cyber Speedway, High Velocity, Virtua Fighter Remix and VF2, Wing Arms, Panzer Dragoon, Virtua Cop, Sega Rally Championship, and Galaxy Fight, are so very far from mediocre it isn't even worth discussing.Don't know why you listed some of the games I specifically said were notable, but oh well :?

Cyber Speedway is mediocre
High velocity is mediocre (ok, maybe its just about decent for the time)
Wing Arms is mediocre
Galaxy Fight is mediocre


Robotica and Ghen War were both very competent, Ghen War is actually one of the first fully 3D shooters on any platform, before Quake even.Yeah, I'm sure Quake had nothing on those games


Point being, just because you don't like these games doesn't make them mediocre. Have you actually played them?Everybody dislikes them, because they are mediocre, you like them simply because they're on Saturn.

Joe Redifer
04-27-2011, 05:06 PM
I love the Saturn. It has many awesome games that I enjoy and I have more fun playing it than the Playstation (most of the time). It was poorly handled, yes, but that doesn't mean I enjoy it any less. Nothing anyone here says can make me appreciate the Saturn less, not sure what the point would be in me doing so.

sheath
04-27-2011, 05:09 PM
New Guy, now you're just being silly. Plus, you are wrong about Edge reporting that anybody told them the SH-2 or VDP1 was added late in its development in reaction to the PS1. They just wrote it down, 16bitter cited "anonymous sources." Well guess what, unnamed sources do_not outweigh names sources like Hamada, Franz and Bayless.

It is obvious that you believe that the Saturn was slapped to together at the last minute, just as it is obvious that you believe the games above are "mediocre" while everything you listed for the PS1 was what, above average or spectacular? Coming from somebody who thinks review scores matter I am not surprised by your stance.

I would rather play Cyber Speedway or High Velocity 2-Player today than play Wipeout or Ridge Racer. You won't catch me saying Wipeout is mediocre, I just prefer Cyber Speedway for, yeah, its 2-Player the fact that the sled doesn't stop every time you tap a wall, and the fact that you can destroy other sleds. High Velocity has a ton more tracks and a much better driving and power slide mechanic than Ridge Racer, hands down.

There is nothing you can pin on Wing Arms to call it mediocre, its gameplay graphics and sound are at least good for that generation. Again, have you played it?

Why don't you like Galaxy Fight? Reviewers on Gamefaqs seem to see it as above average at the least. Your Ghen War comment is just stupid.

Listen you're wrong about the Saturn being a bad system in 1995, it was easily on par with the Playstation until 1997. The only thing the Playstation had over the Saturn was popularity with developers resulting in more positive statements about it in game magazines.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 05:09 PM
Everybody dislikes them, because they are mediocre, you like them simply because they're on Saturn.

Not really, I know for a fact that Classic Game Room reviewed both Cyber Speedway and Galaxy Fight and said they were good fun games to play.

Zebbe
04-27-2011, 05:12 PM
The problem is [...] the losses for the consumer

Can you explain what you mean here?

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 05:27 PM
Again with Mortal Kombat 3, I don't remember many people running out to buy a PS1 for this game. Most people I knew were content with it on their SNES and Genesis systems.Mortal Kombat 3 and Doom were definitely still huge games in 1995, they may well have been the most high profile games out of everything listed.


And talking about mediocrity, some of the games you mentioned are not that great either. Jumping Flash, Diskworld, XCom, etc. are probably some of the WORST PS1 games I have ever seen.X-Com is one of the most highly respected, and fondly remembered strategy games ever made :bang:


Sega Rally if I remember correctly was out in October, Virtua Fighter 2 was out in November, and Virtua Cop was out in November as well.They were all December at earliest, for some reason Virtua Fighter 2 isn't reviewed in some magazines until the FEB issue, so I'd imagine it must have been well into December for that one too.

Joe Redifer
04-27-2011, 05:28 PM
I know Sega Rally came out earliest, but I remember Virtua Fighter and Virtua Cop being early December-ish. The FEB issues of magazines usually come out the previous November.

sheath
04-27-2011, 05:31 PM
I remember buying my Saturn in early November specifically for Virtua Fighter 2. I don't remember seeing Sega Rally until closer to December.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 05:33 PM
The Dual SH-2's were known about by Sega of America by January 1994 according to Marty Franz and Scot Bayless in their Retrogamer Interview with Damien McFerran. The Saturn's dual SH-2's were the inspiration for the 32X having them as well, according to both interviews.

Either you're confused, or just trying to confuse others.

The schedule you lay out does not contradict the story from EDGE as to the Saturn's rushed redesign, instead it arguably confirms it.

When do you think system specs are finalized, days before they start rolling off the assembly-line? The PSX was ready -- finished -- as a production model, mainline boardwork here, in November of 1993, the same time Nakayama supposedly had his fit.

The SH2s coming onto the project as a quick reworking by January matches up remarkably well with the idea of a condensed R&D redesign schedule.

So, really, thanks for pointing those interviews out.


The reason had nothing to do with the Playstation,

Proof? Do you have any for this statement, this assertion of fact?



the reason as stated was because one SH-2 would "not be enough to calculate a 3D world."

And yet, as EDGE noted, the Saturn was redesigned as a response to the Playstation's polygon power, which the SH2 argument and timeline seems to match up with.

Interesting to note that Yu Suzuki stated that the Saturn was based around 2D precepts rather than 3D, with the 3D portion as an afterthought in the machine's design:

Edge: Tell us about Titan.
Yu Suzuki: Titan is a new arcade board that's very similar to Saturn, only with a bigger memory and a good serial I/O.

Edge: So Titan is more powerful than Saturn? Is it also more powerful than Model 2?
Yu Suzuki: Yes, the system's more powerful than Saturn, but the performance isn't comparable to Model 2. Model 2 is a pure 3D graphics engine with very high-technology hardware [...] Also, Titan is based on 2D technology hardware.

EDGE9, June 1994


Cyber Speedway, High Velocity, Virtua Fighter Remix and VF2, Wing Arms, Panzer Dragoon, Virtua Cop, Sega Rally Championship, and Galaxy Fight, are so very far from mediocre it isn't even worth discussing. Even though Edge couldn't manage to say the name Daytona USA without blurting out "disappointing" they gave it an 8/10 score for its excellent gameplay, do you think it should have been lower?

Do you understand that your opinions are no more unbiased than EDGE's? Do you understand the nature of a review?

Or do you think it's a fact when a NYT book reviewer pans a new release?

Your lists of "worthwhile" games are as biased, if not moreso considering stated and unstated aim of gamepilgrimage, as any 5/10 review score that sent you foaming. That you can't note this is, really, the same as an argument as to your lack of ratiocination in general, and is thus circular: you're purely illogical.

Further, conflating game reviews with journalism, in the context of interviews and fact-checking through those sources, is purely dishonest and, as usual, illogical of you.

And yet that's exactly the way you've attempted to attack EDGE -- not on their interviews, their sourcing or their fact-finding but rather in the context of simply disagreeing with a review score or statement on a given software release.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 05:34 PM
Can you explain what you mean here?

The lifespan of the system. The same problem as all post-Genesis Sega hardware.

The sad thing is, Saturn was not only disastrous for itself, but also for DreamCast.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 05:37 PM
Mortal Kombat 3 and Doom were definitely still huge games in 1995, they may well have been the most high profile games out of everything listed.

X-Com is one of the most highly respected, and fondly remembered strategy games ever made :bang:

They were all December at earliest, for some reason Virtua Fighter 2 isn't reviewed in some magazines until the FEB issue, so I'd imagine it must have been well into December for that one too.

X-Com may be well respected, but it looks like crap to me. And if it's so highly respected why haven't I heard of it until these threads? Why wasn't I playing it with freinds in 1995 on PCs? Oh that's right, we were all playing strategy games like Sim City, Warcraft, etc.

As for those Saturn games, the release dates clearly say November for Virtua Cop and December 1st for Virtua Fighter 2. Now they may not have reached Europe until later, but they were definitely out in 1995 in the US and Japan. Again going off of Magazine Review dates is not always the best source to go by.

And Mortal Kombat 3 and Doom were big, but Doom was big on the PC, not so much on consoles. And as I said before most people I knew were playing MK3 on their SNES and Genesis systems, NOT on Playstations.



Edge: Tell us about Titan.
Yu Suzuki: Titan is a new arcade board that's very similar to Saturn, only with a bigger memory and a good serial I/O.

Edge: So Titan is more powerful than Saturn? Is it also more powerful than Model 2?
Yu Suzuki: Yes, the system's more powerful than Saturn, but the performance isn't comparable to Model 2. Model 2 is a pure 3D graphics engine with very high-technology hardware [...] Also, Titan is based on 2D technology hardware.

EDGE9, June 1994



Again what are you trying to prove with this quote? All you are proving is that the Model 2 hardware was a 3D beast and Saturn obviously wasn't as good. This is completely irrelevant to the discussion on Saturn vs PS1, if you are going to throw that quote around tack onto the end of it that the PS1 isn't as powerful either.

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 05:45 PM
X-Com may be well respected, but it looks like crap to me. And if it's so highly respected why haven't I heard of it until these threads? Why wasn't I playing it with freinds in 1995 on PCs? Oh that's right, we were all playing strategy games like Sim City, Warcraft, etc.Its not the most accessible of games, but it is respected, and very in-depth, there's a lot to it, and the Playstation version even supports mouse.

Though unfortunately its expensive and difficult to find these days (on PS1) I got lucky in that I found it being sold cheaply at a local market.

Baloo
04-27-2011, 05:45 PM
Between baloo sitting shivah in response to its unseemly demise, and Trekkiesunite declaring jihad on its behalf, it seems the Saturn even has the power to bring Jews and Muslims into a semi-agreeable alliance.

Then again, are fanboy outbursts their own outliers, or a sign of a new religion of the unwashed and unwanted? Star Wars megachurches ftl.

You're just a complete moron. Why do you come to a SEGA fan forum just to hate on the Saturn so much? Are you just that much of a troll?

For the buyer, the Saturn was far from a bad purchase. Just look at all the people back in the day who posted on here and bought it when it first came out and didn't complain. And you don't even hear people complain about the titles like you do the N64, which went for so long without any good titles really at launch.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 05:46 PM
Its not the most accessible of games, but it is respected, and very in-depth, there's a lot to it, and the Playstation version even supports mouse.

Though unfortunately its expensive and difficult to find these days (on PS1) I got lucky in that I found it being sold cheaply at a local market.

Again though, it's not a game that screams "OH MY GOD WE HAVE TO GO BUY A PS1 FOR THIS!"

16bitter
04-27-2011, 05:49 PM
Again what are you trying to prove with this quote? All you are proving is that the Model 2 hardware was a 3D beast and Saturn obviously wasn't as good. This is completely irrelevant to the discussion on Saturn vs PS1, if you are going to throw that quote around tack onto the end of it that the PS1 isn't as powerful either.

Your attempts to miss the point are hilarious.

I stated in my previous post what the point is: that the Saturn was a 2D machine, forced into the position of pushing 3D graphics. How exactly did you miss that?

Thus the opposite of Model 2. Oh, and Playstation, for that matter -- which is supposedly the machine that caused the shift at all.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 05:53 PM
You're just a complete moron. Why do you come to a SEGA fan forum just to hate on the Saturn so much? Are you just that much of a troll?

Should this be a house of worship for Saturn?

Good job conforming to my stereotype for you.


For the buyer, the Saturn was far from a bad purchase. Just look at all the people back in the day who posted on here and bought it when it first came out and didn't complain.

Yes, think of all those happy customers. Why, I bet there were nearly 5 people on this very board -- a board that would in no way attract Sega fanboys, right? -- that bought the Saturn at $400, watched its software support dry up by 1997, and lost it totally -- on the domestic side -- by 1998 who were perfectly satisfied. How could such happiness, on such a broad scale of demographics, not be considered a success?

With a mind like yours, it's certainly ironic that you would call someone else a moron.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 05:57 PM
Your attempts to miss the point are hilarious.

I stated in my previous post what I was pointing out: that the Saturn was a 2D machine, forced into the position of pushing 3D graphics. How exactly did you miss that?

Thus the opposite of Model 2. Oh, and Playstation, for that matter -- which is supposedly the machine that caused the shift at all.

There are different ways that could be interpreted though. Saying it's based on 2D technology could mean it's a budget line arcade board aimed more at good 2D arcade games than 3D ones, which a lot of the ST-V titles were 2D. That's not the same as saying it's not a machine that can do 3D.

It could have also meant "We went with a 2D approach to 3D instead of putting in our high end chips used in the Model 2 board." That's again not saying it can't do 3D or that it's bad at 3D.

All this comment says is that the Hardware uses a different approach than the high end Model 2 boards. That's it. It doesn't say anything about 3D performance, it doesn't say 3D performance is bad, it doesn't say it can't do 3D, it doesn't say anything about being forced to do 3D, it doesn't say ANYTHING about the Playstation, or any of the things you are trying to twist out of it.

All it says is that the system isn't based on Model 2 hardware. Just because it's based on 2D doesn't mean it can't do 3D or that it wasn't designed with any 3D in mind either.

And let's not forget here that Yu Suzuki doesn't really speak english that well, so there could be translation errors in that statement. He could have meant to say "Our intent for Titan is more 2D games where as Model 2 is entirely for 3D games." Which this makes more sense in saying it's more powerful than Saturn. Titan is the same hardware as the Saturn just with more memory, more Memory would make a bigger difference in performance in 2D than it would in 3D at that point in time. And if this was what he really meant that really throws out any arguments you can make about it being a 2D machine forced to do 3D.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 05:58 PM
Let the Saturn fanboy dissembling commence.

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 05:58 PM
Again though, it's not a game that screams "OH MY GOD WE HAVE TO GO BUY A PS1 FOR THIS!"Most people hugely into strategy would probably have bought a PC anyway, but its best to represent all genre's and have a well rounded library that offers something for everybody.

Joe Redifer
04-27-2011, 05:58 PM
OK everyone, listen up! I am getting a lot of reported posts from this thread. If I get too many more I'm gonna close it. But let's go over a few things here first:

#1 - 16bitter isn't quite crossing any lines. He may be acting like an arrogant SOB, but he's not actually breaking any rules. He seems to know where the line is and is being careful to teeter on it, but not cross it. If he actually does cross it, feel free to report. There is no policy saying that you must like everything someone posts. Granted, I may feel like randomly banning someone at any given time so who knows? Line teeterers are always at the top of my list.

#2 - This certainly isn't one sided as I am seeing some attacks on 16bitter as well. I'm going to leave those in place for great justice, however.

#3 - Both sides are egging the other on. If it continues I'll lock it.



I remember buying my Saturn in early November specifically for Virtua Fighter 2. I don't remember seeing Sega Rally until closer to December.

That may be, but I remember buying Sega Rally before Virtua Fighter 2 and I got both at launch. My memory could be wrong or the dates could be different in different parts of the country. This was back in the days of "It gets there when it gets there", not strict Tuesday launches and whatnot.

sheath
04-27-2011, 05:58 PM
Ah the good old Saturn was just a 2D machine zinger. Using deformed quads, called sprites frequently in documentation, and having no 3D acceleration, is what made the Saturn a 2D machine in developers like Suzuki's minds.

I was reading in Tomb Raider forums just last week, trying to get Tomb Raider working in Dosbox and Windows 7. The fellow who patched it to work refers to vanilla Tomb Raider as "2D" and says that we should all just play it in real 3D using the 3dfx drivers. The PS1's GTE makes it a more 3D specific device than the Saturn, that is true. But compared to Model 2 both are basically deformed 2D to simulate 3D from some perspectives.

Baloo
04-27-2011, 05:58 PM
Yes, think of all those happy customers. Why, I bet there were nearly 5 people on this very board -- a board that would in no way attract Sega fanboys, right? -- that bought the Saturn at $400, watched its software support dry up by 1997, and lost it totally -- on the domestic side -- by 1998 who were perfectly satisfied. How could such happiness, on such a broad scale of demographics, not be considered a success?

With a mind like yours, it's certainly ironic that you would call someone else a moron.

Do you have proof that this happened? Between '96 and '98 I think the Saturn had enough games for the average person to really be satisfied. Between the arcade ports, RPGs, platformers, and fighting games on the system, really what more was the Saturn fanbase looking for besides the next Sonic game? Did we really need all that licensed shit from the PS1?

This is really just a matter of opinion. You can't prove this one way or another aside from the opinions of others who had it at that time. The only way to get valid information really is to take some kind of poll.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 05:59 PM
Most people hugely into strategy would probably have bought a PC anyway, but its best to represent all genre's and have a well rounded library that offers something for everybody.

It's also a good idea to have games that appeal to Western gamers, when releasing in a Western market.

Sony had this. Sega? Did a good job with Mega Drive.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 06:01 PM
Do you have proof that this happened? Between '96 and '98 I think the Saturn had enough games for the average person to really be satisfied. Between the arcade ports, RPGs, platformers, and fighting games on the system, really what more was the Saturn fanbase looking for besides the next Sonic game? Did we really need all that licensed shit from the PS1?

This is really just a matter of opinion. You can't prove this one way or another aside from the opinions of others who had it at that time. The only way to get valid information really is to take some kind of poll.

The 'average' person owned an N64 or Playstation, thus defeating your point. Ordinary Language Philosophy for great justice.

Keep in mind, I think the Saturn was a great machine. I love it as a software provider.

But it was a failure as a design, and as marketing-through-software. That's my argument against it.

That does not mean I hate it. Note the difference.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 06:05 PM
The 'average' person owned an N64 or Playstation, thus defeating your point. Ordinary Language Philosophy for great justice.

Keep in mind, I think the Saturn was a great machine. I love it as a software provider.

But it was a failure as a design, and as marketing-through-software. That's my argument against it.

That does not mean I hate it. Note the difference.

We all know it wasn't the best designed system and wasn't marketed well. No one is saying otherwise here. We are however saying it's not as bad as some people have claimed.

If this is truly what your stance is then why are you arguing about how much it sucks at doing 3D and how it had no good software?

16bitter
04-27-2011, 06:12 PM
If this is truly what your stance is then why are you arguing about how much it sucks at doing 3D and how it had no good software at launch?

Because it wasn't designed for 3D the way the N64 or PSX were from all the information I've encountered, and this often shows in software results, including, yes, the Saturn's bungled ports of VF and Daytona; within the realm of big releases, the Saturn was sorely lacking even on first-party software until the end of 1995, let alone third-party.

And where were the games that were Western-appealing? The Playstation was loaded with releases like Doom, MK3, ESPN: Extreme, Wrestlemania: The Arcade Game, NFL Gameday, Warhawk, Loaded(!) and Twisted Metal all before the end of the year.

Sega didn't even bother to release an NFL game that year, yet they had other sports -- aka sports games that were more appealing to Japanese audiences.

Even Tekken was more popular in the West. And Ridge Racer -- developed on a condensed timeline similar to VF -- was a great port of a high-level arcade racer.

What did Sega have to match all that?

That's not -- again -- only a quality argument, but an audience-specific and marketing issue.

retrospiel
04-27-2011, 06:20 PM
Jesus Christ, would you please stop spamming every thread with your Saturn hate.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 06:28 PM
Jesus Christ, would you please stop spamming every thread with your Saturn hate.

As soon as you provide sources and facts that support your opinions, and counter the facts laid out against the Saturn, I'll be happy to change my tune.

I guess neither of us are likely to get what we want on this one.

retrospiel
04-27-2011, 06:34 PM
Sources... - You mean like in something that would back up your claim of Saturn ending up with the dual SH2 setup "in January or something" - even though people already told you that 32X had already used the very same setup ?

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 06:35 PM
By the time Tekken came out Sega had Virtua Fighter Remix. Shortly after Ridge Racer hit the US Sega had Sega Rally, and High Velocity. And I'd rather play Saturn Daytona and High Velocity than Ridge Racer.

As for Warhawk Sega had Wing Arms, Panzer Dragoon and Solar Eclipse. Again all 3 of those I would rather play, especially Panzer Dragoon.

As for Doom, it was big on the PC, but not so much on consoles. In fact by the time it was hitting consoles the game was 2 years old and sequels and successors like Quake were about to come out. Doom may have been big, but by the time PS1 launched it wasn't as big anymore.

MK3 was big, but again the series was starting to lose popularity. And throw in the fact that more people had Genesis and SNES systems at this point I doubt many people were going to pay $300 for a PS1 to play a game they could get a respectable version of for their 16-bit systems.

Wrestlemania is a crap game regardless of platform, and again lets not forget it was also available on 16-bit systems.

As for Loaded, a Saturn port was released in early 1996. And again the release dates are all over the place for this game. Some say the Saturn port came out as late as October 1996 others say both games came out around December 1995 and January 1996. So again this one is a bit questionable.

As for NFL Gameday, according to every site I've looked at this game came out in 1996. So assuming this is correct we can throw that off the list.

So really all we have is ESPN Extreme, and Twisted Metal. And out of those the only real notable one is Twisted Metal.

By the end of 1995 Sega had plenty to match most of Sony's 1995 releases.

16bitter
04-27-2011, 06:43 PM
Nearly all, if not every single one, of the games I mentioned were Playstation Greatest Hits, FYI.


As for Doom, it was big on the PC, but not so much on consoles. In fact by the time it was hitting consoles the game was 2 years old and sequels and successors like Quake were about to come out. Doom may have been big, but by the time PS1 launched it wasn't as big anymore.

The Playstation version came out in early November 1995, and was the best port on the market, and arguably superior to the PC version in key ways (lighting, music, SFX).

Quake didn't show up until the next year.


As for Loaded, a Saturn port was released in early 1996.

Loaded didn't show up until Summer 1996, at the earliest.

I have EB ads that confirm it -- a September catalog still says 'COMING SOON' -- as well as magazine reviews and ads.


As for NFL Gameday, according to every site I've looked at this game came out in 1996. So assuming this is correct we can throw that off the list.

I rented Gameday in 95.

It was released that year.

Why argue things you have no idea about?

As far as the rest of your post, at least for now (as a response, so far as it goes or stays), the point remains one of not only lacking quality -- gameplay-wise or graphically -- but in the context of market-appropriate content.

The Playstation had a lot more of that.

j_factor
04-27-2011, 06:52 PM
I thought this would stay a joke thread, but I guess I should've known better.

I'm not really sure what the argument is at the moment. But I really think the Saturn hardware was just as good as Playstation on a technical level, and the games showed this at the time. It really seems the only people who believe otherwise are ridiculously fixated on a handful of rush job Saturn ports that didn't turn out so well (VF1 and Daytona, and a few PSX ports). The worst-looking Saturn games somehow "prove" its inferiority. Every system had its share of technically poor games.

I got a Saturn in December 1995. At the time I judged its library to be significantly better than Playstation's. I still think my judgment was correct. Everyone knows that Sega mishandled it, and that's the #1 reason it failed (though not quite the sole reason).


Sheath made two lists of all the games available by the end of 1995, the PS1 list contained multiple good games, Wipeout, Ridge Racer, Doom, Tekken, Twisted Metal, Warhawk, XCom, Zero Divide, Jumping Flash, Diskworld, Mortal Kombat 3 (not a big fan but the game was huge in 1995), there's lightweight, shortlived, but fun fodder like loaded, and impressive tech demo's like Toshinden etc

The Saturn's 1995 list was a list of mediocrity, a handful of multiplatform games, a handful of old 3DO ports, a handful Sega CD FMV games, a load of games like Astal and Clockwork Knight which could be completed in a matter of hours and were clearly rushed out the door to give Saturn release numbers, at the end of the day the Saturn had its decent though disappointing ports of Virtua Fighter and Daytona, the remix of Virtua Fighter (which shouldn't have needed to exist at all if Sega had done the job right to begin with), and Panzer Dragoon, the only high pedigree games worth mentioning in the list were the three which were released right at the end of the year halfway through December, Virtua Cop, Virtua Fighter 2, and Sega Rally.

Did you really just praise Ridge Racer 1 and complain about Astal's brevity in the same post? Egads.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 06:59 PM
Do you honestly think Saturn having a port of MK3, Wrestlemania, or ESPN Extreme would have made a difference? It wouldn't have made any difference because few people cared about those games.

Doom MIGHT have made a slight difference but I doubt it. People weren't talking about PS1 Doom as though it was the most impressive thing ever. And the PC version of Doom is far superior to the PS1 port. The PS1 port has awful music, the lighting kills the feel of the game, and it's missing details since it's based off the Jaguar maps. Quake may not have came out until 1996, but it was still on the horizon and people knew about it. Doom was 2 years old and dated by the time the PS1 launched.

As for NFL Gameday, EVERY SINGLE SOURCE I HAVE LOOKED UP STATES 1996 FOR ITS RELEASE! Find ONE accurate source that proves it came out in 1995 and I will retract my statement on it.

As for Loaded, again the release date for that game is all over the place. So find a good accurate source to prove when it came out.

As for the PS1 Greatest hits, we don't really know WHEN those games started selling, or if they were just thrown into the greatest hits line because they were early PS1 games that possibly didn't sell that well and Sony tried to reintroduce after the system took off in 1997.

The bigger question here is would having those games on the Saturn have made that big of a difference. For most of them I don't think it would have. Maybe having Ridge Racer, Tekken, and a good port of Toshinden and Wipeout might have made a difference, but most of the other games I doubt would have mattered.

What would have made the bigger difference was launching in September with more polished software and a better advertising campaign.

lumclaw
04-27-2011, 07:01 PM
The technical advantages were reversed from what Saturn fanboys claim. However PS1 primarily used its capabilities for fluff. That is, special effects of little use to gamers. It's like Sony went "Look! We're best at non-interactive scenes!" and called it a day when designing PS1's hardware.

j_factor
04-27-2011, 07:04 PM
I don't remember any of these early PSX games really burning up the charts, either. The system was clearly in third place in its early days. And when N64 came out, it sold in four months what Playstation sold in over a year (or something like that, my memory is hazy on the exact lengths of time). So whatever the argument is about what games Playstation did and didn't have and what Saturn did and didn't have, it didn't make that huge of a difference early on.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 07:08 PM
And honestly the source material for Sega's first party ports was better than what Sony was offering on the PS1. Virtua Fighter 1 and 2, Daytona USA, and Sega Rally were far better games than Ridge Racer, Toshinden, and Tekken. If Saturn launched with a more faithful port of Daytona USA (30 fps, longer draw distance), and Virtua Figther Remix with Virtua Fighter 2, Virtua Cop, and Sega Rally right around the corner I doubt people would have cared about Toshinden, Ridge Racer, and Tekken.

TVC 15
04-27-2011, 07:13 PM
The Sega Saturn is above reproach, it is above persuasion, it is both above criticism and praise, it is above either of these childish human gestures.

For the Sega Saturn has one SH-2 processor looking to the future and another SH-2 (when properly coded due to some small bus contention issues) to the past.

It is neither truth nor lies.

It is merely the Sega Saturn.

It is life, it is death, it is all of us.


Feeling slightly dirty now, suffering from stockholm syndrome. I just had to come back for more abuse on these long Sega Saturn threads. I apologise.

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 07:42 PM
As for Warhawk Sega had Wing Arms, Panzer Dragoon and Solar Eclipse. Again all 3 of those I would rather play, especially Panzer Dragoon.Not that I'm criticising the game (though I never liked the 1st one much) Panzer Dragoon is definitely not as western friendly as Warhawk, I remember people at the time saying that flying around on a dragon was "Neverending Story-esque levels of gay"


As for Doom, it was big on the PC, but not so much on consoles. In fact by the time it was hitting consoles the game was 2 years old and sequels and successors like Quake were about to come out. Doom may have been big, but by the time PS1 launched it wasn't as big anymore.Doom was still ridiculously huge in 1995, check any magazine of the time, even the Saturn version was garnering some hype in the months up to release and that wasn't until 1997! Official Saturn Magazine kept telling people "STOP BUYING DOOM ON SATURN AND BUY EXHUMED" because sales of the game were still fairly strong, even though it was hugely late, and a terrible port to boot.

Doom was a benchmark game, it was popular forever, in 1993/1994 people bought PCs and Jaguar's just to play it, they were carrying on porting it for years even after the PS1 version because it just kept being that popular.


I thought this would stay a joke thread, but I guess I should've known better.No you didn't, this thread was obvious baiting from the beginning


Did you really just praise Ridge Racer 1 and complain about Astal's brevity in the same post? Egads.Ridge Racer was at the edge of a new 3D revolution, companies were yet to become used to the new added length, and cost to dev times, and arcade games aren't known for length to begin with. But even saying that they at least attempted to elongate and lengthen the experience with extras as best they could.

Astal is a sprite based platform game with low level 80s style level designs, no interesting or added features, and less than half the number of stages that Sonic 1 had on the Mega Drive in 1991

It is utterley shameful, they're lucky they had good artists working on the game because there sure as hell wasn't any gameplay content.

Compare that trash to Ristar or Yoshi's Island from the same year coming out on inferior hardwares and tell me that mediocrity competes in anything but graphics.

j_factor
04-27-2011, 07:45 PM
Compare that trash to Ristar or Yoshi's Story from the same year coming out on inferior hardwares and tell me that mediocrity competes in anything but graphics.

Tell me Ridge Racer competes in anything but graphics. Because you sure didn't in this post.

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 07:51 PM
Tell me Ridge Racer competes in anything but graphics. Because you sure didn't in this post.

Why do I have to state the obvious?!!? Ridge Racer was an excellent game, it was loads of fun to play at the time, I even mucked about with racing the black car, sure its dated now, but so is just about every early 3D racing game.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 07:54 PM
N
Doom was still ridiculously huge in 1995, check any magazine of the time, even the Saturn version was garnering some hype in the months up to release and that wasn't until 1997! Official Saturn Magazine kept telling people "STOP BUYING DOOM ON SATURN AND BUY EXHUMED" because sales of the game were still fairly strong, even though it was hugely late, and a terrible port to boot.

Doom was a benchmark game, it was popular forever, in 1993/1994 people bought PCs and Jaguar's just to play it, they were carrying on porting it for years even after the PS1 version because it just kept being that popular.




It was big on the PC, but not so much on the consoles. Magazines may have hyped it up, but almost everyone I knew only cared about Doom on the PC. No one I knew cared about the console ports. By the time Saturn Doom came out all my friends were talking about Quake, Goldeneye, and Duke Nukem 3D.


Why do I have to state the obvious?!!? Ridge Racer was an excellent game, it was loads of fun to play at the time, I even mucked about with racing the black car, sure its dated now, but so is just about every early 3D racing game.

There are only 3 tracks in Ridge Racer. You can complete the game in under 30 minutes if you are good. Astal by comparison has 16 levels if I remember correctly and probably would take at least an hour to get through. Which game is the shorter mediocre game again?

j_factor
04-27-2011, 08:02 PM
Why do I have to state the obvious?!!? Ridge Racer was an excellent game, it was loads of fun to play at the time, I even mucked about with racing the black car, sure its dated now, but so is just about every early 3D racing game.

In your post you complained about games that "could be completed in a matter of hours". Ridge Racer can be completed in a matter of hours easily. I guess you only mind when Saturn games can be completed in a matter of hours. If it's got that PS logo, it's all gravy.

If Astal were released on Playstation instead of Saturn, no doubt you'd be praising it today.

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 08:18 PM
There are only 3 tracks in Ridge Racer. You can complete the game in under 30 minutes if you are good. Astal by comparison has 16 levels if I remember correctly and probably would take at least an hour to get through. Which game is the shorter mediocre game again?Astal has 9 stages (not levels) from what I can recall (Journey Begins, Into the Darkness, Deep Forest, River of Dreams, Volcanic Valley, Sea of Clouds, Glacial Rift, Crystal Palace, Plains of Destiny) some of the stages are really short and simplistic too.

Ridge Racer's longevity would depend on what you wanted to do with it, playing through it once would definitely take longer than 30 minutes as it would have to be learned and practiced, getting the black car takes much more time.


In your post you complained about games that "could be completed in a matter of hours". Ridge Racer can be completed in a matter of hours easily. I guess you only mind when Saturn games can be completed in a matter of hours. If it's got that PS logo, it's all gravy.Did I criticise Daytona for being too short? no, you know why that is? because all the damn 3D racers of that era were short, it was the norm for that time period, developers weren't experienced enough to make huge racers with loads of courses yet.

We're not talking about some bog standard 10 a penny 2D sprite game here.

kool kitty89
04-27-2011, 08:23 PM
? Seeing as Power VR are still going, seeing as Power VR produced some of the best textures and power to cost ratio there was, SEGA was very wise to go for Power VR and if it's true about 3DFX then why did EA go with SONY and the PS2 . Tbh I would be far more interested in what CPU was powering the BlackBlet to that of the SH-4
The blackbelt was initially to use a Power PC 603e iirc. SoJ compelled them to switch to the SH4 soon after though, so both projects were using the same CPU. ;) (at least from the articles and interviews I've seen on the topic)

I haven't seen any mention of the specific model PPC 603 used (some are even vague about whether it's a 603 -but a 603 or 603e would have been the most cost effective for the time -the cut-down 602 would have been lower cost, but it only went up to 80 MHz).
If it WAS a 602 or a slower variety of 603 (ie 120 MHz or less), it probably would have been poorer performing than the SH4. (a 133 MHz 603e may have been more powerful, 200 MHz definitely would have)

Of course, that's not taking into account of the custom chip the DC's SH4 was implemented on with the vector coprocessor. (a custom ASIC derivative of a PPC core could have been even more expensive on top of the favorably relationship with hitachi -actually, in that respect, it's a bit surprising that they didn't use an SH2 as the sound system coprocessor as well)








Sega never has and never will understood their brand name and heritage, they never felt confident in their own ability. They didn't, and still don't capitilise on the popularity of their older games, they never provide fan service and the like whilst Nintendo are constantly bringing their old characters back in games like Smash Bros or Mario Kart, cross-pollinating all their characters and increasing the fame of all their games, building each one into a powerful license in itself (even crap like Ice Climbers is more likely to be known by kids now than a lot of Sega's actual classic characters like Wonder Boy),
I agree, with the exception of Sega of America in the early/mid 90s, they didn't understand the importance of milking franchises and pushing shovelware. (and putting a positive marketing/PR spin on all of it in the process -and when I say shovelware, I men both 1st and 3rd party games)

If you look at any really massively successful platform you will see a LOT of shovelware and milked franchises (not always a lot of 1st party induced shovelware, but sometimes that too).

We're talking about business success here, not raw innovation or "integrity". Innovation can be a considerable advantage (be it hardware, software, marketing, etc), but that's one element among many that can drive success . . . or induce failure if pushed too hard. (innovation without practical tempering for cost, mass market appeal, profitability, etc is folly -more so if it detracts from investment that could be used to generate further profits and/or market share)

Having relatively good quality entries for the established franches is important, a mix of lower-quality tie-ins can also be a good thing as long as marketing/PR is managed properly. (in fact, those lower quality games can be absolutely necessary to tie things over in the case of delays or gaps in big-name franchises -like Sonic Spinball, though there are better examples)


Sega of America seemed to understand that balance and was working on establishing it definitively. (as it was, most of the "mediocre" games they put out WERE quite popular and often well-received)
And, of course, on top of the "shovelware" to fill in the gaps, SoA had built a strong foundation of solid, mainstay franchises and trends early-on. (both Katz and Kalinske, from celebrity tie-ins, to sports games support, to building up western 1st and 3rd party publishing, etc)
Of course, you'd need to temper any such "shovelware" to make sure it at least met reasonably quality standards if it was tied to any major franchise so as not to detract from it. (too much at least)

You'd defintely want to focus on high-budget, quality installments in the most popular/established franchises. (any addition spin-offs/shovelware tie-ins would be in addition to that -again, all requiring proper market positioning as well; I'm not talking totally "crap" shovelware here, but more average or arguably mediocre games that could still cater well to the masses -often, such games are only seen as "bad" in hindsight)

Now, I don't think SoA had any of those things down to a science, but they either got really lucky with the mix of support/management/PR/marketing they pulled off in 1990-1994, or they knew what they were doing and were learning from their experience. ;)
Of course, the near full autonomy of SoA was compromised in early 1995, so we'll never know how that could have played out for the 5th generation. (of course, they'd have been put in a hard place with SoJ's saturn hardware and software support as well, and managing the 32x/CD/genesis/etc along side that -a separate topic though ;))



Now, that said, I doubt any of the SoA/SoE teams could have done a better job of marketing in Japan. SoJ may have been capable of better than they did, but they did rather well with all things considered. (they were always up against extremely tough competition and seemed to push pretty good advertising, at least by the time of the Mk.III/SMS -the SG-1000/Mk.II stuff seems a bit weak)



All the higher ups ever saw was a product that needed to be advertised, so when Sony and Microsoft came into the game all they saw was competition which could outspend them on advertising, they effectively panicked with the Saturn ie "we can't hope to compete with a huge company like Sony unless we release before their product hits the market", and never thought they could compete with Microsoft, even though during that period Microsoft itself had made little name for itself in the gaming market, and, in fact was generaly pretty disliked by a lot of console gamers
Yes, money is a major factor, and there are mitigating strategies (like good market positioning and management and highly efficient use of funds among other things), but Sega totally avoided that with how they managed the Saturn.

Besides that, even if you know you can't get the top market share, you can plan to be profitable in a minor market share. (and best exploit your specific advantages -albeit the Saturn didn't have too many for the western mass market aside from Sega's potential in-house support which was also poorly exploited, but the DC had far more inherent advantages for the market at the time)

They (SoJ) seemed to be totally disconnected with the status of the western (especially US) market in 1994/95 (or even '96). Then there were all the PR mistakes made on top of that.

Then they made some of the same mistakes with the DC, albeit they already were in a tight spot from not being as conservative as they could/should have in certain areas, and (more so) with the crappy management in Europe leading to a weak position where they should have had an even stronger market position than the US. (especially since Europe was/is more hype-resistant than the US market -in terms of viral marketing and magazine culture deflating hype/exaggerated promotional efforts)



Sega simply didn't understand that they had built up a lot of clout with gamers over the years, and that in the video game market people associate companies with the games that they've played appearing on that companies hardware, Sony and Microsoft were pretty much starting as blank slate, faceless corporations in the eyes of most gamers, whilst Sega were a proven standard.
I think SoA management may have understood that to a good extent (not just for consumers/media, but for their established software development capabilities and 3rd party developer relationships).

With the DC, Moore seemed to feel very strongly that the Xbox was going to be a massive (if not instant) success with its hardware capabilities and backing. (either that or, as some claim, he was "bought out" by MS)



During the Saturn era Sega effectively did the opposite of what Nintendo would've done, they pretty much threw all of their most popular licenses away and started over!!!
And also screwed up 3rd party relationships . . . and had Sony steal other 3rd parties. (albeit Sega was probably in a position in 1994 to buy CORE before they got bought out, that would have been interesting ;) -losing CORE as a near 2nd party developer was pretty big for that generation)


They certainly did a bit better with the Dreamcast, but by this stage their brand was much weaker with multiple unsuccessful hardware releases and a huge gap between Mega Drive and Dreamcast, with younger gamers not even knowing much about Sega at all by the time of Dreamcast.
Yes, the DC's support in general genres and franchises is much closer to what the Saturn should have gotten from day 1 (including the sports games). Albeit, there were more franchises they could have built on from the Genesis with the Saturn that were pretty much dead by the time of the DC.

There were also smaller/newer potential franchise starting games to build on on the Genesis, including several SoA developed games. (some of which didn't get the marketing/supported they should have in 1995 -like Comix Zone)
One big thing would have been pushing multi-platform development for most/all late gen Genesis/CD releases to be upgraded for Saturn (same for 32x games) and development tools to facilitate that. (investing in better dev tools and documentation was a major issue in general, though something SoA had no control over without better low-level documentation -they could opt to invest SoA funds to build tools, but they couldn't do that without proper hardware documentation from Japan -as it was, the 32x ended up being a saving grace by accelerating tool development once the Saturn docs finally arrived -they literally had no development tools for the Saturn in the west until mid 1995 iirc)







The Dreamcast being last place might not have been a given, but it was sitting on the shelves at $150 while the PS2 sold out for six months at $300. Sony took, and I mean took, 70% of the market that generation. Microsoft and Nintendo lost money on their consoles as a result. The best the Dreamcast could have scrapped its way to is 10% of the left overs, it would have lost Sega a ton of money too.
And that was one of Sega's problems.

They kept trying to push sales beyond what could be supported at the time, and pushing in the wrong way at that. (the only thing that could have helped was counter-hype marketing against Sony that poked holes in their exaggerated advertisements)

The DC SHOULDN'T have been sitting on shelves at $150 . . . it should have been left at $200 and started selling for profit sooner. ;) (they could drop it again once the $200 GC launched to maintain positioning as the cheapest current-gen console on the market)



Oddly enough, Electronic Arts said, in a 1995 interview with the ever unbiased Next Generation, that if they had not supported the Genesis 10% of the market is all Sega would have managed.
And EA also would have been a far weaker company. It was a symbiotic relationship; EA drove Genesis sales big time and the Genesis drove EA to far greater heights.
Michael Katz made a very wise move when he deftly delegated the contract agreement that avoided EA going unlicensed back in 1990. (SoJ wanted to sue EA)

Now, I wouldn't say 10% of what it was, but it probably would have been a substantial loss for the Genesis in the US. (probably more than a 10% drop in sales, probably well short of 50%)

Sega Sports was pretty good too, so that would have been one mitigating factor. (especially if they'd contracted a decent company for Joe Montana back in '89 and had it out by that Christmas as intended ;))







PowerVR was the better choice, actually making it seem like they wanted the alternative and then scrapping that was not a good idea.
I also totally agree with Thenewguy
They DID want an alternative though, they just decided against going with it.
They'd have to drop 1 in the end either way. ;)

The problem came in the manner they went about managing the dual development projects.
IIRC, the 2 were kept secret and separate and the teams didn't know of the others' existence (at least early-on), so that would have led to a rather sticky political/bureaucratic situation. (unless I'm mistaken and both teams -and 3DFX- knew of the competitive nature of the projects)
















As for the Netlink and MS/Nintendo in the USA; Well I don't think The Netlink was ever sold at a loss (more so given it's high price) nearly every game made for it was a port of a game that had gone before (meaning development costs were minimal) and to top it off it used local phone calls, so there was no server issues at all; SEGA did take a pretty good fight to both SONY and Nintendo in the USA, SEGA USA was badly let down to poor sales of the DC in Europe and Japan, and a lot of developers not willing to give SEGA another chance
I wasn't talking about the modem being sold at a loss, but the service (and overall R&D/marketing investment) bleeding cache when they couldn't afford it.
They probably should have left that in Japan only.

With the DC, you had losses both from the modem as well as investments in an unnecessary service that never paid off (compared to simply relying on 3rd party ISPs -the plan was to get people to use SegaNet as their main ISP and make money through subscriptions, and that ended up an ambitious pipe dream).
Then there was the losses from the sign-un rebates as well (free dreamcasts with SegaNet subscription).

Again, HEAT ended up being a loss-making enterprise as well, prior to the DC actually.



Staring with a clean sheet or a Blank slate is sometimes the best way has you've not picked up any bad habits or bad practices and don't become complacent or worse still arrogant; complaints which many level at SONY with its PS3 design.
Yeah, except many of the problems with the PS2 and PS3 was FROM starting with a blank slate rather than building on past experience.
All Sony had to do was build on the best aspects of the PSX, but that didn't happen. (the PS3 is at least better than the PS2 in some many programming aspects, but still far from catering to mass market standards . . . and the BIG problem of being way too expensive at launch -if Sony had had a machine basically equal to the 360 tech wise, but more reliable and cheaper -more so with a backwards compatibility gimmick- they'd have had a winner, though they obviously wanted to push Blu-Ray as well, and they'd need a REALLY tight design to be cost competitive AND have BD -even with their extensive in-house advantages of manufacturing and for BD specifically)

Starting fresh with the Saturn's hardware ended up a mess too, not that an all-new design couldn't have been clean and efficient (more than a backwards compatible or evolutionary one could be), but the Saturn simply wasn't engineered to be that at all.
The shift in management in 1995 certainly ruined Sega (and the Saturn) though . . .
The fresh start with the DC was far better, but still flawed, unfortunately.

But that's starting fresh from a hardware perspective (or more of an overall market perspective) is what Nintendo could have hugely benefited from with the N64. They got killed by arrogance though.
If they'd finally disposed of their antagonistic practices towards 3rd parties and aimed at being friendly with developers and competitive with other licensing contracts, that would have been huge for them. (same for going with CD-ROM -another thing that would be more attractive to developers)


However, thenewguy was talking about dropping established franchises, not hardware/management.








499.99 and 599.99 launch prices is what did them in.
Yep, they needed to go cheaper on hardware . . . and aiming at a common/friendly programming environment would have helped too (ie get competitive performance to the 360 for competitive cost by catering to similar techniques as PCs and the 360 were/are using).

It would have been tough to do that with the BD drive, maybe possible though. (if they designed a really tight, highly-integrated chipset and configuration aimed at extreme low-cost, it might have worked -doing that AND having performance as good or better than the 360 could have been tough though . . . then again, price and hype tends to be more important than raw performance; embedded backwards compatibility is always a good gimmick too)














Sales, and even quality don't mean jack, look at Ice Climbers again, total rubbish product, a good two years out of date at release, but the fan service in Smash Bros adds to the "legend" of Nintendo, this is very much at odds with stuff like Wonder Boy, which actually was one of the best gaming series' of the entire 80s.
I was going to totally agree here, but there IS Segagaga as was mentioned already. (really too little too late in that context though)

A shame it took so long and ended up with a JP exclusive game. (they should have been pushing compilation mascot games since the MD days at least -like a Mario Kart competitor for one, probably done in a more out-run visual style to cater to the hardware -like Street Racer did, if not actually offering point to point racing levels like out run rather than just circuits)

People complain about things being a bad idea if they're "me too" sort of competition. But, hell, if it sells well, why not? Why deprive your userbase of a genre just because it would seem like "copying" the competition?


Don't get me started on RARE, they're another company who ultra mismanaged their brands and licences.
A lot of cock-ups well before MS for that matter. (and what the hell happened to Battle Toads?)
They had a lot of major talent leave well before the MS takeover -of course Nintendo had been influencing things since the mid 90s. (what happened to Dinosaur planet was rather disappointing too, but Ablacfalcon already ranted on that in detail a while back ;))



If you're going to compete with Nintendo you have to use the same tactics, they made themselves into the "Disney" of videogames simply by acting smart and taking care of their brands

I certainly wouldn't have liked the Gamecube style set-up though, where there's very little originality at all and most releases are sequels, but I think a happy medium could've been reached, successful licences can help to fund original games anyway, and at the end of the day its best to give consumers what they want.
I'm not sure what you mean with the GC. I was very satisfied with the library personally. Tons of good 1st and 3rd party games. (though, like almost every system we've ever owned, we got it a few years after launch, so had a lot more to chose from anyway . . . and like most average families, we only bout a couple games a year)


I don't like Sega's 30 in 1 style compilations, those things cheapen the original games, you wouldn't see Nintendo putting that many games into a compilation, they give their old games all the bells and whistles and release them in special edition boxes, makes people think they're more important and worth spending time with and playing singularly etc.
More like Nintendo doesn't release retro compilations at all with very few exceptions.
Then there's the very smart rip-off they call Virtual Console, but even there you're missing quite a few big name games and cult classics. (like Star Fox and Earth Bound)






NewGuy, you are on to it but you seem to think that it is "better" milk franchises than to focus on creating new games. The real Sega focuses on making new games (and new hardware), that is what they did best, that is what their development culture thrived on. When that focus changed, most of the talent left Sega.

Whether or not it is more fiscally responsible to milk cash cows, we have never seen a company with Sega's emphasis on new games that also thrived on cyclical re-releases. The two mentalities, complete creative freedom versus resting on the laurels of popular IP, seem to be mutually exclusive.
We're not talking about re-releases at all, we're talking about relying on (and building upon) established franchises.

I already addressed the innovation vs shovelware thing above. If you have to pick one over the other, it makes more business sense to go with shovelware with mass market appeal (at least with a good marketing spin) and good profits than innovative efforts that end up niche. (that also goes for supporting a wealth of 3rd party games and making porting multiplatform games as easy as possible)










01-29-2011 #5
From what I heard, it was a pride thing with Sega of Japan picking PowerVR over 3DFX because they wanted to keep all the development in Japan. This pissed off all the Blackbelt guys which made almost the entire team quit on the spot. Since Electronic Arts had so much money in 3DFX stock, this decision killed them financially which is why they never supported the Dreamcast. I never saw any Dreamcast than the one you know.

What a surprise. Yet more SOJ jingoism, just as it was with Kalinske and the SGI non-deal.

But then, at least PowerVR provided that power; unlike Saturn, it was a very strong chipset, and was the best on the market for over a year.
Yeah, except there's every indication that going with PowerVR was the right move. (regardless of why the decision was made)


Where is 3DFX now and where is PoweVR now?
That has nothing to do with anything though.

What mattered was the hardware at the time and how it compared in performance, cost, and library/programming support.







Do you understand basic economics?

Because Sony/MS can afford to pursue markets while bleeding cash. All Sega did was bleed cash while losing its market.

Good job, R&D! Winning!
Exactly, Sega needed to play it smart to hang onto the market and be successful, but that obviously didn't happen. ;)





Jesus Christ, would you please stop spamming every thread with your Saturn hate.
I do believe he's specifically stated liking numerous games on the Saturn, but his comments are from a logical historical/business perspective of how bad the Saturn was for Sega. (both the system itself, and the management surrounding it -the real problems started in early 1995 when SoJ forced SoA to launch that spring . . . a horrible, horrible decision followed up by even worse ones, none of which they could afford -and the Saturn hardware/tool support/software weren't saving graces either)



Sources... - You mean like in something that would back up your claim of Saturn ending up with the dual SH2 setup "in January or something" - even though people already told you that 32X had already used the very same setup ?
The story goes that the final redesign started in fall of 1993, any significant changes would have been made (initiated) then or before.

Also, the 32x's dual SH2 layout was also in January of 1994, so that's quite possible too. ;)

As I've said before, the Jaguar and 3DO were likely the main drivers in modifications made to the Saturn given the timing of the PSX's announcement. (came really late and there would be relatively little they could change at that point -certainly not the full shift from SH1 to dual SH2 CPUs added/enhanced VDP1, possibly added DSP, added/faster RAM, etc, etc)

Besides, the dual SH2 layout was hardly one of the Saturn's biggest cost wasting areas. (it wasn't ideal, but there were far bigger weaknesses in the system in terms of streamlining for programmability and cost-effectiveness)

kool kitty89
04-27-2011, 08:34 PM
Nope, it was a crappy design which cost more to manufacture than Playstation, but had worse graphical results than Playstation 90% of the time, was too difficult to make games for, was released at a retarded time, half of its games were outdated, and many were extremely overrated, and it effectively ended Sega as a force in the videogame market.
A good summary, though there's also the poor management of software (mainly the genres/franchises pushed), SoJ encroaching on SoA (and SoE?) management freedom, etc, etc.
Oh, and of course, the poor tool support on top of the difficult/inefficient/expensive hardware. ;)

It was a perfect storm of slip-ups and poor design work.




The guy stated that using 2 CPUs was a poor design choice, and that 1 more powerful CPU would've been better.

You don't publicly show reservations about your own companies hardware, that's just stupid
Yeah, but there were no faster CPUs available at comparable cost.
The SH3 would probably have been more expensive than 2 SH2s (at least in the short run) and would have delayed the system.
Everything else was significantly more expensive.

The only practical option would have been to use 1 SH2 and save cost, or configure the SH2s differently to allow more flexible use than the master+slave configuration. (or add more coprocessor logic other than the SH2)
A single 40-50 MHz SH2 would have been FAR better than dual SH2s. (or a 60 Mhz model running at 2x the Saturn's clock speed -that would actually make use of the SDRAM's speed rather than just wasted cost over EDO DRAM)

Hitachi wasn't offering faster SH2s until later . . . maybe Sega could have leveraged faster rated models specially for the Saturn though.



The CPUs were really a very minor issue compared to the rest of the hardware design. (or software development tool support for that matter)






Suzuki's comments about the Saturn are limited to comparing it and Titan to Model 2's 3D hardware. It was a technical discussion and the Model 2 is technically superior to the Saturn and Titan at 3D in every respect. Suzuki also mentioned that they had to get the Saturn's SH-2s working on separate code for Virtua Fighter. These facts cannot be applied to the Playstation versus Saturn, Edge did it anyway without any facts to connect the two discussions.
The Saturn is better than the Model 2 in some respects. At least it has hardware gouraud shading. ;)

The PSX has more advantages over the Model 2 including easier development in general due to the architecture and tools. (including use of triangle rasterization among many other things)





One powerful CPU would have been better, the PS1's CPU is irrelevant to Suzuki's comment though. Suzuki would have preferred one CPU running at 60Mhz, and who wouldn't?
1 CPU running at 33 MHz would have been better (or easier) for a lot of things. 40 MHz would have been better for most things. (and then there's the fact that the Saturn usually uses the slave SH2 for 3D math, so you lose a ton of that added resource right there)

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 08:48 PM
I'd rather play Astal than most of those PS1 launch games.

And as for Panzer Dragoon being a "never-ending story level of gayness", that's a pretty bold statement to make coming from a person that puts Jumping Flash, a PS1 game where you play as a white bunny hopping through candy land, on a freaking pedestal as an awesome game the Saturn didn't have.

And be careful with what you say koolkitty. These PS1 fans will take what your saying as proof that the PS1 could have handled arcade perfect Model 2 ports.

kool kitty89
04-27-2011, 08:57 PM
I'd rather play Astal than most of those PS1 launch games.

And as for Panzer Dragoon being a "never-ending story level of gayness", that's a pretty bold statement to make coming from a person that puts Jumping Flash, a PS1 game where you play as a white bunny hopping through candy land, on a freaking pedestal as an awesome game the Saturn didn't have.

And be careful with what you say koolkitty. These PS1 fans will take what your saying as proof that the PS1 could have handled arcade perfect Model 2 ports.
It could probably have done many (if not all) model 2 games better than the Saturn, but not arcade perfect due to practical limitations of hardware. (including RAM limiting texture resolution/detail)


I firmly believe the PSX was much better heardware through and through in terms of R&D and building onto mass market standards, etc, etc. The Saturn was a mess, and it's not a matter of personal preference. (I don't care for sony or the PSX in general, I didn't care for it as a kid and it still sort of rubs me the wrong way now -I hate the controllers a lot more now than I did then too, mainly due to my hands being a lot bigger)

It's a matter of design execution, cost effectivness, mangement, etc, etc.


It was stupid for Sega to push many of the games they did at the time . . . a few niche 2D games was OK (especially early on -especially for late-gen games brought over from the MD/CD/32x), but 3D should have been the #1 emphasis moving forward for sure.

Many retro gamers tend to get an odd perspective on things rather than looking at real-world market trends and demands (both in hindsight and looking at the market up to 1994 for what they'd have known already).

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 08:59 PM
See I don't think the PS1 could have handled Virtua Fighter 2 or Virtua Cop and other model 2 games as well as Saturn did. It may have been able to add more fluff to the games like lighting and transparency but I think the number of polygons, frame rate, and resolution would have suffered as a result. As well as texture quality.

However they probably would have ended up being even with trade offs leading in favor to each system.

retrospiel
04-27-2011, 09:11 PM
I do believe he's specifically stated liking numerous games on the Saturn, but his comments are from a logical historical/business perspective of how bad the Saturn was for Sega. (both the system itself, and the management surrounding it -the real problems started in early 1995 when SoJ forced SoA to launch that spring . . . a horrible, horrible decision followed up by even worse ones, none of which they could afford -and the Saturn hardware/tool support/software weren't saving graces either)

I don't think Saturn was the issue but whatever.

Black_Tiger
04-27-2011, 09:13 PM
Why do I have to state the obvious?!!? Ridge Racer was an excellent game, it was loads of fun to play at the time, I even mucked about with racing the black car, sure its dated now, but so is just about every early 3D racing game.

I don't agree that Ridge Racer is an excellent game, but it was popular.

Daytona USA isn't nearly so dated as it continues to make money as an arcade machine, even while arcade games in general have almost completely died out.

Daytona is a classic like Doom and Super Mario games. Ridge Racer was more of a tech demo for the Playstation. Personally, I prefer good art and style like Daytona has over technical achievements and Ridge Racer has always looked bland and boring to me. But I know that my tastes weren't popular during that generation.

The way that I see it, even if the difference in graphics is as huge as some claim, the Saturn had some of the greatest games of all time early on while the Playstation had a bunch of mediocre stuff. Although Doom seemed kinda dated to me at the time, I do think that it was by far the Playstation's best game early on. These 'match the games' comparisons don't really count for much to me, since it's all a bunch of 'just okay' or 'not so great' games on both sides, with some classics that have stood the test of time on the Saturn's side.

The Playstation's early library was like the Jaguar, where there are many games in the same category as some classics for various platforms, but having a game in the same genre as a classic doesn't cancel out. Not even close.


It's like a match up like this-

Console A > Console B

Plok = Sonic 3
War 2410 = Shining Force II
Gunforce = Gunstar Heroes
Syvalion = Thunder Force IV
Final Fantasy Legend = Phantasy Star IV
Brawl Brothers = Streets of Rage 2
Fighter's History = Super Street Fighter II
Super Pinball
Q-Bert 3
Aerobiz
Super Bowling


As you can see, Console A has a similar game for everything Console B has, plus a few extra games. So clearly Console B has the superior library. :p


Sure the Playstation and its library was marketed better and was more popular, but Sega's mistake of giving us quality over quantity is still our win to this day.

As for game magazines being corrupt, biased, or simply incompetent, all you have to do is judge them by how they followed through on their duty to steer the consumer clear of garbage. Toshinden is completely worthless, just as many fmv games were early on. Did any magazines not praise Toshinden as the greatest fighter ever that will stand the test of time? It doesn't matter which of the possible reasons are behind their incorrect coverage in cases like this. It just goes to show that you can't use game mags as a way of measuring the quality of games for their time. Metacritic scoring is broken today, there's no reason to apply a flawed formula to flawed data from the past.

You can say that the Sony lineup was smarter from a marketing standpoint, but it wasn't the best for a consumer who appreciated good games.

j_factor
04-27-2011, 09:13 PM
Did I criticise Daytona for being too short? no, you know why that is? because all the damn 3D racers of that era were short, it was the norm for that time period, developers weren't experienced enough to make huge racers with loads of courses yet.

Daytona USA is still longer than Ridge Racer. Other 3D racers of that era were longer too -- WipEout, Need for Speed, Sega Rally, etc. all had significantly more longevity. Hell, even Virtua Racing did.

sheath
04-27-2011, 09:14 PM
I agree, with the exception of Sega of America in the early/mid 90s, they didn't understand the importance of milking franchises and pushing shovelware. (and putting a positive marketing/PR spin on all of it in the process -and when I say shovelware, I men both 1st and 3rd party games)

If you look at any really massively successful platform you will see a LOT of shovelware and milked franchises (not always a lot of 1st party induced shovelware, but sometimes that too).

If you look at really successful game publishers or console manufacturers you also never see a real push for innovative gameplay ideas, new games, or doing anything other than milking franchises. You also see a lot of anti-competitive business tactics. I probably would have outgrown games if there weren't companies like Game Arts, Genki, Technosoft, Hudson Soft, Sunsoft, Core (early), Treasure (especially Treasure), and Sega out there cranking out unique gameplay experiences sometimes monthly.



And EA also would have been a far weaker company. It was a symbiotic relationship; EA drove Genesis sales big time and the Genesis drove EA to far greater heights.
Michael Katz made a very wise move when he deftly delegated the contract agreement that avoided EA going unlicensed back in 1990. (SoJ wanted to sue EA)

Now, I wouldn't say 10% of what it was, but it probably would have been a substantial loss for the Genesis in the US. (probably more than a 10% drop in sales, probably well short of 50%)

Sega Sports was pretty good too, so that would have been one mitigating factor. (especially if they'd contracted a decent company for Joe Montana back in '89 and had it out by that Christmas as intended ;))

EA said that the Genesis would have struggled to get 10% of the market without them. So they obviously didn't see the reciprocal relationship, but this was after they were already fully behind Sony anyway (February 1995 was the Edge interview I think).



We're not talking about re-releases at all, we're talking about relying on (and building upon) established franchises.

I already addressed the innovation vs shovelware thing above. If you have to pick one over the other, it makes more business sense to go with shovelware with mass market appeal (at least with a good marketing spin) and good profits than innovative efforts that end up niche. (that also goes for supporting a wealth of 3rd party games and making porting multiplatform games as easy as possible)

Company culture is a major factor as well. It's all about the vision for a company to be successful and creative. If the company attracts people because it is huge and financially successful, then that is the kind of people that will stay there. If the company attracts people because it is known for making a ton of new games every year, then that is the type of people it will attract. We cannot discount the affect of making shovelware or milking franchises has on a creative culture. We should be able to clearly see that in the current gen losing so many talented innovative companies because of franchises.

The history of the industry implies that a Sega with more interest in "making money" than "making games" would have been something else entirely, something radically different than the Sega that made all of the first party games that still attract gamers to talk about them. By failing to remain marketable with the Dreamcast, Sega essentially proved that having an innovative and creative culture is something that will absolutely limit how large a video game company can become and how long it can survive.

kool kitty89
04-27-2011, 09:19 PM
See I don't think the PS1 could have handled Virtua Fighter 2 or Virtua Cop and other model 2 games as well as Saturn did. It may have been able to add more fluff to the games like lighting and transparency but I think the number of polygons, frame rate, and resolution would have suffered as a result. As well as texture quality.

However they probably would have ended up being even with trade offs leading in favor to each system.
The PSX should have had an advantage in textures depending how much the 2D BGs ate into things.

The VDP2 stuff is pretty much the only thing that the Saturn would have had any edge over, and it shouldn't have been enough to counter the overall advantages of the PSX for polygon count, speed, etc.

The resolution would have been lower due to the higher color depth, though 320x480 probably would have been realistic. (composite video doesn't cater that much to higher horizontal res anyway, though 640x240 or 512x240 could have been an option too)
The PSX could have had better shading/lighting for sure than the limited 256 color Saturn version. (it could have looked BETTER than the arcade or PC version with some good use of gouraud shading . . . albeit the Saturn running at lower res could have had added that too -but with fillrate limits compared to the PSX)

The PSX COULD have pushed 512x448, but that would have taken up most of VRAM due to highcolor rendering rather than the Saturn's 256 color mode. (allowing 512x512 to practically fit into the 256 kB framebuffer)

Black_Tiger
04-27-2011, 09:22 PM
Daytona USA is still longer than Ridge Racer. Other 3D racers of that era were longer too -- WipEout, Need for Speed, Sega Rally, etc. all had significantly more longevity. Hell, even Virtua Racing did.

Length doesn't mean much when the gameplay quality and/or level of fun is lower. Especially when it comes to arcade racers. Daytona holds up well to most/all arcade racing games. Ridge Racer at best isn't as good and also has less content than Daytona.

Would you rather have 3 stages of Sonic 3 or 1 stage of Plok?



The PSX should have had an advantage in textures depending how much the 2D BGs ate into things.

The VDP2 stuff is pretty much the only thing that the Saturn would have had any edge over, and it shouldn't have been enough to counter the overall advantages of the PSX for polygon count, speed, etc.

The resolution would have been lower due to the higher color depth, though 320x480 probably would have been realistic. (composite video doesn't cater that much to higher horizontal res anyway, though 640x240 or 512x240 could have been an option too)
The PSX could have had better shading/lighting for sure than the limited 256 color Saturn version. (it could have looked BETTER than the arcade or PC version with some good use of gouraud shading . . . albeit the Saturn running at lower res could have had added that too -but with fillrate limits compared to the PSX)

The PSX COULD have pushed 512x448, but that would have taken up most of VRAM due to highcolor rendering rather than the Saturn's 256 color mode. (allowing 512x512 to practically fit into the 256 kB framebuffer)

Sounds like Dead or Alive PSX vs Dead or Alive Saturn.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-27-2011, 09:27 PM
Exactly what I was going to say Tiger. I'd rather have 60fps High Res graphics than 30 fps low res graphics with lighting and gouraud shading. I feel that Saturn Dead or Alive is better than PS1 Dead Or Alive just because it looks cleaner and you can see the entire stage at any time. On PS1 we may have fancier effects but it comes at the cost of resolution, framerate, and draw distance as Dead or Alive shows us.

sheath
04-27-2011, 09:30 PM
Kool Kitty, on the PS1 being better suited for Model 2 games than the Saturn. I really don't know where you are coming from. Even the Arcade boards that used PS1 hardware never came anywhere near to Model 2 level, not even with RAM and speed increases. If the PS1 could do Model 2 games, Tekken 1 & 2 and Soul Blade would have looked like Model 2 games in the Arcades.

Meanwhile, to the untrained eye, Saturn games like Sega Rally, Virtual Cop and Virtua Fighter 2 looked so close to their Arcade equivalents even the magazines were amazed.

http://www.system16.com/screens/tekken_a.gif
http://www.system16.com/screens/tekken2_a.png
http://www.system16.com/screens/tekken2b_a.gif

http://www.system16.com/screens/vf2_a.jpg
http://www.system16.com/screens/vf2ver21_a.jpg

4wfDre9j1So

50g4zc_kQHM

kool kitty89
04-27-2011, 10:11 PM
Apparently not while launching in 1994 and thereby giving the Playstation a run for its money in Japan. I can turn this hardware discussion on the Playstation with the same logic. Sony just needed to have more Video RAM and it would have been better than the Saturn in every way but sound. Sony should have waited and put a 60Mhz CPU in the Playstation and it would have been better than the Model 2 tech without 3D acceleration. Sony should have focused on a hardware accelerated 3D GPU so it would have had so much trouble with polygon tearing and texture warping.
The PSX's "GPU" is very well 3D oriented for the time. There wasn't much issue at all with Z-tearing and perspective issues were addressed by better programming efforts.

The "tearing" you usually bring up is the seaming issues caused by improper rounding of the GTE coordinates. That wouldn't have been solved by a full GPU either, though having an FPU instead of the fixed-point GTE would have solved it. (or a fixed-point matrix coprocessor that handled things a little differently -as it is, you can fix it on the software end by properly managing rounding iirc)

Affine texture rendering was the best option for the time, so it made a lot of sense to push that. (maybe adding a feature that allowed line segmentation like Quake does for better perspective correction -breaking up lines at regular intervals rather than just between polygon end-points; that would have been much less intensive than perspective-correct rendering, but would have greatly reduced distortion issues)



A 60 MHz CPU wouldn't have made it better than the Model 2 either . . . you still have memory limits, fill-rate, floating point performance, etc, etc. (that's talking raw performance and not ease of use though)




Nobody considers these things for one reason, the Playstation ended up dominating after 1997. That actually happened because of exclusive third party software and Sony overmarketing the platform, swallowing losses on each console sold, etc. The Saturn having a 60Mhz CPU instead of two SH-2s, which actually were better than the PS1's CPU even if they "only" managed 1.5x the processing ability of one SH-2, would not have changed the massive financial advantage Sony had.
Once again, the Saturn's CPU was NOT one of its major faults. It wasn't ideal, but there were much bigger areas where it fell short. (I already detailed this in another recent thread, but I think it may have been lost from the backup gap)






FMV games I can recognise are Double Switch, Corpse Killer, Quarterback Attack, D, and Mansion of Hidden Souls, not sure if thats all of them though, I'm not really an expert on FMV games.
FMV games aren't a bad thing. Multimedia is a big part of what made the PSX what it was. (including some true FMV games -ie games where multimedia/streaming video is integrated into primary gameplay)
Contuing to push lower-quality/dated FMV games would be an issue though. (only a couple of those on the list fall into that category though)


I don't know if I'd call Mansion of Hidden Souls an FMV game. It's an adventure/puzzle game that happens to have a lot of CG animation. More like The 7th Guest than Night Trap.
It's an FMV game, just a good one. I consider Myst an FMV game too, among others.



D is a detective game like Myst. It just happens to be done with pre-rendered CGI.
Detective??? WTF, Myst is an action adventure game as much as Monkey Island or Grimm Fandango.
You could have a detective themed adventure, but I certainly wouldn't classify Myst as such.







I think you've gone a little overboard there. Antibiotics have been abused so long that the medical industry has stopped prescribing them to keep them effective. Using the Saturn too much only results in finding more good Saturn games. ;)
No, no, the CACHE, you wear out the CACHE, it's almost as bad as the Dreamcast in that respect. :D

Hmm, I should post my backup of the Legend of Zoltor thread.









There's no doubt it's worth owning. There's no doubt it had some of the best software of its generation.

The problem is the cost to Sega, the loss of the consumer, the losses for the consumer, the inelegant board design -- likely due to the original design being too underpowered to compete with PS1 -- and the terrible spot this put dev teams in.

Add all that up, and Saturn was a massive mistake from a corporate standpoint.

I love the machine, as a gamer. As a Sega fan? I think it was a pretty awful release.
Another good summary and I don't think I need to say much given what I already have at various points. (though a chunk of that is missing from the 2 month gap . . . )

I know we disagree on some of the details, but overall there's a lot of common ground. (ie underpowered would be OK if it was cheap and/or easy to develop for, though it was largely underpowered due to being difficult to develop for and also very cost ineffective on top of that)





Seriously, this is uncalled for. You are very lucky I'm not that deep into religion because someone who was could take great offense to that. Your personal attacks are getting more and more annoying. But I guess that's what you do when you have no real argument and only quote old opinions from magazines.

This thread was obviously made as a joke to make fun of YOU and the countless threads you made on this subject before the forums went down. If you want to continue to make an ass of yourself go ahead, but I don't think anyone in this thread is taking you seriously anymore.
He was just using an analogy, just the the WWII naval one he made a while back in context of the battle of midway. (though I suggested the destruction of the Yamato was more appropriate)

Don't take it at face value, look at it in perspective to it being a figure of speech . . .

Though I don't find it especially applicable given that you and Baloo don't have drastically different opinions on most topic AFIK.





16bitter,were you or someone close to you hurt by the saturn.You seem to have a personal grudge with the system.
No, he's obviously stated that he likes many aspects personally as a GAMER, but he's not so foolish as to ignore the massive problems that surrounded it and basically ruined Sega. (though technically the Saturn itself is symbolic of the far larger and deeper wealth of problems, some of which were related to the hardware design specifically, but many others in addition to that)

He's speaking from a logical historical perspective, and while I disagree on certain points, I certainly agree with the summary of it all.





Well, too bad Sega had killer 3D hardware in the arcades, only to design a system that was meant for 2D at home.
Nah, that arcade hardware was part of the problem too, very costly (hurt them in the arcade market and thus put them in a worse position at home), and emphasizing some of the features that weakened the Saturn. (including quad based rendering)

That at least held true for the model 1 and 2, the model 3 had the same cost issues, but was very much in-line with common market standards otherwise. (Sega didn't use it that way though, at least given the vast majority of quad-specific games)

It certainly could have made sense to collaborate with Lockheed Martin on a low-cost emphasized 3D machine in general. (2D performance would generally come along with that due to 3D being heavily reliant on 2D drawing performance . . . if you're talking blitter performance and not 2D specific tile logic like the Saturn's VDP2)













At around the same time, Sega made another important decision. It recognised that its most important market was America, and that it needed to retain the enormous userbase it had built up with the Genesis. The answer was the Mars project, which resulted in the system we now know as the 32X.
Essentially, Jupiter became Mars.
Rather ironic that SoJ supposedly recognized that North America was #1 in importance, but totally f*cked up Saturn support relative to that and compromised SoA's management in 1995.

That and I wonder what SoA had to say on Jupiter and whether they'd have preferred it over Mars. (at least had they known how SoJ would be pushing the Saturn so rapidly)



Unlike the Playstation, the Saturn does not contain a dedicated geometry engine for calculating polygons - instead, the twin CPUs handle all the calculation, and the VDP1 chip, in conjunction with the frame buffer, draws 3D objects to the screen as distorted sprites.
That's incorrect, the Saturn also has a somewhat flexible DSP coprocessor intended for 3D math. The reason the CPU was used often instead was due to poor development tool suport and the difficulties of using fixed-point math with quads. (the SH2s could do floating point in software fairly adequately, but I don't think the DSP could help with that)

The "distorted sprites" are just quadrlateral primitives being rendered. Distorted quads rather than distorted trips as the PSX and PC (and most 3D renderers save Sega's arcade, 3DO, Saturn, and Nvidia's ill-fated NV1).


"The SH-2 was chosen for reasons of cost and efficiency," claims Kazuhiro Hamada, section chief of Saturn development at the time of the system's conception. "The chip has got a calculation system similar to DSP but we realised that a single CPU wouldn't be fast enough to calculate a 3D world."[/B]
They added a pretty fast DSP too, so that's obviously not the whole story. (more general purpose CPU resource is good in any case and dual CPUs could have been the only realistic option for the time . . . but there's a lot of other trade-offs to consider)







Yup, Edge #16 is at fault for the rumor of Sega adding the second SH2 and the VDP1 to the Saturn after the Playstation announcement in 1993. Did they cite anything but themselves in this assertion? No. Were they there during any of the Saturn's design meetings? Nope. Did 16bitter ever show evidence that suggests Edge was a fair and unbiased magazine in the previous threads he created to bash the Saturn? Nope.
No, it wasn't edge, it was an inside source of some sort separate from edge and the rumor had been spreading separately inside the industry prior to the edge publication. (Chilly Willy has a personal anecdote about rumors coming from Sony staff back in '94 in terms of the SH1, less RAM, etc being upgraded at the last minute)

I think went over this in detail recently, but it's probably been lost . . . (maybe I can dig it up from google)

That included my musings on how any 1993 Saturn redesign would have been more likely fueled by the 3DO and Jaguar pissing on the early Saturn's specs than the PSX being a factor.

In any case, having the dual SH2s by January of 1994 doesn't change anything either really, and doesn't even counter EDGE's claims. (or did they specifically claim that Sega added it in mid 1994 -ie a totally infeasible time given the Saturn's release date . . . the hardware would have likely been frozen for production by spring of 1994)









Either you're confused, or just trying to confuse others.

The schedule you lay out does not contradict the story from EDGE as to the Saturn's rushed redesign, instead it arguably confirms it.
Yes, though it doesn't confirm WHY such a redesign took place. (ie jaguar and 3DO -and PCs- vs PSX being the prime factor)



When do you think system specs are finalized, days before they start rolling off the assembly-line? The PSX was ready -- finished -- as a production model, mainline boardwork here, in November of 1993, the same time Nakayama supposedly had his fit.
I doubt the PSX was solidified for production that early. The documentation was probably solidified and the development systems were probably ready, but the final consumer hardware was probably being tweaked until spring of 1994. (ie any minor bug fixes, final configuration of the motherboard/RAM/chips/case/external ports/etc -the custom chips were probably all solidified by the end of 1993 though, or at least the final revisions should have been taped out and being implemented in silicon)



And yet, as EDGE noted, the Saturn was redesigned as a response to the Playstation's polygon power, which the SH2 argument and timeline seems to match up with.
Again, I think the 3DO and jaguar (and PCs) could have been bigger inflences given how late the PSX came in. (chucking in a 2nd SH2 could have been done, but the more substantial modifications that the full rumor in the tech industry claims would have pre-existed that -ie the claim that the Saturn was using an SH1 as the main CPU with less RAM and no VDP1 -or a weaker VDP1 missing the 3D drawing modes)


[b]Edge: Tell us about Titan.
Yu Suzuki: Titan is a new arcade board that's very similar to Saturn, only with a bigger memory and a good serial I/O.

Edge: So Titan is more powerful than Saturn? Is it also more powerful than Model 2?
Yu Suzuki: Yes, the system's more powerful than Saturn, but the performance isn't comparable to Model 2. Model 2 is a pure 3D graphics engine with very high-technology hardware [...] Also, Titan is based on 2D technology hardware.

The Titan really isn't more powerful than the Saturn either, it's pretty much identical across the board from all information I've seen. (other than removing the CD-ROM drive)












Either you're confused, or just trying to confuse others.

The schedule you lay out does not contradict the story from EDGE as to the Saturn's rushed redesign, instead it arguably confirms it.
Yes, though it doesn't confirm WHY such a redesign took place. (ie jaguar and 3DO -and PCs- vs PSX being the prime factor)



When do you think system specs are finalized, days before they start rolling off the assembly-line? The PSX was ready -- finished -- as a production model, mainline boardwork here, in November of 1993, the same time Nakayama supposedly had his fit.
I doubt the PSX was solidified for production that early. The documentation was probably solidified and the development systems were probably ready, but the final consumer hardware was probably being tweaked until spring of 1994. (ie any minor bug fixes, final configuration of the motherboard/RAM/chips/case/external ports/etc -the custom chips were probably all solidified by the end of 1993 though, or at least the final revisions should have been taped out and being implemented in silicon)



And yet, as EDGE noted, the Saturn was redesigned as a response to the Playstation's polygon power, which the SH2 argument and timeline seems to match up with.
Again, I think the 3DO and jaguar (and PCs) could have been bigger inflences given how late the PSX came in. (chucking in a 2nd SH2 could have been done, but the more substantial modifications that the full rumor in the tech industry claims would have pre-existed that -ie the claim that the Saturn was using an SH1 as the main CPU with less RAM and no VDP1 -or a weaker VDP1 missing the 3D drawing modes)


[b]Edge: Tell us about Titan.
Yu Suzuki: Titan is a new arcade board that's very similar to Saturn, only with a bigger memory and a good serial I/O.

Edge: So Titan is more powerful than Saturn? Is it also more powerful than Model 2?
Yu Suzuki: Yes, the system's more powerful than Saturn, but the performance isn't comparable to Model 2. Model 2 is a pure 3D graphics engine with very high-technology hardware [...] Also, Titan is based on 2D technology hardware.

The Titan really isn't more powerful than the Saturn either, it's pretty much identical across the board from all information I've seen. (other than removing the CD-ROM drive)










We all know it wasn't the best designed system and wasn't marketed well. No one is saying otherwise here. We are however saying it's not as bad as some people have claimed.

If this is truly what your stance is then why are you arguing about how much it sucks at doing 3D and how it had no good software?
He's taking the history buff perspective . . . the machine was a mess from almost every angle and more so from the events surrounding it.

Saying it "wasn't the best designed system" is a massive understatement. Saying the MD wasn't the best designed system wouldn't be untrue as most systems are flawed (sometimes with quite odd decisions), but the Saturn is just so wrong for a console of the time on some many areas it's sad.

The software support was also wrong: quality games don't mean anything if they don't cater to the mass-market audience.


If hardware had been the only/main mistake made with the Saturn, it wouldn't have been so bad, but they botched it in so many other was, especially in the way they tore down the hard-earned US market and SoA's infrastructure.

Thenewguy
04-27-2011, 10:18 PM
And as for Panzer Dragoon being a "never-ending story level of gayness", that's a pretty bold statement to make coming from a person that puts Jumping Flash, a PS1 game where you play as a white bunny hopping through candy land, on a freaking pedestal.LMAO, this was awesome.

Still I was merely repeating what I heard people saying about Panzer at the time, I didn't hate the theme personally, and the big difference here is that Panzer was a major in-the-public-eye game that Sega was pushing, whilst Jumping Flash was just fun Japanese weirdness that most people ignored, but many critics, and gamers liked (bar the fact that it was another game which was too bloody short, albeit pushing new boundaries like the other 3D games of the time), and they counted as another good game in the PS1's repertoire.

kool kitty89
04-27-2011, 10:26 PM
Exactly what I was going to say Tiger. I'd rather have 60fps High Res graphics than 30 fps low res graphics with lighting and gouraud shading. I feel that Saturn Dead or Alive is better than PS1 Dead Or Alive just because it looks cleaner and you can see the entire stage at any time. On PS1 we may have fancier effects but it comes at the cost of resolution, framerate, and draw distance as Dead or Alive shows us.
No, the framerate should be higher on the PSX.

The only trade-off is the color depth vs screen res. (and DoA on PSX doesn't run at 320x480 AFIK, though that would practically limit it to 30 FPS)

Actually, you can't have 60 FPS on the Saturn either, it's interlaced in high-res mode so you'd be stuck with a nominal 30 FPS max. :p




Kool Kitty, on the PS1 being better suited for Model 2 games than the Saturn. I really don't know where you are coming from. Even the Arcade boards that used PS1 hardware never came anywhere near to Model 2 level, not even with RAM and speed increases. If the PS1 could do Model 2 games, Tekken 1 & 2 and Soul Blade would have looked like Model 2 games in the Arcades.
I didn't say the PSX hardware was performance competitive with the Model 2 hardware, I said it could be better suited to porting model 2 games than the Saturn.

The Saturn got support from amazing developers with the better converted arcade games, that says nothing about the relative hardware performance unless you have equally skilled and experienced developers pushing on the PSX. ;)

The PSX has a much higher fillrate, better geometry performance, nominally more texture memory (can dig into CPU RAM too), etc.
The fillrate and geometry performance are the main factors in this case.







Also, this is a little off topic, but I think it ties into the overall discussion:
http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1810982#post1810982
Combine that with Yu Suzuki describing Nakayama as the type of guy who would ship a game if he saw moving pictures on the screen, so he always kept glitched code handy to put on his screen when the boss walked his direction. That was in the recent 1up interview. I think Nakayama might be to blame for Sega's downfall in the West more than any other single factor. It is amazing that the Saturn, complete with its lack of development kits and being "hard to program," is Sega's only successful console in Japan.



I completely disagree with Stolar's impression of Okawa and I think he was just blabbing about superficial facts he knew about the man. All I know about Okawa is that he used hundreds of millions of his personal money to keep Sega afloat in late 2001 and he died of a heart attack a couple of weeks after the Dreamcast's discontinuation.



The Dreamcast supposedly languished on shelves at half and then one third the price of the PS2 during Christmas 2000 in the US. That was printed by magazines that had notoriously predicted its demise for its entire lifecycle though, so that information is suspect until proven.

The sheer volume of people who I heard talking in 2000 about how great the PS2 was going to be, especially retail/rental clerks, tells me that there was definitely massive demand for the PS2. Also, I remember hearing numerous parents asking for the "Sony Dreamcast," and immediately noticed how closely one had to inspect Dreamcast jewel cases to distinguish them from PS1 games.

http://www.digitpress.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1811184#post1811184
I wonder if he had also hindered the Master System's success in the US. (or whether that was more an issue with SoA staff at the time -he seemed pretty open to Katz's plans to built-up SoA, so maybe it was just a matter of getting the right people there in the first place to spark that expansion -or they could have delegated things to a capable 3rd party marketing firm in the US instead, they had the budget -initially more marketing budget than Nintendo- but seemed to largely squander it)

I've seen claims of Nakayma being "out of touch" with the home console market compared to the arcade (trying to apply arcade type market strategies to the consumer market -there's some references to the 32x/Mars project stemming from that logic), but if that Yu Suzuki comment was inclusive of his arcade projects, it seems Nakayma wasn't especially good at that side of things either. (maybe he was better at pushing arcade hardware market positioning than software or the home market in general)

Others have implied that Nakayma was "forced" to take actions contrary to SoA's wishes by pressure from "other" upper management (partially induced by Nakayma constantly pounding on how the MD wasn't as successful as the Genesis), but it seems possible that Nakayma alone was the bigger problem. (other anecdotes and quotes point to some of the other Japanese management actually disagreeing with many of Nakayma's decisions too, but not related to SoA either way -albeit some JP managment seemed to disagree with many of the same decisions SoA disagreed with, but often for different reasons)


It was more of a flash in the pan hit though, once Sony got Square, the Saturn declined rapidly (and fell behind the N64's market share by 1998 -not aggregate sales, mind you).

And it really depends how you define "success" . . . I think the SG-1000 and MkIII/SMS had been profitable at least, and the MD was definitely a market success for them.

Actually, I think the MD may have done about as well as the Saturn overall. (comparing net hardware sales of the PCE, MD, SFC vs PSX, Saturn, N64)


I think Okawa may have been the best overall president/CEO that SoJ ever had. (it makes you wonder how he might have handled things back in 1994/95 or such)

sheath
04-27-2011, 10:56 PM
Kool Kitty, I was not under the impression that you thought the PS1 was on the level with Model 2. My point was that the best System 11 games look nowhere near as advanced as Model 2 games, and yet 1995 Saturn games are so close that even critical magazines were astonished. The Dead or Alive on PS1 analogy is apt as well.

Some of what you are stating as fact about the PS1 is absolutely the position of Sony fan groups about the system. The GTE having a better fillrate is probably true, but if that really matters why did the Saturn hit 480 resolutions before and more often than the Playstation? Why was Virtua Fighter 2 60FPS when only the much later released Tekken 3 achieved the same (with much lower character animation)?

Why is it that the Saturn can be said to have more overall processing power than the PS1, but still be inferior at 3D to the PS1? By my estimation we are blending too many topics and that is why some statements about the Saturn are being twisted to apply to the Saturn-PS1 discussion. "True 3D" is one topic, "Good 3D for the time" is another topic, what makes a successful platform is a completely different topic. Then there is how the Playstation, Saturn and even the Model 2 approached 3D individually to discuss and compare.

It seems to me that somehow the Playstation's approach was unilaterally declared "best" and everything else was compared to it as the standard. Well, even the top Playstation games make me question it as a standard to meet for quality 3D gaming.

gamevet
04-27-2011, 11:12 PM
The PSX's "GPU" is very well 3D oriented for the time. There wasn't much issue at all with Z-tearing and perspective issues were addressed by better programming efforts.

The "tearing" you usually bring up is the seaming issues caused by improper rounding of the GTE coordinates. That wouldn't have been solved by a full GPU either, though having an FPU instead of the fixed-point GTE would have solved it. (or a fixed-point matrix coprocessor that handled things a little differently -as it is, you can fix it on the software end by properly managing rounding iirc)

Affine texture rendering was the best option for the time, so it made a lot of sense to push that. (maybe adding a feature that allowed line segmentation like Quake does for better perspective correction -breaking up lines at regular intervals rather than just between polygon end-points; that would have been much less intensive than perspective-correct rendering, but would have greatly reduced distortion issues)



A 60 MHz CPU wouldn't have made it better than the Model 2 either . . . you still have memory limits, fill-rate, floating point performance, etc, etc. (that's talking raw performance and not ease of use though)



If it could be corrected so easily through software, then why did we see titles published by Sony, that still had these tearing issues? Cool Borders 2 was released in 1997, yet it had horrible tearing. Cool Borders 3 appears to have corrected that issue, but it was way later in the Playstation's lineup.

sFmWU1aOcqw&feature=related

Victor/Core's Steep Slope Sliders had no tearing and was smooth as butter in comparison.

n3KBvJcPQuM&feature=related

Baloo
04-28-2011, 02:15 AM
I don't agree that Ridge Racer is an excellent game, but it was popular.

Daytona USA isn't nearly so dated as it continues to make money as an arcade machine, even while arcade games in general have almost completely died out.

Daytona is a classic like Doom and Super Mario games. Ridge Racer was more of a tech demo for the Playstation. Personally, I prefer good art and style like Daytona has over technical achievements and Ridge Racer has always looked bland and boring to me. But I know that my tastes weren't popular during that generation.

The way that I see it, even if the difference in graphics is as huge as some claim, the Saturn had some of the greatest games of all time early on while the Playstation had a bunch of mediocre stuff. Although Doom seemed kinda dated to me at the time, I do think that it was by far the Playstation's best game early on. These 'match the games' comparisons don't really count for much to me, since it's all a bunch of 'just okay' or 'not so great' games on both sides, with some classics that have stood the test of time on the Saturn's side.

The Playstation's early library was like the Jaguar, where there are many games in the same category as some classics for various platforms, but having a game in the same genre as a classic doesn't cancel out. Not even close.


It's like a match up like this-

Console A > Console B

Plok = Sonic 3
War 2410 = Shining Force II
Gunforce = Gunstar Heroes
Syvalion = Thunder Force IV
Final Fantasy Legend = Phantasy Star IV
Brawl Brothers = Streets of Rage 2
Fighter's History = Super Street Fighter II
Super Pinball
Q-Bert 3
Aerobiz
Super Bowling


As you can see, Console A has a similar game for everything Console B has, plus a few extra games. So clearly Console B has the superior library. :p


Sure the Playstation and its library was marketed better and was more popular, but Sega's mistake of giving us quality over quantity is still our win to this day.

As for game magazines being corrupt, biased, or simply incompetent, all you have to do is judge them by how they followed through on their duty to steer the consumer clear of garbage. Toshinden is completely worthless, just as many fmv games were early on. Did any magazines not praise Toshinden as the greatest fighter ever that will stand the test of time? It doesn't matter which of the possible reasons are behind their incorrect coverage in cases like this. It just goes to show that you can't use game mags as a way of measuring the quality of games for their time. Metacritic scoring is broken today, there's no reason to apply a flawed formula to flawed data from the past.

You can say that the Sony lineup was smarter from a marketing standpoint, but it wasn't the best for a consumer who appreciated good games.

This right here. Why the fuck does it matter who won the console war and who had the same types on games on which systems when they launched and longevity and different developers and shit today? All that really matters is the games, and I sure as hell don't see people raving about mediocre nonsense like Ridge Racer, Toshiniden, Jumping Flash or the first Tekken, and yet games like Sega Rally, Virtua Fighter 2, and Panzer Dragoon are still regarded as classics today in their respective genres.

What it all comes down to is that PS1s library is old and dated. Saturn's library may not have nearly as many games, but they're a hell of a lot more fun. And that's all that really matters for gamers. Why argue about who won and who lost when you can play the games and decide for yourself? Like the Playstation more, that's fine. But don't go bash the other system for being terrible when it didn't garner as many sales due to SEGA's shitty marketing plan 15 years ago.

Team Andromeda
04-28-2011, 03:02 AM
Better question: where is Sega now?

Not in the home console business. But to be fair, the clusterfuck that was Saturn gets a great deal of credit for that.

Still going and one of the few gaming companies to record a profit for the past year , why ?. Remind us again were 3DFX are now ?. Oh and aren't Power VR powering the new SONY NGP too (its almost enough to make you proud to be British) ?

Team Andromeda
04-28-2011, 03:23 AM
I agree, with the exception of Sega of America in the early/mid 90s, they didn't understand the importance of milking franchises and pushing shovelware

Now you're just being silly , You really going to sit there and tell me that SEGA didn't milk Sukura Wars, Sonic, Virtual Fighter and host of other IP. You'll only milk IP that sells well and SOR III didn't sell great at all, Ecco was a flop on the Dreamcast and the PS2. Capcom are masters at milking IP , but even they don't make sequels to everyone of its IP's.


The blackbelt was initially to use a Power PC 603e iirc. SoJ compelled them to switch to the SH4 soon after though, so both projects were using the same CPU.

And your source of this is ?


Besides that, even if you know you can't get the top market share, you can plan to be profitable in a minor market share

Yes in the 8 and 16 but days, but in the 3D and 32 Bit age of Big teams, CD Rom and expensive productions no, That' why Atari , Commodore , NEC, SNK, 3DO all went by by to the console dream.


I wasn't talking about the modem being sold at a loss, but the service (and overall R&D/marketing investment) bleeding cache when they couldn't afford it.

Given it was not a lot more than just adding what is in effect Link up Code to a game that's already been produced I would think developments costs were minimal , and really don't remember SOA or SOJ pushing the next-link hard, compared to the cash SEGA 'Bled;' into the Ativator, those 3D glasses , sega menacer and a host of other utterly pointless MD add on's it would have been minimal.



They had a lot of major talent leave well before the MS takeover -of course Nintendo had been influencing things since the mid 90s.

Ahhh.. So NCL are to blame too. Lets get real here all talent leaves BIG groups to set up their own Teams, be that EA, Lionhead, Sony, SEGA, NCL, Capcom, BUNGiE, Activsion . It has and will always happen.


The DC SHOULDN'T have been sitting on shelves at $150 . . . it should have been left at $200 and started selling for profit sooner

Sorry to kill a dream, sales were dropping and SEGA were forced to slash the price of the DC, Funnilly enough MS were forced to slash the price of the X-Box after getting hammered by CUBE sales at the start, and even said sorry for the High Price of the
European launch


All Sony had to do was build on the best aspects of the PSX, but that didn't happen

That's what happens when you don't start with a clean slate


What mattered was the hardware at the time and how it compared in performance, cost, and library/programming suppor

Well one look at a most DC games would give you that answer ? Textures and graphics that could hold up well,even with some X-Box games . SEGA made the right choice, but its so sad you can't just come out and say it .


Exactly, Sega needed to play it smart to hang onto the market and be successful, but that obviously didn't happen

So NCL are wrong to be lauching the Wii II, and MS were wrong to drop the X-Box stone dead. What next SONY should hang on to the PSP and not bother with the NGP. Jesus Christ, given me a break !

djtwok
04-28-2011, 04:13 AM
No ROM beggging, please! - Melf

sheath
04-28-2011, 08:53 AM
www.emuasylum.com has it.

Olls
04-28-2011, 09:31 AM
All that really matters is the games, and I sure as hell don't see people raving about mediocre nonsense like Ridge Racer, Toshiniden, Jumping Flash or the first Tekken, and yet games like Sega Rally, Virtua Fighter 2, and Panzer Dragoon are still regarded as classics today in their respective genres.


And you know why? Because Playstation games got better as time went on, while the Saturn sat still. With classics like Tekken 2 and 3, Soul Blade, Gran Turismo 1 and 2 who is going to remember mediocre racing and fighting games such as Ridge Racer and Toshinden? Exactly.



What it all comes down to is that PS1s library is old and dated. Saturn's library may not have nearly as many games, but they're a hell of a lot more fun. And that's all that really matters for gamers. Why argue about who won and who lost when you can play the games and decide for yourself? Like the Playstation more, that's fine. But don't go bash the other system for being terrible when it didn't garner as many sales due to SEGA's shitty marketing plan 15 years ago.

You made a complete ass out of yourself right here.

lumclaw
04-28-2011, 09:47 AM
Come on. We all hate to admit the existence of topics such as this all trace their roots back to one game - Street Fighter II.

Without Capcom fighters, Saturn fanboyism wouldn't have become a shred of what it is today. Not that I can't blame them. I mean games like Street Fighter Alpha 2 for sure ARE dang impressive hardware feats. :D

Thenewguy
04-28-2011, 11:20 AM
LOL, Next you'll be demanding sequels to Jet Set Willy and Dizzy and countless UK and much loved classics from the past.Dizzy is caught up in licensing issues between Codemasters and the Oliver Twins, the Oliver Twins have said many times in the past that they would've brought the Dizzy series back many years ago if they'd been able to, and Matthew Smith has been mentally Ill since the 80s.


Oh and No SEGA did not own the Disney licence at all... because Capcom and Co also brought out Disney games for both the NES and Snes and even Mega Drive.As usual this is entirely irrelevant, Sega brought out Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck games, therefore they must have had some kind of agreement with Disney, therefore they actively aimed to bring out family friendly games on top of their other offerings, therefore they had an open stance to content.


Owing the name and IP means nothing with out the Team to make it. SEGA still owns the IP to MSR, but Bizzare Creations were able to fly the nest and make the PGR series for MS and the X-Box.IMO Sega had the talent to continue the series to a high quality themselves, hell Hudson managed to do a pretty good job with the sequels to Adventure Island.


:) 'Was'. It never came out and all the fans are still waiting for a direct sequel to appear on a NCL home console , at least PS fans got a sequel and even a story mode in PSU (even if it was crap)How does this help your case?!?! Nintendo intended to release more Mother games, they didn't dump the IP, unfortunate circumstances happened, and yet again they made sure the character was kept in the public eye with Smash Bros in case they changed their stance later, they also released the sequel on the GBA as I mentioned earlier.


LOL what is this ?. Next you'll be counting Sonic R as a full Sonic title on saturn, even thought it plays nothing like a Sonic game. And play Shenmue you'll see Alex Kid and a host of other SEGA characters make some sort of appearance, does that count too ?. No need to make a sequel to Skies SEGA, a cameo in Valkyria is enough lolYou have zero understanding of what we're actually discussing don't you? the point is that Nintendo keep all their characters in the public eye, they manage their IPs properly, and carefully, they know what their fans want, and they provide it.


I just making the point that NCL has allowed 3rd parties to work on its IP, even British ones. So lets not have a pop at SEGA for doing just the same as NCL please.Sega don't do the same thing, giving licenses to crap companies and forgetting about them is not the same as working closely with up and coming and respected companies.

And just to clarify I'm not talking about Sumo, who have done a perfectly respectable, and sometimes very good job on Sega games, I pointed them out earlier simply to say that the biggest fanservice games coming from Sega (Sega Superstar Racing, and Superstar Tennis) were from a British (where Sega's heritage was well loved) company, and not Sega themselves, who probably don't even understand the popularity and heritage they had built in other countries.


I have every idea was I was taking about since I imported my CUBE. Now lets go on domestic launch software and consoles like the Mega Drive, Snes, N64, Cube, DC, Saturn, PS were all lacking in the number of games ready for launch,and I do love the irony of you highlighting a SEGA game has a good launch game.Yep Japanese launches are awful, with only 1 or 2 good games ever available at best, you can easily release machines with very little at launch there because there's no competition at all and everyone is in the same boat.

Its interesting to see that none of the console you listed actually had games which made the hardware look bad, Virtua Fighter, good game that it was, made the hardware look like it couldn't keep up, Mario 64 did the opposite

And there is no irony, I'm a huge Sega fan, if they do something right then I point it out, the Dreamcast had one of the best western launch line-ups of all time.


The same MS that cancelled Kameo II and PDZ II in order for RARE to focus on Natal ?. Not the same MS that killed off Studios like Fasa, Diigital Avil, Nidie Built , Ensemble.RARE's results with the 360 didn't live up to expectation unfortunately, they had their chance though, and they had some unlucky breaks too, but I wouldn't blame their current status solely on Microsoft


Keep it comingI can keep it coming, but I'd rather you didn't being that there's very little focus and a lot of repetition in your argument, you've partially swayed me on the "milking IPs" area, but I stick to the crux of my initial argument, they do throw away and forget about viable IPs (especially during the Saturn era), and they don't understand the power of fanservice and cross pollinisation, but more than anything else they just mismanage their IPs in general, Sega had little qualms about dumping a popular character into a bad game just to sell it (Alex Kid), and they were not passed giving a popular series less and less development budget and allowing it to stagnate (Golden Axe), or paying a cheap company to churn out a quick sequel (Shinobi).

Nintendo are careful with their IPs, they keep track of them all and their heritage, they try to build and strengthen their licences over time, Sega tend to weaken, water down, and forget about their IPs, they look at them simply in the short term, and don't understand how to build and nurture (and control) the fanbase.

16bitter
04-28-2011, 12:02 PM
And Sega may have lost money on the Saturn, they were not bleeding money like they were with the Dreamcast. That's what effectively killed Sega.

First it's estimated that by industry analysts such as DataQuest and Jeffries & Co. that it costs Sega approximately $330 to manufacture each Saturn. By the time units have been boxed, marketed shipped, and distributed, it's estimated that Sega is losing almost $100 per unit. If Sega hopes to sell one million unites (which indeed it does), then it has to be prepared to lose $100 million before it makes money back on software.

[...]

Second, while Sega Rally and VF2 may match anything that Playstation is capable of, they are the results of the very best development teams in the world having spent almost two years mastering the hardware (with unlimited access to the people who designed it), working from tried and trusted arcade game formulas. A far cry from newcomer Takara's six-month, start-from-scratch rush job of Toshinden for Playstation - and the kind of resources that only a precious few third party game developers can hope to match.


[...]

It also has been noted that when Sega Rally and Virtua Cop reach the Saturn, Sega has used up all its stock of hit arcade titles. From this point on, it will have to rely on the steady trickle of Saturn conversions from new coin-ops as and when they're released.

[...]

Fourth, Sega has to fight momentum. While it indeed may be too early to name the winners and losers of the hardware battle (at least among the big boys), the development community has to pick its winners and losers 18 months ahead. State of the art 32-bit games take a year and a half to develop, and often cost in excess of $1 million. [...] Given the state of market up until Christmas 95, any company making its development decisions now has to consider the Playstation and PC development a necessity, Ultra 64 a possibility, and Saturn a luxury (especially when considering the ease of developing for each system).

[...]

The Playstation costs $280 to manufacture.

Next Generation13

So, the question is, what sources and financial estimates do you have to contradict this?

A long rant about an 8/10 rating for a crap port of Daytona, note, is not counter-evidence. In case you're as confused as sheath.

Further, I seriously doubt that the Dreamcast was losing Sega up to $100 per unit. That's the Saturn's dismal record.

kokujin
04-28-2011, 12:03 PM
I have to agree with Baloo on this one, I never saw why the PSX was praised so heavily , a lot of the systems "classics" didn't hold up so well, while I still play Nights and Guardian Heroes routinely today.

16bitter
04-28-2011, 12:06 PM
I have to agree with Baloo on this one, I never saw why the PSX was praised so heavily , a lot of the systems "classics" didn't hold up so well, while I still play Nights and Guardian Heroes routinely today.

There are many all-time great games on Playstation. Its library is one of the most rich and varied in console history.

The biggest advantage for Saturn today was its biggest strike back then: the Playstation's 3D nature, versus the 2D base and ability of Sega's product.

kokujin
04-28-2011, 12:13 PM
There are many all-time great games on Playstation. It's library is one of the most rich and varied in console history.

The biggest advantage for Saturn today was its biggest strike back then: the Playstation's 3D nature, versus the 2D base and ability of Sega's product.

That's very true older 3D games don't age as well as 2D, but I still think the PSX library is highly overrated and I'm talking about exclusive titles.

Olls
04-28-2011, 12:21 PM
That's very true older 3D games don't age as well as 2D, but I still think the PSX library is highly overrated and I'm talking about exclusive titles.

"Highly overrated" is a term some of you sega fanboys throw around a lot when describing virtually anything non-sega, so give us a few concrete examples.

kokujin
04-28-2011, 12:27 PM
"Highly overrated" is a term some of you sega fanboys throw around a lot when describing virtually anything non-sega, so give us a few concrete examples.

First of all I am a not a fanboy, just something I noticed when I started looking into PSX.A lot of PSX games haven't aged that well and even at the time were crap.That's not to say the library has no good games, but it is not nearly as much as people make it out to be.How many good games do you think are on the PSX?

Team Andromeda
04-28-2011, 12:30 PM
Dizzy is caught up in licensing issues between Codemasters and the Oliver Twins, the Oliver Twins have said many times in the past that they would've brought the Dizzy series back many years ago if they'd been able to, and Matthew Smith has been mentally Ill since the 80

Nice try, but one Matthew Smith doesn't own the IP rights to Jet Set Willy and the reason we've not seen a new Dizzy is because the last one sold like crap.


As usual this is entirely irrelevant, Sega brought out Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck games, therefore they must have had some kind of agreement with Disney

No as usual you've been caught out and using double standards. SEGA had 'Permission' to make games based on Disney Characters (but then so did other companies), but didn't 'own' the Disney Licence


IMO Sega had the talent to continue the series to a high quality themselves, hell Hudson managed to do a pretty good job with the sequels to Adventure Island

Funny , Remind me again who;s making sequels to Puyo Puyo, how made a sequel to Thunder Force V. I think it's SEGA. So yes SEGA can continue to make sequels , but that will only happen to a series that sells well in the 1st place or if there is a high demand ; Given that more or less every 3D beat them up has been an spectacular flop (bar say Die Hard) I think its say to say that Genre as had it's day, like Point and Click games .


Nintendo intended to release more Mother games

It didn't come out and NCL have never gone back to the series. You seem to forget that work did start on Streets Of Rage IV , So SEGA did intend to make it, but like with the Mother series shit happens ...


the point is that Nintendo keep all their characters in the public eye, they manage their IPs properly, and carefully, they know what their fans want, and they provide it.

LOL. So SEGA making Sonic Jam, Sonic R and letting Sonic appear in Christmas NiGHTS isn't keeping the character in the public eye. I can list you a high number of SEGA games with various Sega cameo's(even with Flicky) but they're just cameo's


Sega don't do the same thing, giving licenses to crap companies and forgetting about them is not the same as working closely with up and coming and respected companies.

I say again , You never played Zelda or Mario on the CDI have we. It does't get any more crappier than that , So if I were you I would drop it and I would hardly call the likes of Travelers Tales or the likes of Sumo Digital , Dimps crappy companies.


Yep Japanese launches are awful, with only 1 or 2 good games ever available at best, you can easily release machines with very little at launch there because there's no competition at all and everyone is in the same boat

Right so can we drop it with the Saturn, and it's not just Japanese launches; The 3DO USA launch was terrible, the PS2 pretty poor and the USA lauch of the genesis and Super Nintendo hardly the best either (in fact the Snes launched in the West with the same number of games as the Saturn)

So lets drop it .


RARE's results with the 360 didn't live up to expectation unfortunately, they had their chance though, and they had some unlucky breaks too, but I wouldn't blame their current status solely on Microsof

?. Who knows how a Kameo II and PDZ II may have turned out , and what about all the other talent and IP that MS have let slip through its hands ?. You bash SEGA and then have nothing to say when SONY and MS let talent and IP go to waste .

Keep the double standards coming

sheath
04-28-2011, 12:43 PM
Seriously, why do people use the term fanboy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanboy) when it by definition includes all of us and anybody else who frequents a forum about any topic at all? It seems to me that it is an abused term used to make the user feel smarter. Is it intrinsically "better" and more reasonable to prefer the Playstation library over the Saturn's library? That sounds like a fanboyish assertion to me.

evilevoix
04-28-2011, 12:45 PM
I am so glad that I donít argue on the internet anymore, it looks so tiring.

Kamahl
04-28-2011, 12:46 PM
I am so glad that I donít argue on the internet anymore, it looks so tiring.

http://ihatepeacocks.com/resources/southpark-they-took-our-jobs-animated-gif.gif

retrospiel
04-28-2011, 12:50 PM
Sega brought out Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck games, therefore they must have had some kind of agreement with Disney, therefore they actively aimed to bring out family friendly games on top of their other offerings, therefore they had an open stance to content.

It would be VERY interesting to know why there weren't more Disney games by Sega of Japan. SOA's Disney games were HORRIBLE!


Nintendo are careful with their IPs, they keep track of them all and their heritage, they try to build and strengthen their licences over time, Sega tend to weaken, water down, and forget about their IPs, they look at them simply in the short term, and don't understand how to build and nurture (and control) the fanbase.

Nintendo was one company with their HQ in Japan, while Sega were two different companies. At least they behaved as such.

And just like there were two Segas, there are two fractions of Sega fans: Those who think Sega was or should have been predominantly American - which would include Steven L. Kent, Sam Pettus, 16bitter, Melf, and you (it seems) - and those who think they were or should have been predominantly Japanese just like Nintendo, to which I'd count myself.

Many on the "pro-SOJ" side also seem to favor Saturn over 32X, while the other side favored 32X over Saturn.

Goes to show how deep the split was back in 1994. Had they managed to migrate their fan base to one single platform, things might have turned out very different.

Melf
04-28-2011, 12:53 PM
Funny , Remind me again who;s making sequels to Puyo Puyo, how made a sequel to Thunder Force V. I think it's SEGA. So yes SEGA can continue to make sequels , but that will only happen to a series that sells well in the 1st place or if there is a high demand ; Given that more or less every 3D beat them up has been an spectacular flop (bar say Die Hard) I think its say to say that Genre as had it's day, like Point and Click games .

Sega licenses the Thunder Force IP to make sequels. It doesn't own the property. Sega published, and later developed the games under license, and it did a pretty half-ass job at that. changing the name of part IV (even misspelling the new name. "Lightening" Force? Geez), and passing on bringing parts V and VI outside of Japan.


It didn't come out and NCL have never gone back to the series. You seem to forget that work did start on Streets Of Rage IV , So SEGA did intend to make it, but like with the Mother series shit happens ...

Sega never intended to make SOR IV, Yuzo Koshiro did. He was the one who pitched the game, and his sister worked on character designs. The game was never picked up, and SOA officials reportedly weren't even familiar with the characters by the time the Dreamcast came around. Way to take care of your IP!


LOL. So SEGA making Sonic Jam, Sonic R and letting Sonic appear in Christmas NiGHTS isn't keeping the character in the public eye. I can list you a high number of SEGA games with various Sega cameo's(even with Flicky) but they're just cameo's

The thing is, no one wanted Sonic cameos; they wanted a Sonic GAME. Sonic R and Sonic 3D Blast weren't true sequels, and Sega cruelly baited and switched its fans with the character for years. Meanwhile, Nintendo was releasing true Mario games and keeping the character relevant. It's no wonder Sonic is a joke today and people still associate Mario with quality gaming.


?. Who knows how a Kameo II and PDZ II may have turned out , and what about all the other talent and IP that MS have let slip through its hands ?. You bash SEGA and then have nothing to say when SONY and MS let talent and IP go to waste .

I think Sega has abandoned more IP from the Genesis era than MS has PERIOD. There are enough Sega franchises out there deserving of a new game that it boggles the mind. Of course, there's always the fact that Sega is very hit-and-miss when it comes to actually reviving a franchise. For every OutRun 2 there is a Golden Axe Rider. For every Phantasy Star Online there is a Shining Force Neo.

retrospiel
04-28-2011, 12:57 PM
I am so glad that I donít argue on the internet anymore, it looks so tiring.

It is. I can't tell you how many times I discussed the same things over and over again since I joined this forum.

Black_Tiger
04-28-2011, 01:37 PM
"Highly overrated" is a term some of you sega fanboys throw around a lot when describing virtually anything non-sega, so give us a few concrete examples.

I think that Sega has always had highly overrated games, but underrated ones too. Of course I also think that most of the games included in every 'teh greatest of all time' lists are overrated and that way too many aren't even good or great.

NiGHTS is one of the most overrated games of the generation. But so are FFVII and Zelda OoT.

There were a couple posts talking about the Saturn catering more to "hardcore gamers". I think it's sad that the 32-bit generation ushered in commercial/mainstream gaming and that what was considered good during the 8 & 16-bit generations has ever since been referred to as "hardcore". The Playstation definitely was the go-to console for commercial gaming.

Iron Lizard
04-28-2011, 01:45 PM
Sega's only problem is that many games were over looked thanks to Sony and Nintendo dominance. This drives up demand and price. Then a collector blows $100 on Popful Mail or Albert Odyssey and is not blown away by the experience. The game then becomes "Overrated" . I get so damn tired hearing that word.

TVC 15
04-28-2011, 02:01 PM
Sorry to pipe in here, this isn't any criticism of either the Saturn or PSX just another boring technical question. But I've noticed with a lot of Saturn 3d titles in the lower resolutions their seems to be more pixelation around the edges of polys. Is this due to the Saturn lacking dithering like the PSX? I can't quite figure this one out.

Mind you most Saturn games looked a bit richer in colours, probably due to a bit of over saturation maybe, but is the PSX's dithering the reason for the slightly more subdued colours as well?

Da_Shocker
04-28-2011, 02:04 PM
There wasn't much on the PSx that simply appealed to me compared to the Saturn. I think it had one of the worst controllers ever. The only thing it had going for is that the 3rd parties absolutely loved the PSx. The only games that I really missed out was the sports games. The PSx did have some mighty fine Football and Basketball games.

Team Andromeda
04-28-2011, 02:06 PM
Sega never intended to make SOR IV, Yuzo Koshiro did. He was the one who pitched the game, and his sister worked on character designs.

Yuzo Sister did the character designs since part II , there were a few in SOJ that wanted to make the game. It was just the higher ups inside both SOA/SOJ that stopped the game going into full production.


Sega licenses the Thunder Force IP to make sequels

Sequels ?, SEGA made 1 and it was pretty average, that is the danger one takes when having a different developer handling IP that means a lot to the fans.


The thing is, no one wanted Sonic cameos

I know, and I'm pretty sure that any fan of Kid icarus would want the same, and cameo's in fighting games mean little. There's a Cameo of Panzer Dragoon in OutRun 2006 - its nice, but I rather SEGA made a new Panzer game tbh.


I think Sega has abandoned more IP from the Genesis era than MS has PERIOD

Well seeing as SEGA been going since 70's (for videogames) it simply has a lot more IP to abandoned, don't you . I'm not holding up any hope for sequels to BLiNX, Crimson Skies, Sudeki, Blood Wake, Amped, Links, Lost Oddesy, Kameo, PDZ, Blue Dragon, Mech Assault, Phantom Dust, MM, Mech Assualt and a host of other IP, Not bad given that MS Games studio only been going for a couple of decades and less than that in the console area


For every OutRun 2 there is a Golden Axe Rider. For every Phantasy Star Online there is a Shining Force Neo

That's a spot on point tbf. But Shining Neo was an ok game , the trouble for me was the use of 'Force' in the title; When it played nothing like a Shinning Force game.


It would be VERY interesting to know why there weren't more Disney games by Sega of Japan

Yes It would, but I'm guessing the cost of getting the rights off Disney (and Dinsey looking to enter the market it's self) and the Team will to make something new all played their part. Myself given the Saturn 2D chipset I think it was a terrible mistake not to make a new Disney and SOR games for the Saturn using the full power of the 2D chipset.


Nintendo was one company with their HQ in Japan, while Sega were two different companies

No NCL also had Nintendo America, and lets not kid our self that they is no in-Fighting between each corps different bases . SONY did it, SNK did it, NEC did it, and I bet so did NCL did it . NCL are just masters at keeping everything In-House thought splits did could happen . Nintendo America were a bit vocal at the N64DD being a being a bit of a waste of time.

16bitter
04-28-2011, 02:48 PM
Seriously, why do people use the term fanboy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanboy)

Not that I would make a habit of condoning wikipedia definitions, but since you linked to it:

Fanboy is a term used to describe a male who is highly devoted and biased in opinion towards a single subject or hobby within a given field.

By your own definition, both through the link and the broad-basis of appellation, you're a biased fanboy?!?

If you say so.


when it by definition includes all of us and anybody else who frequents a forum about any topic at all?

Users at WebMD.com are fanboys?!

That's some interesting logic, as usual.

In other words, someone can take an interest, be a consumer, a creator, or an expert in a given field without being a fanboy.

A fanboy is a creature that shares many foibles with bridge trolls, only this creature is non-chimeric and confirmed to exist in many house basements around the world. This sub-strata or phylum of humanity(?) tend toward Freudian subversions so perverse that they literally form emotional attachments of such strength toward household objects -- in this case, video game platforms -- that there are often grotesque 'bonding' rituals that, through the selfsame debased and emotionally stultified acts, actually seek to prove Freud wrong: when a cigar isn't just a cigar (see William Jefferson Clinton, POTUS), or turning on a Sega console takes on a whole new meaning.

That is to say, the term fanboy isn't simply for the average consumer, follower or even low-level fan -- standards that so many people on this site conform to, including myself -- but rather is a person so blinkered with misplaced intimacy issues, that they have no ability to think an argument through rationally, instead acting out in fits of, yes, fanboy rage that usually attach to "defending" the household appliance, object of love, with "nonsequitur" illogic, contradiction and loaded terminology that doesn't hold up to much scrutiny.

The fanboy also tends to hate sourced fact, as a general observation of behavioral profile on this forum.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-28-2011, 02:58 PM
Next Generation13

So, the question is, what sources and financial estimates do you have to contradict this?

A long rant about an 8/10 rating for a crap port of Daytona, note, is not counter-evidence. In case you're as confused as sheath.

Further, I seriously doubt that the Dreamcast was losing Sega up to $100 per unit. That's the Saturn's dismal record.

First of all these are from outsides guessing. NOT from Sega themselves. Get a quote from Sega's people stating exact costs and then we'll believe you. The proof we have that this isn't correct is that Sega didn't go bankrupt during the Saturn Era. If they were truly losing that much money per unit they wouldn't have survived. Sega didn't have the reserves Sony had.

As for running out of titles, I guess that proves those magazines to be full of shit too as in 1996 and 1997 we got a steady release of Model 2 conversions as well as completely new games like Fighters Megamix. Yeah it may have taken AM2 a while to learn the Saturn's Hardware, but after mastering it with Virtua Fighter 2 it wasn't hard at all for them to make games. The Same goes for Sega's other divisions.

Thenewguy
04-28-2011, 03:28 PM
Nice try, but one Matthew Smith doesn't own the IP rights to Jet Set Willy and the reason we've not seen a new Dizzy is because the last one sold like crap.Good, I've definitely got enough info to form a proper opinion of your posts now, I know that the Oliver Twins have been trying to create a new Dizzy for years and are tied up in licensing problems, and I know that demand has been high for a new Dizzy game in Britain (Wiiware, iphone, or just Virtual Console re-releases of the old games), based on many magazine articles I've read, and interviews.

Therefore you've pulled this information out of your ass (ie made it up), just like you made up the fact that Sega's arcade division were apparently doing as badly during the Saturn era as they were during the Dreamcast (at which point I have to waste inordinate amounts of time finding actual evidence) when in actual fact it was hugely booming in Japan during the Saturn era, and still doing fairly well in Europe (not doing well in the US though it seems). You just make stuff up to back up your arguments.


LOL. So SEGA making Sonic Jam, Sonic R and letting Sonic appear in Christmas NiGHTS isn't keeping the character in the public eye.You don't keep your premier character "in the public eye" when you're getting trashed, you make a real game for them, and yet again we have clear examples of Sega weakening their licenses with Sonic R, and Flicky's Island, with Smash Bros the actual games are well made in their own right.


I say again, You never played Zelda or Mario on the CDI have we. It does't get any more crappier than thatI already explained this to you, from what I can remember Nintendo was pressurised into that deal because they ran out on Phillips with the SNES add-on.

They didn't ask Phillips to make those games for them.


So if I were you I would drop it and I would hardly call the likes of Travelers Tales or the likes of Sumo Digital, Dimps crappy companies.Great one, listening as usual I see, I can't believe you just wrote this when I just said I wasn't talking about Sumo in the last damn post!!

16bitter
04-28-2011, 03:34 PM
First of all these are from outsides guessing. NOT from Sega themselves. Get a quote from Sega's people stating exact costs and then we'll believe you.

So, in other words, you have no sources to support your statements.

And all you have as a rebuttal to the Next Generation pieces is...well, complaint about their nature, or truthfully the fact that they exist.

So far as Saturn losing great deals of money, Tom Kalinske himself said just that. And every industry source that I've ever found either agrees, confirms it or expands upon it by providing economic analysis.

I provided respected industry sources, that literally, in this case, made their livings and company names by looking into matters of manufacturing costs and overhead to the parent. Your reply? More fanboy drivel.

You never provide sourcing that conforms to or confirms your underthought, overwrought statements as to the Saturn's worth. In the end, oxymorons piling into each other is about all your providing in those contexts.

The worst part is, you're the norm for pro-Saturn theatrics-posing-as-argument.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-28-2011, 03:39 PM
I didn't say it didn't lose Sega money in the long run, I said I don't think Sega was hemorrhaging money with the Saturn like that magazine article was implying.

If Sega lost $100 on every Saturn sold and Sega sold 10 million Saturns, that comes out to 1 Billion dollars. I don't even think Sega had that kind of money to lose at that point.

They obviously lost money, but I don't think that magazine is accurate on how much.

16bitter
04-28-2011, 03:42 PM
I didn't say it didn't lose Sega money in the long run, I said I don't think Sega was hemorrhaging money with the Saturn like that magazine article was implying.

And what do you have to confirm this, in the context of denying the statements?

Source after source stated that Sega was losing up to $100 per system.

Your answer? That you disagree. As if that settles the matter, or means that you have provided anything that logically contradicts the finding.

Typical.


If Sega lost $100 on every Saturn sold and Sega sold 10 million Saturns, that comes out to 1 Billion dollars. I don't even think Sega had that kind of money to lose at that point.

Quotes like these show your inability to understand baseline economics.

Selling a million quickly would also, as likely, drive down pricing for the parent through the high-yields, aka supply and demand creating bigger markets and cheaper product for parent and consumer.


They obviously lost money, but I don't think that magazine is accurate on how much.

Again, provide something that contradicts them. Sourced work from inside the industry.

I dare you.

Da_Shocker
04-28-2011, 03:47 PM
So, in other words, you have no sources to support your statements.

And all you have as a rebuttal to the Next Generation pieces is...well, complaint about their nature, or truthfully the fact that they exist.

So far as Saturn losing great deals of money, Tom Kalinske himself said just that. And every industry source that I've ever found either agrees, confirms it or expands upon it by providing economic analysis.

I provided respected industry sources, that literally, in this case, made their livings and company names by looking into matters of manufacturing costs and overhead to the parent. Your reply? More fanboy drivel.

You never provide sourcing that conforms to or confirms your underthought, overwrought statements as to the Saturn's worth. In the end, oxymorons piling into each other is about all your providing in those contexts.

The worst part is, you're the norm for pro-Saturn theatrics-posing-as-argument.

Tom Kalinske also said that the Saturn version of Toshinden would be far superior and we all seen how that ended up.

More Kalinske goodness
http://www.defunctgames.com/shows.php?id=theysaidwhat-22

16bitter
04-28-2011, 03:50 PM
Tom Kalinske also said that the Saturn version of Toshinden would be far superior and we all seen how that ended up.

More Kalinske goodness
http://www.defunctgames.com/shows.php?id=theysaidwhat-22

Oh, good. Team Andromeda-level illogic.

So because Kalinske promotes product, that means that everything he says is suspect?

Except his statements -- his admitting that the Saturn was losing money -- on Sega's financial issues conforms to every industry competitor's and neutral party's finding on that level as well.

That wasn't even a good a try on your part. At least I hope it wasn't.

synbiosfan
04-28-2011, 03:52 PM
I am so glad that I donít argue on the internet anymore, it looks so tiring.

You weren't very good at it anyways...KIDDING:D

I feel the same way myself.

TrekkiesUnite118
04-28-2011, 04:00 PM
And what do you have to confirm this, in the context of denying the statements?

Source after source stated that Sega was losing up to $100 per system.

Your answer? That you disagree. As if that settles the matter, or means that you have provided anything that logically contradicts the finding.

Typical.



Quotes like these show your inability to understand baseline economics.

Selling a million quickly would also, as likely, drive down pricing for the parent through the high-yields, aka supply and demand creating bigger markets and cheaper product for parent and consumer.



Again, provide something that contradicts them. Sourced work from inside the industry.

I dare you.


That would work if Sega didn't lower the price quickly to match the PS1. Instead Sega kept lowering the price to match the PS1. If Sega sold 1 million Saturns at $400 and lost $100 per unit that's still $100 Million lost. That's a lot of money, especially in 1995. And then considering they lowered the price to below $200 in 1996 when PD2 came out, they would still be bleeding money if what you say is true. If the Saturn cost $500 to produce in 1995 I doubt it lowered to below $200 to produce in one year. Look how long it's taken for Sony to make money on the PS3 this generation.

The fact remains that if Sega was selling the Saturn at that big of a loss in 1995 and was then lowering the prices to match the PS1, they would have been hemorrhaging money until they went bankrupt. This however didn't happen until the Dreamcast came along.

The Saturn definitely lost money, but I think it lost it more in the sense that hardware, and as a result software, didn't sell to expectations. Not because Sega was bleeding money on it.

Da_Shocker
04-28-2011, 04:14 PM
It was clear that the cost of producing PS3 units were high for Sony, forcing the company to charge $600 per unit, but now we know exactly how high. Next-gen.biz has offered a full analysis of Sony's expenses. As it turns out, Sony is losing $306.85 for each 20GB system sold and $241.35 for every 60GB system.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/746/746482p1.html

Software sales sucked on the Saturn and they were marginally better on the DC.

16bitter
04-28-2011, 04:17 PM
The fact remains that if Sega was selling the Saturn at that big of a loss in 1995 and was then lowering the prices to match the PS1, they would have been hemorrhaging money until they went bankrupt. This however didn't happen until the Dreamcast came along.

Sega lost a huge amount on Saturn.

That, in turn, directly hurt the Dreamcast.

The idea that the Dreamcast cost more than the Saturn is one of the more ridiculous ideas that Saturn fanboys push; as usual, there's really nothing logical or factual that runs parallel to the statement.


Not because Sega was bleeding money on it.

And what sources support this idea?

Never is content provided in the counterargumentation. It's always long, drawn-out meta-narratives that are lacking in fact by their very nature.

Da_Shocker
04-28-2011, 04:30 PM
I already explained this to you, from what I can remember Nintendo was pressurised into that deal because they ran out on Phillips with the SNES add-on.

They didn't ask Phillips to make those games for them.


Pressure by who?

After Nintendo decided not to have Philips create a CD add-on to the Super Nintendo, Nintendo gave Philips permission to use five Nintendo characters in their games for the CD-i. The games were given little funding or time for completion, and Nintendo provided only cursory input.

The games were poorly received by video game critics, due to the barely functional controls and especially known for the cutscenes that used full motion video. The Philips CD-i did not sell well and Nintendo rarely acknowledges the games' existence, even erasing them from history in a statement connected to The Legend of Zelda: Collector's Edition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CD-i_games_from_The_Legend_of_Zelda_series

Development

In 1989, Nintendo signed a deal with Sony to begin development of a CD-ROM-based system known as the "Nintendo PlayStation" or the SNES CD to be an add-on to the Super Nintendo Entertainment System that would allow for FMV and larger games.[18][40] However, Nintendo broke the agreement and instead signed with Philips to make the add-on, which caused Sony to spin off their add-on into its own console called the PlayStation.[3][18][41] Witnessing the poor reception of the Sega Mega-CD, Nintendo scrapped the idea of making an add-on entirely.[18][40] As part of dissolving the agreement with Philips, Nintendo gave them the license to use five of their characters, including Link, Princess Zelda, and Ganon, for games on Philips's console called the CD-i, after the partnership's dissolution.[2][40] Contracting out to independent studios, Philips subsequently used the characters to create three games for the "CD-i", with Nintendo taking no part in their development except to give input on the look of the characters.[14][40] Philips insisted that all aspects of the CD-i's capabilities, including FMV, should be used.[28] As the system had not been designed as a dedicated video game console, there were several technical limitations, such as an infrared controller that lagged behind the on-screen action.[28] The team that created the first two games consisted of four artists, three programmers and one musician and were given a little over a year to create both games.[28] The voice of Princess Zelda was provided by Bonnie Jean Wilbur and the voice of Link by Jeffrey Rath, while additional voices were provided by Jeffrey Nelson, Mark Berry, Natalie Brown, Karen Grace, Josie McElroy, Marguerite Scott and Paul Wann.[42]

Wand of Gamelon and Faces of Evil were the first Nintendo-licensed games released on the Philips CD-i.[1] The two games were given the relatively low budgets of approximately $600,000 each and it was decided by the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based development team Animation Magic, led by Dale DeSharon, to develop the two games in tandem and have them share the same graphics engine to more efficiently use the budget.[43] The animated cutscenes were created by a team of six animators from Russia who were flown to the United States for the project.

The backgrounds for Zelda's Adventure were created out of videos of scenery near Santa Monica Boulevard in West L.A., footage of Hawaii taken from a helicopter, and developers' vacation photos.[44] This decision took up much of the games' RAM usage, causing backgrounds to scroll slowly, and developers were extremely frustrated. Space was so limited that how to utilize one or two kilobytes of free space was the cause of much argument.[44] The composer for Zelda's Adventure also played the part of Gaspra in the games' cut scenes.[44] The houses and interiors built for the cut scenes were built as scale models.[44] Developers have stated they were not influenced by the first two CD-i Zelda games.[44] Zelda's Adventure spent two years being tested, longer than it took to develop the game.[44] Much more music was composed for the game than was used.[44] Developers had difficulty making sure all the areas of the game had proper background masking.[44]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CD-i_games_from_The_Legend_of_Zelda_series#Developmen t

Thenewguy
04-28-2011, 04:34 PM
Witnessing the poor reception of the Sega Mega-CD, Nintendo scrapped the idea of making an add-on entirely.[18][40] As part of dissolving the agreement with Philips, Nintendo gave them the license to use five of their characters, including Link, Princess Zelda, and Ganon, for games on Philips's console called the CD-iPressure or goodwill, either way Nintendo didn't ask Phillips to make some games on rival hardware because they wanted to make money and further their business, thats for sure.

16bitter
04-28-2011, 04:36 PM
:rofl:

rep to newguy

sheath
04-28-2011, 04:36 PM
Whoever posted that Sega financial report needs to repost it. It showed that Sega was profitable until they liquidated Saturn stock in March 1998.

old man
04-28-2011, 04:39 PM
Hey guys, what's going on in this.... Oh wait, never mind.

Team Andromeda
04-28-2011, 04:40 PM
Good, I've definitely got enough info to form a proper opinion of your posts now, I know that the Oliver Twins have been trying to create a new Dizzy for years and are tied up in licensing problems

LOL. In their own words " It would need the budget of our other games and you have to find someone to take that leap of faith"

Not licensing troubles , but 'funding 'issues are getting in the way , and Publishers will only fund sure bets these days, not even the Oliver twins (despite owning their own Company) are willing to risk spending the cash . And as for Manic Minner there's a guy called Tommy Barton that's getting inthe way .


You don't keep your premier character "in the public eye" when you're getting trashed, you make a real game for them

Ahhh.... Changing our tune and stance yet again (there's a surprise) . I may have missed something, but the likes of Shenmue, Sonic R, Segagaga , Fighters Megamix were not trashed , not inthe press or by the fans.

Keep it coming


I already explained this to you

And I'll remind you again , Mario and Zelda were utter crap, made Shinobi look like perfection in contrast and who choose to walk away from SONY and enter with Philips ?. Maybe NCL should have done with JVC, Hitachi or Panasonic to provide their CD system ?

What next Artoon and Team Ninja had a Gun to NCL head, for their rather poor use of Yoshi and Metroid

Keep it coming


Great one, listening as usual I see

Thank you, and so nice to see you trying to alter once stance (like usual) You're going to sit there and make out that Travellers tails and Dimps are terrible companies?.

Keep it coming

16bitter
04-28-2011, 04:43 PM
Whoever posted that Sega financial report needs to repost it. It showed that Sega was profitable until they liquidated Saturn stock in March 1998.

Yes, the Saturn was clearly a moneymaker.

And Sega had no other source of income like, oh, being one of the biggest arcade game companies in the world up to that point.

sheath
04-28-2011, 04:46 PM
Hello Mr. Attitude, please keep your words in your mouth. Thank you.

evilevoix
04-28-2011, 04:53 PM
How long is this supposed to go on for?

Thenewguy
04-28-2011, 04:55 PM
Ahhh.... Changing our tune and stance yet again (there's a surprise) . I may have missed something, but the likes of Shenmue, Sonic R, Segagaga , Fighters Megamix were not trashed , not in the press or by the fans.My god man! do you only function in absolutes?! can you only weigh up two factors at a time?

Eg -

Us - The Saturn was difficult to program for, which hurt it
You - 1. PS2 WAS HARD TO DEVELOP FOR THEREFORE YOU ARE WRONG
Us - But there were other factors involved
You - 2. DOES NOT COMPUTE!!!! GOTO 1

Companies should make sure to represent their premier characters in real games, the lessor important ones which are still popular but you don't specifically have plans for in the short term are the ones which you worry about in regards to keeping in the public eye with cameos, as well as thinking about making some plans for using in proper games for the future..

Just because I write something doesn't mean there can't be other extenuating circumstances that I'm not going into detail with.

Joe Redifer
04-28-2011, 05:01 PM
but is the PSX's dithering the reason for the slightly more subdued colours as well?

Not sure, but the dithering in many games did give it the kind of vomit look to me. It always reminded me of the flakes the custodian at school would poor on vomit to clean it up. I don't know why PS games were so heavy on the dithering, it made the games look awful. People harp on the Genesis all of the time for its dithering, but nobody ever complains about the PS's much more prominent and worse-looking (in my opinion) dithering.

kool kitty89
04-28-2011, 05:02 PM
The Saturn chipset may not have been the best design, but it wasn't the worst either. It was no worse than most Arcade Boards at the time, the fact that in its first year we got the same amount of software as the PS1 proves it couldn't have been that hard to develop for. Throw in the fact that the companies who were used to working with Arcade Hardware (Sega, Konami, Capcom, Treasure, etc.) gave us some of the best results from the system also proves that it couldn't have been that much worse than Arcade hardware.
No, I'd say the Saturn hardware was possibly the worst of all time in terms of a realistic mass market design.

"Power" can be irrelevant, it's all a matter of cost to performance ratio and realistic price point, market positioning, ease of programming, etc. (then there's the non-technical issue, of course)

In fact, sega having a LESS powerful system could have been better than what they did so long as it was a good, cost-effective design.

If they wanted to undercut Sony's price point (especially if they wanted to be out earlier), a simpler, fundamentally cheaper, but well-thought-out design is what they needed. (of course, they couldn't have known Sony's actual design or price point until later, but it would have made all the sense in the world to focus on a highly low-cost optimized design back in 1992 from the start using existing market standards to build upon -ie necessarily ignoring the odd side-step of their model 1 and 2 arcade hardware clashing with real-world standards- . . . that could be inclusive of a backwards compatible MD/CD derivative -that gimmick is always a useful marketing angle- but an all-new design could have cost/performance advantages)

As it was, they could have made some hefty cost cuts at the last minute to make it cheaper than the PSX, but it still would have been relatively inefficient.
Besides, SoJ wasn't thinking that way at all; they apparently wanted to push an expensive high-end system in line with the 3DO. (though actually less cost effective than the 3DO and far more expensive to manufacture -especially taking scalability into account -actually the 3DO hardware was significantly simpler than the PSX and would have been cheaper under comparable circumstances to Sony's manufacturing and margins)

sheath
04-28-2011, 05:04 PM
It's much worse than that in my experience. People don't know about the dithering in most of the popular games, didn't notice it, and will deny its existence unless a video can be shown to prove it for every_single_game that has it. Youtube is, of course, too fuzzy to show dithering (except for emulated Genesis games), so it doesn't exist.

Kamahl
04-28-2011, 05:06 PM
How long is this supposed to go on for?

We made like 40+ pages... let them have their fun XD

Da_Shocker
04-28-2011, 05:07 PM
My god man! do you only function in absolutes?! can you only weigh up two factors at a time?

Eg -

Us - The Saturn was difficult to program for, which hurt it
You - 1. PS2 WAS HARD TO DEVELOP FOR THEREFORE YOU ARE WRONG
Us - But there were other factors involved
You - 2. DOES NOT COMPUTE!!!! GOTO 1

Companies should make sure to represent their premier characters in real games, the lessor important ones which are still popular but you don't specifically have plans for in the short term are the ones which you worry about in regards to keeping in the public eye with cameos, as well as thinking about making some plans for using in proper games for the future..

Just because I write something doesn't mean there can't be other extenuating circumstances that I'm not going into detail with.


The other factors was Sony's hype and shitload of money. Developers grumbled about the PS2 being difficult but they still flocked to it in droves. I find it odd that the PS2 and PS3 have been the exact opposite in terms of ease programming. Both the Cube and Xbox were pretty easy to program yet still could'nt touch the PS2 i in terms of sales.

sheath
04-28-2011, 05:07 PM
Both sides are making no sense to me at this point.

Thenewguy
04-28-2011, 05:11 PM
If Sega lost $100 on every Saturn sold and Sega sold 10 million Saturns, that comes out to 1 Billion dollars. I don't even think Sega had that kind of money to lose at that point.There would be some offset though, Sega were making money in some areas which would weather the damage, but not make enough to totally offset the huge loss.

Sega did have a whole load of Saturn games which sold over 300,000 in Japan (VF2 sold 1.4 million there), they did have a handful of games which sold a few 100,000 in the US, they had the hugely sucessful arcade business in Japan, and (to a much lessor extent) in Europe.

Didn't Sega go into debt and start borrowing money during the Saturn days anyway? I'm sure I heard they were spending money they didn't have on the Dreamcast?

sheath
04-28-2011, 05:17 PM
There was definitely some shifting of debts, as always occurs with corporations, as early as the Genesis' peak in 1992-93. That financial report showed that Sega saw annual dips in revenue in their console division from 1993 onward, if I recall. The company's profits dropped accordingly, and most sharply in 1994. We have seen other publications that Sega lost somewhere around 70% of their revenue in 1993-94. From what I have seen no division showed an overall loss any year until 1998, which means that the Saturn could not have lost Sega $100 million per million consoles sold.

evilevoix
04-28-2011, 05:25 PM
We made like 40+ pages... let them have their fun XD

Their stuff is personal and nitpicking B.S., at least we made valid points and facts arguing the validity of the TG16 and its battle with the SNES/MD.

Thenewguy
04-28-2011, 06:30 PM
Their stuff is personal and nitpicking B.S., at least we made valid points and facts arguing the validity of the TG16 and its battle with the SNES/MD.

By the way, I've been thinking a lot about the TG-16 recently, and what I been really wondering, and can't work out, is whether it was as good as the Mega Drive at animation, any thoughts on the subject? I would be interested in your input

Melf
04-28-2011, 06:43 PM
Sequels ?, SEGA made 1 and it was pretty average, that is the danger one takes when having a different developer handling IP that means a lot to the fans.

What other developer? Technosoft developed the first 5 games, and the owner of the IP licensed it to Sega, who developed part 6. The same company was behind the games' development for virtually the whole series. Sega only made the last one.

sheath
04-28-2011, 06:48 PM
By the way, I've been thinking a lot about the Saturn recently, and what I been really wondering, and can't work out, is whether it was as good as the Playstation at 3D animation, any thoughts on the subject? I would be interested in your input


Hmm....

retrospiel
04-28-2011, 07:25 PM
Us - The Saturn was difficult to program for, which hurt it
You - 1. PS2 WAS HARD TO DEVELOP FOR THEREFORE YOU ARE WRONG
Us - But there were other factors involved
You - 2. DOES NOT COMPUTE!!!! GOTO 1

Funny how this played out exactly the other way around from my perspective.

16-bit
04-28-2011, 07:56 PM
XVCtkzIXYzQ

sheath
04-28-2011, 08:01 PM
And the real 16-bitter has stepped forward.

16-bit
04-28-2011, 09:29 PM
Wait, the real 16-bitter is the dude?

kool kitty89
04-28-2011, 10:30 PM
Kool Kitty, I was not under the impression that you thought the PS1 was on the level with Model 2. My point was that the best System 11 games look nowhere near as advanced as Model 2 games, and yet 1995 Saturn games are so close that even critical magazines were astonished. The Dead or Alive on PS1 analogy is apt as well.
The System 11 is basically the same hardware as the PSX with double the VRAM, so of course the system 11 would be weaker than the model 2 in similar areas to the PSX. (you'd have more freedom with textures with the system 11 though)


The Saturn having closer arcade ports means nothing other than programming skill. (and there's no doubt that Sega had some of the top programmers in the world)

Put them to work on the PSX hardware with similar experience and see what happens. :p

Besides that, I think you're exaggerating things a bit with "arcade perfect" in terms of color count, polygon count, etc.
Plus, Model 2 games never use smooth shading, so the loss in 256 color mode isn't as obvious. (256 color flat shading vs highcolor shading will look a bit worse for sure, but not as dramatic as gouraud shading -especially for lighting effects)

I need to look at DoA again, but I'd thought the arcade version did use smooth shading. (if not, that's another direct advantage for the otherwise limited 256 color mode on the Saturn)
Again, ironic that the PSX got hardware dithering capabilities that could have been extremely useful for allowing decent smooth shading in a 256 color mode.



Some of what you are stating as fact about the PS1 is absolutely the position of Sony fan groups about the system.
On the whole, those sort of groups exaggerate some things, but they have some good points. (of course, most are blindly going by publicized specs or hype -or by "experience" in games and not from any understanding of the hardware performance itself, so that's not really any good either)

The GTE having a better fillrate is probably true, but if that really matters why did the Saturn hit 480 resolutions before and more often than the Playstation? Why was Virtua Fighter 2 60FPS when only the much later released Tekken 3 achieved the same (with much lower character animation)? [/QUOTE]
GTE has nothing to do with fillrate. GTE is a very fixed purpose coprocessor that does nothing but handle polygonal 3D math (calculates vertices). In fact, I think it's a bit overkill as the GPU fillrate practically limits real-world polygon counts to a fraction of what the GTE technically supports. (peak 1M verteces per second, though maybe with pure flat shaded polygons the GPU could come close to making use of all that -probably more like rendering vector lines though)

It's the GPU that limits fillrate, just like the VDP1 in the Saturn (both being blitter-like processors, but VDP1 being considerably more primitive with a lack of buffering or caching, especially dramatic for texture performance). The saving grace of VDP1 is having separate source and destination banks in RAM (an expensive lower-tech approach to a problem much better addressed by caching/buffering and use of wider buses), and of course having a dedicated video bus. (which the PSX also has)
That gives it significantly higher performance than the Jaguar or 3DO, but still much less than the PSX.

I'd have to see detailed performance figures on VDP1 to be absolutely sure (or to make more specific comparisons -ie exactly HOW much higher the PSX's fillrate is), but from everything I've gleaned on the subject, this certainly seems to be the case.
The only mitigating factor would be if the Saturn's VDP1 does actually have some sort of minimalistic buffering and not just single pixel read/write for texture mapping like the Sega CD, Jaguar, 3DO, most PC software renderers, etc.

I know the PSX's max fillrate is 33 Mpixels/s, and that's about 8x the speed of the 3DO (technically the 3DO could peak at 5 Mpixels/s, but that's assuming every fetch is in fast page mode, and that's not realistic, and beyond that, the peak texture speed would only be reached with the CPU totally halted) and even more compared to the jaguar (again, takes full main bus bandwidth to achieve with other processors halted/waiting).
And if the Saturn's VDP1 worked the way I've been led to believe, it would peak at 9.54 Mpixels per second, but that's assuming all fetches are in burst mode. (with fetches as random accesses -but writes still assumed in burst mode- you'd be cut back to 4.77 Mpix/s -assuming the SDRAM's random access response is faster than 140 ns- so real-world performance would be somewhere between the 2)
And even with buffering or caching, the Saturn's VDP1 still would peak at 9.54 M/s highcolor texture rendering.

The performance should be the same for 8-bit pixels unless VDP1 has some special buffering for 256 color rendering.

And that's not comparing flat shading or gouraud shaded filling. Neither of those requires fetching textures, but just filling regions of the framebuffer with the proper color (or color/shade gradient) and could thus be much faster. However, the PSX GPU has a 32-bit connection to the 33 MHz VRAM bus for a 133 MB/s peak transfer rate vs 28.64 MHz at 16-bits for the Saturn framebuffers giving 57.3 MB/s, so peak fillrate for flat and gouraud shading would have a significant advantage for the PSX. (256 color mode on the Saturn might change things if VDP1 is able to plot 2 8-bit pixels per write, and given how simple that sort of buffering would be -compared to texture source/destination buffering, I'd be surprised if VDP1 didn't have support for that . . . but 256 color mode would be flat shaded only, so gouraud shading is out of the picture)


But, again, the choice of resolutions is mostly due to color depth. The Saturn's VDP1 can run at 256 colors (8-bit rather than 16-bit pixels) while the PSX's GPU can only render 16-bit highcolor pixels to the framebuffer.
So running at 512x512 (or 512x448, etc) in 256 colors on the Saturn would take 2x the RAM on the PSX in highcolor and use most of VRAM. (it would be totally impossible to do highcolor at those resolutions on the Saturn as the framebuffer is limited to 256 kB max -and unlike the PSX, that's not flexible shared memory, so any less than 256 kB more or less goes to waste)


The only other advantage of the Saturn would be things done with VDP2, especially at high res. (a scaled 2D BG wouldn't be hard to manage with the PSX GPU, but it would eat up overall texture bandwidth -we're talking lower res stuff anyway though)
Things like the horribly choppy Grandia intro scaling is definitely not any indication of the PSX's performance. (some of the bugs in that game boggle the mind, it's a really sloppy conversion in that respect)




Why is it that the Saturn can be said to have more overall processing power than the PS1, but still be inferior at 3D to the PS1?
The Jaguar has more processing horsepower than either and the N64 has more still by a large margin, but that doesn't mean much of anything on its own.
"processing power" is talking about general purpose computational performance, not graphics performance, etc, etc.
Also, tapping that power can make massive exceptions to raw performance (like the bottlnecks in the Jaguar -especially with JERRY- limiting real world performance substantially).
I mean, the Atari 2600 has almost as much computational power as the NES, but many more factors come into play. ;) (ie non CPU related stuff -or how the VCS eats up about 3/4 of the CPU time with graphics management)

Albeit, for raw computational performance, you technically could inflate the PSX with the GTE's vertex performance. (something the Saturn and Jaguar couldn't match with any processor, though the N64 probably could -it usually used floating point calculations though iirc, so a different comparison in general . . . actually the Jaguar and Saturn could have an edge over the PSX in floating point math too given the SH2s are fairly good at software floating point math, as is the Jag GPU -approximately 1 MFLOPs, but that doesn't matter since the PSX didn't use floating point math -and neither did the Jaguar most of the time -fixed point math on the GPU is still many times faster and done in hardware as with the SH2, apparently some saturn games did opt for floating point stuff due to how fixed point math is a huge pain to use with quads -which also makes the DSP in the Saturn less useful)


And with the above said, you can see that the Saturn eats up a lot of that added computational resource with things the PSX does in hardware. If you used the SCU DSP for 3D math (assuming you were willing to deal with the fixed point math issues for quad rendering -which all polygonal 3DO games had to do), you technically would have some added CPU resource over the PSX, but that would only matter for games where CPU resource was a limiting factor for a game. (ie rather than rendering speed)


However, all this performance stuff isn't what I was even getting at with my previous main points.
My big problem with the Saturn's hardware (from a historical perspective) is that it simply made no sense for a console design. It was extremely poorly streamlined and non-cost effective with a difficult to work with architecture and undesirable feature set on top of that. (and that's just looking from the perspective of the time, not pushing hindsight)
Then there was the lack of tools and poor tools when they did arrive. It was like the Jaguar, but without the excuses of being a small, poorly funded company with years of management problems up to that point. (it was actually WORSE than the Jaguar as at least the Jag had moderately workable developer documentation out by late 1992, a year before the test market . . . that would have been like having preliminary Saturn development docs out by late 1993 in Japan or mid 1994 in the US)




By my estimation we are blending too many topics and that is why some statements about the Saturn are being twisted to apply to the Saturn-PS1 discussion. "True 3D" is one topic, "Good 3D for the time" is another topic, what makes a successful platform is a completely different topic. Then there is how the Playstation, Saturn and even the Model 2 approached 3D individually to discuss and compare.
"What makes a system successful" is inclusive of several of those other topics. Also, I don't remember arguing anything about "true 3D" whatsoever.

In fact, I've made the point several times that there was no "true" 3D at the time. You had traingle based polygonal 3D and ray-casting/height map engines along with either of those adding scaled/rotated 2D objects for psuedo 3D effects.
Thus, the only "safe" design for 1993/94 would have been a machine well-balanced enough to manage all of the major rendering methods of the time.
Quads were not among those and Sega took a really odd path with the Model 1 and 2 arcade boards as such. (technically, they could have avoided polygon rasterization entirely and aimed at flexibility -requiring a coprocessor to complete rasterization like the Jaguar- and focus on optimal performance and cost effectiveness with such flexibiltiy)
The N64 took that sort of foolproof approach too, though the RSP was only ever used for triangle based 3D rendering. (it could have been tuned to a number of different things -or several at once- if there had been a demand for such or if Nintendo/SGI pushed developers to go beyond polygons and supported special tools to use such alternate renderers)

Only in hindsight did full polygonal 3D (especially texture heavy 3D) become a given, especially with PC hardware acceleration opting for that rather than GPU-like flexibility and versatility. (that would happen later, but continue pushing polygons almost exclusively)
The N64 arrived just as that shift was taking place on PCs, and from 1997 onward, pretty much all 3D was done with pure polygons. (with a handful of exceptions like Outcast)


It seems to me that somehow the Playstation's approach was unilaterally declared "best" and everything else was compared to it as the standard. Well, even the top Playstation games make me question it as a standard to meet for quality 3D gaming.
No, it wasn't best, it was inflexible in some areas to be sure, but they DID build on established standards and rising market trends.

And technically speaking, the PSX's GPU DOES cater fairly well to column based renderers (you render sideways and then rotate the frame), so if those rendering methods (voxels or doom/duke 3D type engines) had persisted, it wouldn't have been totally left in the dust. (the fillrate could have made it better than the Saturn as well, or jaguar for that matter, but you probably wouldn't see the interpolated height fields like Phase Zero on the Jag, more of the plain pixelated voxel engines you saw on PCs of the time).

It also wasn't a super low-cost design given the fast RAM used (I think VRAM for video too), 3 buses, etc, but it was pretty integrated as far as the chipset goes and then there's all the advantages of vertically integrated manufacturing and price dumping. (the hardware alone is certainly cheaper than the Saturn's by a good margin, but Sony's other advantages widens that gap much further; thus sega would have needed an extremely tight design to compete with fairly similar performance and lower cost -otherwise they'd end up with a weaker machine at similar cost . . . or they could have pushed development further and ended up with a more expensive machine -initially- with significantly more power and flexibility)


If the Saturn chipset had been technologically closer to the Jaguar chipset, Sega would have been much better off than with the Saturn chipset. (given the newer design timeline and added resources, Sega could have funded a significantly better chipset than what flare had managed by the end of 1992)
For that matter, given the SGI offer and subsequent rejection, SoJ could have pushed for a design with similar aim as SGI's concept, but with better cost effectiveness and catering more to their favored manufacturers.

Albeit some of this is better suited to that "best chipset of the 5th generation" thread. (which is gone now . . . though I did end up saving most of it ;))









If it could be corrected so easily through software, then why did we see titles published by Sony, that still had these tearing issues? Cool Borders 2 was released in 2007, yet it had horrible tearing. Cool Borders 3 appears to have corrected that issue, but it was way later in the Playstation's lineup.
Huh, 2007?

It's all a matter of developer effort and how the software did things. Chilly Willy already addressed this before.

It's the same thing with how many PSX games continued to have texture warping problems rather than opting for subdivided mapping. (subdivided texture mapping WOULD reduce average fillrate and rendering speed, of course, so that would be a trade-off)









This right here. Why the fuck does it matter who won the console war and who had the same types on games on which systems when they launched and longevity and different developers and shit today? All that really matters is the games, and I sure as hell don't see people raving about mediocre nonsense like Ridge Racer, Toshiniden, Jumping Flash or the first Tekken, and yet games like Sega Rally, Virtua Fighter 2, and Panzer Dragoon are still regarded as classics today in their respective genres.
It doesn't matter who won, that's not what these arguments are about.

It's a matter of historical interest in how and why Sega ruined their position on the market and how the Saturn played a major part in it.


"games" are a totally different category, a subjective one at that. (I like the N64 a LOT for that matter, but that doesn't mean I don't think Nitendo made some idiotic decisions managing it)
I don't really care for the PSX (though I can't deny it has a lot of compelling games -both personally and from a mass market perspective), but I can respect the good hardware design and management. (of course with Sony's inherent funding on top of that)

The jaguar was a market failure, but that doesn't stop me from recognizing it as a technical marvel of its time. (or discussing all the problems and cirumstances that led to its failure on the market)


It's a matter of historical interest, and something that would probably bore any non history buffs. (or non techies for that matter) ;)



What it all comes down to is that PS1s library is old and dated. Saturn's library may not have nearly as many games, but they're a hell of a lot more fun. And that's all that really matters for gamers. Why argue about who won and who lost when you can play the games and decide for yourself? Like the Playstation more, that's fine. But don't go bash the other system for being terrible when it didn't garner as many sales due to SEGA's shitty marketing plan 15 years ago.
Not that's totally subjective.
I personally find the PSX had FAR more to offer that is fun to play, but it's really up to personal preference.

Hell, aside from party games, it's generally got more to offer than the N64.

It's all up to personal preference, but there's SO much more breadth to the PSX's library. It's a lot like comparing the NES to the Master System's overall game library or comparing the Genesis/SNES to the TG-16's US turbochip releases. ;) Or PS2 vs DC or Xbox or GC. (granted, DC+Xbox+GC combined would be another story ;))

You need a very specific niche gaming preference to like the Saturn more (or other bias).


My only real gripe about the PSX is the terrible controllers, but at least there are decent 3rd party controllers to get around that. ;)


This is all subjective stuff, totally separate from the historical discussion that 16-bitter has been pushing.







And you know why? Because Playstation games got better as time went on, while the Saturn sat still. With classics like Tekken 2 and 3, Soul Blade, Gran Turismo 1 and 2 who is going to remember mediocre racing and fighting games such as Ridge Racer and Toshinden? Exactly.
Saturn didn't sit still, it got development support from some of the top (if not the very top) programmers in the industry from Sega's in-house teams.

Anyway, the current discussion wasn't about more or better games, but about historical market positioning, PR, marketing, management, developer relations, hardware, and a lot of interconnected factors among those issues.

Olls
04-28-2011, 10:56 PM
Saturn didn't sit still, it got development support from some of the top (if not the very top) programmers in the industry from Sega's in-house teams.


Not literally of course, but later titles are not remembered as fondly as the early ones (and I have seen none mentioned).

kool kitty89
04-28-2011, 11:35 PM
The Playstation costs $280 to manufacture.[/i]
If that is accurate (assuming for 1995), I'd assume that was Sony's nominal hardware manufacturing cost (which would be deflated by Sony's in-house advantages compared to Sega's largely outsourced manufacturing and such).

So, the actual apples to apples hardware costs would have been closer than real-world figures depict.
That's also why the Saturn hurt things even more: Sega would have needed an even tighter design to really compete against Sony in that category, but they did the opposite with a sloppy, expensive, inefficient design. (of course, they could also have had a cheaper design that wasn't especially tight, just less powerful -the 32x took that to the extreme, but there's a lot of middleground -with Sega's resources, they should have been able to pull off a very tight and efficient design if they'd actually tried)


Further, I seriously doubt that the Dreamcast was losing Sega up to $100 per unit. That's the Saturn's dismal record.
Remember the DC launched at a significantly lower price and saw significant price drops as well, so it could certainly have been a possibility. (of course, the Saturn would have been losing a hell of a lot more if they'd launched it at $200 in 1995 or had it at $150 in 1996 ;))

The Saturn would obviously have been cheaper than the DC by 1998/99, but it was older, simpler hardware. (the motherboard might have cost more, but the components should have been less than the DC by a good margin, the PSX would have been cheaper still, of course -and the N64)






Not that I would make a habit of condoning wikipedia definitions, but since you linked to it:

Fanboy is a term used to describe a male who is highly devoted and biased in opinion towards a single subject or hobby within a given field.

By your own definition, both through the link and the broad-basis of appellation, you're a biased fanboy?!?

If you say so.
Yeah, I don't know where he was going with that. "Fan" yes, I'll admit to that, albeit I consider myself to be a relatively unbiased/open-minded general fan of gaming/electronics/tech/history. (enjoying history openly sort of entails shedding bias)

That lack of bias is also why I was rather skeptical about whether SoJ really did assert control over SoJ as claimed in 1995, but recent supporting evidence swayed me to believe that to be the case. (still a lot of open ended stuff and missing details, but at least we know that it was SoJ -or Nakayma- who forced that ill-fated, ill-planned, ill-advised May launch of the Saturn in 1995 -the more or less definitive beginning of the end for Sega)



In other words, someone can take an interest, be a consumer, a creator, or an expert in a given field without being a fanboy.
Of course! Again, I really don't see where Sheath was going with that argument.



That is to say, the term fanboy isn't simply for the average consumer, follower or even low-level fan -- standards that so many people on this site conform to, including myself -- but rather is a person so blinkered with misplaced intimacy issues, that they have no ability to think an argument through rationally, instead acting out in fits of, yes, fanboy rage that usually attach to "defending" the household appliance, object of love, with "nonsequitur" illogic, contradiction and loaded terminology that doesn't hold up to much scrutiny.
You could defend such things in a logical fashion as well. I've done that with the 32x discussions (some of which you were involved in), albeit it wasn't one-sided. (I always qualified things with the exceptions that made the 32x detrimental as well -or trade-offs with alternative options . . . and historical perspective and reasoning on Sega's end)


The fanboy also tends to hate sourced fact, as a general observation of behavioral profile on this forum.
Yes, though being skeptical in general can be good and a lot of the "sourced" material is genuinely questionable. (there's a lack of good counter evidence either, but an un-refuted weak source is still a weak source :p )

Though, in the Saturn's case, there's a lot of logical deduction that supports such claims. (general component costs in the industry at the time would point heavily to the $300 Saturn being sold at a substantial loss, or the $200 1996 Saturn -probably worse)






Quotes like these show your inability to understand baseline economics.
That's what I was thinking. ;) (you'd have to take into account things like revenue from other products and software sales)


Selling a million quickly would also, as likely, drive down pricing for the parent through the high-yields, aka supply and demand creating bigger markets and cheaper product for parent and consumer.
Yes, though that's assuming they didn't start off stockpiling at high volumes from day 1, and that the hardware is relatively scalable.

The further price drops and inherent advantages of Sony's hardware and in-house manufacturing and R&D resources would put Sega at a cyclical disadvantage with the Saturn in any case.

I highly doubt the Saturn was selling at a loss at $400, but probably was at $300, $200, and probably $150 in '97 too. (perhaps at $100 in 1998 as well, though component costs were dropping substantially from late 1996 onward)

Then you've got total operational costs for distribution, advertising, software development, etc dragging things down more.


The saving grace was having success in Japan with the Saturn and continuing revenue from the MD and other products in the short run (the weak arcades hurt a lot though).
Of course, they compromised much of the potential of those other products with how they managed the Saturn.







Oh, good. Team Andromeda-level illogic.

So because Kalinske promotes product, that means that everything he says is suspect?
Yeah, it's not like that quote was from an interview with Kalniske AFTER he left Sega. (ie when he'd have far fewer conflicts of interest on such issues)


Except his statements -- his admitting that the Saturn was losing money -- on Sega's financial issues conforms to every industry competitor's and neutral party's finding on that level as well.
Yes, though I'm pretty sure that was in the context of SoA specifically. (not taking Sega's international finances into account)
So Sega may not have been pulling net deficits yet, though it certainly could have been possible. (debt would come later, after years of sustained deficits without sacrificing assets to neutralize those deficits -ie a company stepped in debt can still be liquidated for a hefty profit due to the total assets exceeding the debt, but such liquidation wouldn't be practical for an active company -more like in bankruptcy or if the owner of the company wants to get out of the business -as Atari Corp did in 1996)






The fact remains that if Sega was selling the Saturn at that big of a loss in 1995 and was then lowering the prices to match the PS1, they would have been hemorrhaging money until they went bankrupt. This however didn't happen until the Dreamcast came along.
You're thinking too small and you don't seem to understand the concept of bankruptcy.

Sega could have been bleeding massive amounts of money but still stayed out of bankruptcy by borrowing more and more money and/or liquidating assets.
The very fact that they ended up in heavy dept in the Saturn's lifespan is proof of that.

If you think bankruptcy means being "broke" and having not liquid assets (ie cash to spend) in reserve, then you're flat wrong.
You can become steeped in debt long before approaching bankruptcy, it's really a matter of context.

Of course, Sega also had Okawa bailing them out with hundreds of millions in private loans to Sega. (ie on much more favorable terms than 3rd party creditors/investors)


Now, don't get the wrong idea here: deficit spending and even going into debt in the short run can be necessary for a company to be created, stay afloat or facilitate expansion (hence SoA's deficit spending due to heavy investment in expansion). It's a matter of investment for the future . . . but that's not the case with the sort of debt the Saturn was building up. (the Dreamcast had the right sort of debt for the most part, but Sega wasn't in a good position to pull that off -it could have been possible, and they came close, but it was also extremely tight and they would have needed to get pretty much everything right to pull it off due to their weak position from the Saturn mess)










Sega lost a huge amount on Saturn.

That, in turn, directly hurt the Dreamcast.

The idea that the Dreamcast cost more than the Saturn is one of the more ridiculous ideas that Saturn fanboys push; as usual, there's really nothing logical or factual that runs parallel to the statement.
Yeah, it's almost like he's just rambling off Team Andromeda's BS claims on the topic. (he also seems to be oversimplifying matters considerably)






Whoever posted that Sega financial report needs to repost it. It showed that Sega was profitable until they liquidated Saturn stock in March 1998.
I doubt it showed them as profitable, though it may have shown them staying out of nominal debt.
Of course, corporations can do all sorts of things to mask debt and make their financial reports look better than they are in reality.

Plus, the overall financial reports aren't what we'd want to see: we'd want the total operational costs of the Ssturn broken down by region and corresponding revenue. (Sega's other products and operations could be offsetting things too)


However, I think it's this that you're looking for:
http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/grant/docs/11Videogames.pdf
pg. 14

kool kitty89
04-28-2011, 11:48 PM
Not sure, but the dithering in many games did give it the kind of vomit look to me. It always reminded me of the flakes the custodian at school would poor on vomit to clean it up. I don't know why PS games were so heavy on the dithering, it made the games look awful. People harp on the Genesis all of the time for its dithering, but nobody ever complains about the PS's much more prominent and worse-looking (in my opinion) dithering.
Of course, you'd need to see the alternative (posterization) to make the decision on which is better.

The only simple way to do that is to compare a PC game set to 320x240 highcolor with dithering enabled and disabled. (Tomb Raider II is a great example for that)
The posterization can be uglier at times for sure, but at such low resolutions, it's a wash much of the time. (at 640x480, dithering looks MUCH better though)

It was an option supported in hardware that developers could enable to make shading look better. (it was up to the developer whether it actually looked better though)


This sort of thing is why I think all realtime rendered games should have detail options like PC games, then everyone can be happy. ;) (if they're willing to fiddle around with a menu to chose their preferences rather than the default settings)


Likewise, dithering is necessary for the Sega CD games using it. The grainy look may not be great, but if posterization looked better, you can bet they'd have opted for that. (some games do opt for a low threshold and stylized postrized graphics and some others used posterization heavily to allow lossless compression -especially for making RLE practical- though those end up looking uglier than good dithering IMO -the main advantage would be a lack of lossy compression artifacting while still maintaining a fairly high framerate -like Dune and NovaStorm)



It's much worse than that in my experience. People don't know about the dithering in most of the popular games, didn't notice it, and will deny its existence unless a video can be shown to prove it for every_single_game that has it. Youtube is, of course, too fuzzy to show dithering (except for emulated Genesis games), so it doesn't exist.
It's not that obvious until you mention it. It's not like 2D dithering, but dynamic dithered interpolation like the dithering used in X-Wing.

I wish more games supported dithering, especially 256 color PC games that push dynamic lighting. (you end up with some heavy posterization and/or faceted flat shading -Tomb Raider opts for posterized shaded lighting more like Doom rather than flat shading and ends up with very heavy banding . . . they support 640x480 in the software renderer, but no dithering -it's especially important for the untextured areas like Lara's skin)



But again, it was never a disadvantage of the PSX, just an added feature that developers could CHOOSE to use if the WANTED it. ;)
PS2 games used it too and a lot of PC games offered it as long as the graphics card did.

256 color framebuffer support would have been nice for the PSX though. Potential for higher resolution without a ton of VRAM being used and hardware dithering to make smooth shading practical. (and much finer than at common highcolor resolutions on the PSX)

sheath
04-29-2011, 03:02 AM
The System 11 is basically the same hardware as the PSX with double the VRAM, so of course the system 11 would be weaker than the model 2 in similar areas to the PSX. (you'd have more freedom with textures with the system 11 though)

The Saturn having closer arcade ports means nothing other than programming skill. (and there's no doubt that Sega had some of the top programmers in the world)

Put them to work on the PSX hardware with similar experience and see what happens. :p

That is hotly contested among gamers, and certified untrue according to game magazines. Sales figures and the general lack of popularity of Sega's games in the West is proof for most. Because of this, I operate from the perspective that Sony's third parties, and Sony themselves, must have been just as good at making games as Sega's internal developers and therefore have no excuses whatsoever.


Besides that, I think you're exaggerating things a bit with "arcade perfect" in terms of color count, polygon count, etc.
Plus, Model 2 games never use smooth shading, so the loss in 256 color mode isn't as obvious. (256 color flat shading vs highcolor shading will look a bit worse for sure, but not as dramatic as gouraud shading -especially for lighting effects)

I need to look at DoA again, but I'd thought the arcade version did use smooth shading. (if not, that's another direct advantage for the otherwise limited 256 color mode on the Saturn)
Again, ironic that the PSX got hardware dithering capabilities that could have been extremely useful for allowing decent smooth shading in a 256 color mode.

I am not sure why you keep bringing up a 256 color mode. All of the games we have mentioned in these discussions average in the 300-800 color range in their Saturn iterations, with peaks in the 1200 colors range (according to SSF and Irfanview). Playstation games were in the same range, but with spikes into 2000 colors on screen


On the whole, those sort of groups exaggerate some things, but they have some good points. (of course, most are blindly going by publicized specs or hype -or by "experience" in games and not from any understanding of the hardware performance itself, so that's not really any good either)

... GTE is a very fixed purpose coprocessor that does nothing but handle polygonal 3D math (calculates vertices). In fact, I think it's a bit overkill as the GPU fillrate practically limits real-world polygon counts to a fraction of what the GTE technically supports. (peak 1M verteces per second, though maybe with pure flat shaded polygons the GPU could come close to making use of all that -probably more like rendering vector lines though)

That's the kind of exaggeration Sony centric technical discussion has produced. The Playstation had one component that could hit a million something or others per second, Sony said it was flat shaded polygons originally, and actually everybody ran wild with that specification. Yet according to the software library, most games were lucky to achieve 80,000 texture mapped and gouraud shaded polygons per second, and Iron and Blood maxed the system out at a reputed 200 thousand.



I know the PSX's max fillrate is 33 Mpixels/s, and that's about 8x the speed of the 3DO (technically the 3DO could peak at 5 Mpixels/s, but that's assuming every fetch is in fast page mode, and that's not realistic, and beyond that, the peak texture speed would only be reached with the CPU totally halted) and even more compared to the jaguar (again, takes full main bus bandwidth to achieve with other processors halted/waiting).
And if the Saturn's VDP1 worked the way I've been led to believe, it would peak at 9.54 Mpixels per second, but that's assuming all fetches are in burst mode. (with fetches as random accesses -but writes still assumed in burst mode- you'd be cut back to 4.77 Mpix/s -assuming the SDRAM's random access response is faster than 140 ns- so real-world performance would be somewhere between the 2)
And even with buffering or caching, the Saturn's VDP1 still would peak at 9.54 M/s highcolor texture rendering.

This kind of disparity in performance just needs a source Kool Kitty. The games don't show this huge of a gap even if these fillrate numbers are true. We should be looking at the 3DO and Saturn having basically the same 3D performance, and then the PS1 displaying double or triple the performance in 3D games at a minimum. This did not happen between the Saturn and PS1 in particular.



The Jaguar has more processing horsepower than either and the N64 has more still by a large margin, but that doesn't mean much of anything on its own.
"processing power" is talking about general purpose computational performance, not graphics performance, etc, etc.
Also, tapping that power can make massive exceptions to raw performance (like the bottlnecks in the Jaguar -especially with JERRY- limiting real world performance substantially).
I mean, the Atari 2600 has almost as much computational power as the NES, but many more factors come into play. ;) (ie non CPU related stuff -or how the VCS eats up about 3/4 of the CPU time with graphics management)

These are fair points. I am sure it has not escaped you that Sony has relied on this sort of "processing power" approach for their marketing for two generations now. There is something to it, even 3D Saturn games display gameplay complexity, hit detection, and AI, that PS1 games rarely even approached. Unlike the PS1's GTE, the Saturn's SH-2s were actually used for these types of "general" computations in games.


However, all this performance stuff isn't what I was even getting at with my previous main points.
My big problem with the Saturn's hardware (from a historical perspective) is that it simply made no sense for a console design. It was extremely poorly streamlined and non-cost effective with a difficult to work with architecture and undesirable feature set on top of that. (and that's just looking from the perspective of the time, not pushing hindsight)
Then there was the lack of tools and poor tools when they did arrive. It was like the Jaguar, but without the excuses of being a small, poorly funded company with years of management problems up to that point. (it was actually WORSE than the Jaguar as at least the Jag had moderately workable developer documentation out by late 1992, a year before the test market . . . that would have been like having preliminary Saturn development docs out by late 1993 in Japan or mid 1994 in the US)

These statements are completely overlooking the trends of the Industry up to and including the Saturn and PS1's launch. You can see it in Arcade hardware and the Jaguar, the Sega CD plus Genesis, Nintendo's advertising that the SNES had multiple coprocessors to make better games with than a simple CPU and Graphics output chip could. Sony did not win because they made a simple system, they won because they gave developers the ability to make games simply. Even that only lasted for a while and then developers were back to trying to code to the metal, and low and behold they started griping about the PS1's limitations too!


"What makes a system successful" is inclusive of several of those other topics. Also, I don't remember arguing anything about "true 3D" whatsoever.

In fact, I've made the point several times that there was no "true" 3D at the time. You had traingle based polygonal 3D and ray-casting/height map engines along with either of those adding scaled/rotated 2D objects for psuedo 3D effects.

The "true 3D" discussion has been embedded in the discussion by the Sony side of things. My point is the same as the one you point out shortly. Sony became the standard by merit of sales, and so their approach to 3D that generation became "close enough" for everybody involved.



It doesn't matter who won, that's not what these arguments are about.

It's a matter of historical interest in how and why Sega ruined their position on the market and how the Saturn played a major part in it.

This statement seems to prematurely eliminate the possibility that anti-competitive mega-corps had anything to do with Sega's downfall.




However, I think it's this that you're looking for:
http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/g...Videogames.pdf
pg. 14

Nope, I was thinking of Sega's financial statement for fiscal 98 (http://www.gamepilgrimage.com/sites/default/files/Media/ar98.pdf).


It's not that obvious until you mention it. It's not like 2D dithering, but dynamic dithered interpolation like the dithering used in X-Wing.

I wish more games supported dithering, especially 256 color PC games that push dynamic lighting. (you end up with some heavy posterization and/or faceted flat shading -Tomb Raider opts for posterized shaded lighting more like Doom rather than flat shading and ends up with very heavy banding . . . they support 640x480 in the software renderer, but no dithering -it's especially important for the untextured areas like Lara's skin)

But again, it was never a disadvantage of the PSX, just an added feature that developers could CHOOSE to use if the WANTED it.
PS2 games used it too and a lot of PC games offered it as long as the graphics card did.

256 color framebuffer support would have been nice for the PSX though. Potential for higher resolution without a ton of VRAM being used and hardware dithering to make smooth shading practical. (and much finer than at common highcolor resolutions on the PSX)

That is extremely arguable, especially since I don't know why you keep going back to the 256 color thing. Saturn and PS1 games, especially during the formative years of these popular opinions, were in the same range of 300-1000 colors on screen.

Team Andromeda
04-29-2011, 03:48 AM
My god man! do you only function in absolutes?! can you only weigh up two factors at a time?

Eg -

Us - The Saturn was difficult to program for, which hurt it
You - 1. PS2 WAS HARD TO DEVELOP FOR THEREFORE YOU ARE WRONG
Us - But there were other factors involved
You - 2. DOES NOT COMPUTE!!!! GOTO 1

Companies should make sure to represent their premier characters in real games, the lessor important ones which are still popular but you don't specifically have plans for in the short term are the ones which you worry about in regards to keeping in the public eye with cameos, as well as thinking about making some plans for using in proper games for the future..

Just because I write something doesn't mean there can't be other extenuating circumstances that I'm not going into detail with.

No one ever tried to deny that the Saturn wasn't hard and expensive to develop/program for, but they again so was the N64, the PS2 and the PS3, but surprise surprise no complaints from you and about those matters.

No One will ever try and make out the Saturn didn't have the best of launches and was lacking with software ready to go, but there again that was the case with the Mega Drive, 3DO, PS, PS2, DC, N64, Cube, Snes launches and surprise surprise no complaints from you, about those consoles launches lacking in number of games ready to go.

People who were gaming in the 1990's would know that the likes of Capcom, Virgin and a host of other companies were allowed to use the Disney licence for their games (not just SEGA) but like SEGA for what ever reasons stopped using the Disney rights.

People who were gaming in the 1990's would know that NCL also liked to outsource it's IP to British and 3rd party developers, not just SEGA and like with SEGA, this was meet with mixed results from time to time.

People who been gaming since the dawn of time , will all have requests and want sequels to fans fav games, but for what ever reasons these will never happen (In the UK there a load that want Stunt Racer II and Elite III) even from the biggest companies with tons of money and loads of Marketshare (I know a few that want Getaway III).

People who been into gaming since the 1980's would all know talent moves on, Studios shut down or get merged , staff leave and want to set up their own companies, not just SEGA but it has happened or happens to every corp in the Industry.


So by all means keep it coming, and I'll by all means highlight you're obvious anti Saturn bias and double standards

Team Andromeda
04-29-2011, 03:51 AM
What other developer? Technosoft developed the first 5 games, and the owner of the IP licensed it to Sega, who developed part 6. The same company was behind the games' development for virtually the whole series. Sega only made the last one.

That was my Point. SEGA only made 1 sequel to Thunder Force, not sequels.

kool kitty89
04-29-2011, 04:08 AM
My god man! do you only function in absolutes?! can you only weigh up two factors at a time?

Eg -

Us - The Saturn was difficult to program for, which hurt it
You - 1. PS2 WAS HARD TO DEVELOP FOR THEREFORE YOU ARE WRONG
Us - But there were other factors involved
You - 2. DOES NOT COMPUTE!!!! GOTO 1
.
:lol:

This post wins the thread. TA just ignores the main points and picks on minor issues in the posts . . . and chops out the text with the main points in it and makes no attempts to respond realistically. ;)




Companies should make sure to represent their premier characters in real games, the lessor important ones which are still popular but you don't specifically have plans for in the short term are the ones which you worry about in regards to keeping in the public eye with cameos, as well as thinking about making some plans for using in proper games for the future..

Just because I write something doesn't mean there can't be other extenuating circumstances that I'm not going into detail with
Yes, primer franchises should get full-fledged and continual installments in addition to spin-offs and cameos.
More niche games tend to lend more to cameos and re-appearances if a market shift merits it. (ie if interest is boosted in a certain genre)

The opposite is true too: shifts in interest in genres can lead to mainstay franchises becoming niche and dying off. (especially games that couldn't make a good 2D to 3D transition -2D SHMUPs in particular had gotten rather worn out by the early 90s even, though that's a genre that could make a good push into 2.5D and 3D too -ie a 2D scrolling shooter in full polygonal 3D graphics or a full 3D railshooter in the style of previous games in the series)

I already said that in a much more drawn-out fashion previously. ;)






The other factors was Sony's hype and shitload of money. Developers grumbled about the PS2 being difficult but they still flocked to it in droves. I find it odd that the PS2 and PS3 have been the exact opposite in terms of ease programming. Both the Cube and Xbox were pretty easy to program yet still could'nt touch the PS2 i in terms of sales.
Exactly: Sony also had a massive userbase and excellent PR at the time. And weak competition on top of all that. (weakened Sega and Nintendo, newcomer MS with less than ideal management and experience on the market -and of course being non-Japanese meaning they had almost no chance in Japan)

Sony could AFFORD to make mistakes with the PS2, Sega never had such leeway with the Saturn. (market slump, declining arcades, strong market competition for current and coming generation, and then all the mistakes they couldn't afford: 32x conflict, screwed up MD/CD/GG management/support, poorly suited hardware for the market with the Saturn -cost ineffective, expensive, difficult to program for, wrong feature set, etc- and then poor development tool support on top of that and screwed up/conflicted management for the Saturn itself from in-house software being pushed, to 3rd party relations, to marketing, etc)





By the way, I've been thinking a lot about the TG-16 recently, and what I been really wondering, and can't work out, is whether it was as good as the Mega Drive at animation, any thoughts on the subject? I would be interested in your input
Gah! This one wins the thread too! :D






Their stuff is personal and nitpicking B.S., at least we made valid points and facts arguing the validity of the TG16 and its battle with the SNES/MD.
WTF??? It's the same sort of thing except we're talking history in a broader sense (more business/politics/bureaucratics/marketing/etc) rather than technical stuff.

Still stubborn people with their heads up their asses rather than making logical contributions to the discussion though. :p








Funny how this played out exactly the other way around from my perspective.
I don't see how it would even be possible to do that the other way around. :daze:

TA seems to fail to recognize that some companies can simply do things that others never could realistically do.

ie if Sega had the PS2 hardware rather than the DC, they wouldn't have gotten nearly as far as they did. The GC and Xbox both probably would have flopped too. (especially if the Sony had hardware more in line with the DC/GC/Xbox)

Nuxius
04-29-2011, 04:27 AM
Playstation true believers seem to conveniently forget that it took the PS1 1.5 years to sell 1 million units in the US as well. We are talking about scraps of the video game industry that established the PS1's "dominance" in software releases early on.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_1996_March_25/ai_18120045/
I seriously doubt that, unless you have some article that states that Canada and Mexico were eating up PSX's by the bucketload. :p

...Nah, even then, you're still wrong, as on Jan. 13, 1997 (close enough to your 1.5 year guess), Sony said that they had sold 3.2 million Playstation's in the US.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_1997_Jan_29/ai_19067781/
3.2 million ≠ 1 million.



As for NFL Gameday, EVERY SINGLE SOURCE I HAVE LOOKED UP STATES 1996 FOR ITS RELEASE! Find ONE accurate source that proves it came out in 1995 and I will retract my statement on it.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_1995_Dec_4/ai_17809970/

retrospiel
04-29-2011, 05:01 AM
I don't see how it would even be possible to do that the other way around. :daze:

Well my stupid cat walked across the keyboard and managed to delete what I intended to write.

I understood tng's post as not only referring to this very discussion but also previous discussions on "the Saturn issue", and not only TA but also other people who enjoy(ed) their Saturn, myself included.

With that premise:



You - SATURN SUCKS!
/spams multitple threads
Us - Oh, come on. Saturn was a really nice little machine. Things could have been very different had Sega not split their resources and fan base with 32X.
You - NO, PPL COULDNT EVEN PORT THEIR CRAPPY PS1 GAMES TO IT. SATURN SUCKS
Us - Because it has a very different architecture, much like PCE, MD and SNES. All in all Saturn was more powerful than PS1. It did things no PS1 game could replicate, see game x, y and z.
You - DOES NOT COMPUTE!!!! I'LL EITHER DERAIL SOME OTHER THREAD OR START A NEW ONE TO DISCUSS THIS IN DETAIL. SEE YOU LATER SUCKERS.

kool kitty89
04-29-2011, 06:00 AM
Well my stupid cat walked across the keyboard and managed to delete what I intended to write.

I understood tng's post as not only referring to this very discussion but also previous discussions on "the Saturn issue", and not only TA but also other people who enjoy(ed) their Saturn, myself included.

With that premise:

You - SATURN SUCKS!
/spams multitple threads
Us - Oh, come on. Saturn was a really nice little machine. Things could have been very different had Sega not split their resources and fan base with 32X.
You - NO, PPL COULDNT EVEN PORT THEIR CRAPPY PS1 GAMES TO IT. SATURN SUCKS
Us - Because it has a very different architecture, much like PCE, MD and SNES. All in all Saturn was more powerful than PS1. It did things no PS1 game could replicate, see game x, y and z.
You - DOES NOT COMPUTE!!!! I'LL EITHER DERAIL SOME OTHER THREAD OR START A NEW ONE TO DISCUSS THIS IN DETAIL. SEE YOU LATER SUCKERS.
Yeah, but that's not the case at all.

The it's not like the SNES, MD, PCE whatsoever.

And it's never been "Saturn Sucks" without qualification, it's a detailed and logical historical discussion and there have been no logical arguments to refute it in the least. (I'm talking about how Sega screwed up by making the Saturn like they did, releasing it like they did, supporting it like they did, and then all the management surrounding that)

The PCE did "suck" due to NEC's total ineptitude at marketing/management outside of Japan (and had some lucky breaks on major screw ups in Japan too, up until the PC-FX).

The Saturn was bad conceptually for the market at the time, it was just wrong in so many ways. Even if the market DID demand powerful 2D over 3D it would still have been a bad design due to the poor cost effectiveness. (and that's only the hardware side of things)

The 32x wasn't a technical marvel either and it was on the opposite end of the spectrum in terms of not catering to the mass-market needs, but on the whole (comparing the 32x to Saturn hardware as configured in 1994), the 32x was BETTER for the 5th gen mass market in a number of respects than the Saturn. (really, the market needed something in-between cost-wise, and far better than either in terms of efficiency -though at least a cut-down Saturn would have gotten the cost and price reasonable)


The Saturn's hardware didn't cause Sega's downfall alone, but it was certainly a part of it. (the overall Saturn situation in 1994-1997 is pretty much what killed Sega in the home console business though)
Sega forcing the horrible May 1995 launch and turning the 32x "hickup" into a genuine mess, screwing up all their other products at the time (and generally getting priorities wrong), pushing for the wrong type of in-house software and considerably weakening ties with developers (tough hardware to work with, weak documentation and tools released rather late -ie early/mid 1995, the harmful May launch, and then the declining market share on top of those problems)


The MD's hardware was far from perfect too, but it was still good enough for the mass market at the time of its release. (and they got lucky with NEC screwing themselves over)



There's no doubt that the PSX is a much more well-balanced machine for the time, not the only way to go to be sure, but the Saturn was not one of those other options to go with. (the Jaguar is more the sort of hardware that Sega needed in terms of overall concept and features -actually it was also killer in 2D to the point of being largely ahead of the Saturn, so that's win win -obviously, we're talking another year of development and far more funding from start to finish, so it could have been better than the Jaguar by a good margin -probably closer to 1/2 way between the jag and the Jag II)

The N64 is a good example too, though several design points would be unrealistic for sega to push. (the RDRAM, customized R4000 based GPU, etc)
Perhaps Sega could have collaborated with Hitachi to develop a custom GPU based on the Super H core and aimed at a similarly flexible design. ;) (or again, more like the jaguar except using an SH derived GPU rather than a totally custom, brand-new GPU)
Note, I'm talking about GPUs in the sense of a general purpose graphics-optimized CPU-like microprocessor not a blitter-like chip as with the PSX's "GPU." (or Saturn VDP1, or N64 RDP -more like the RSP)





Of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with personal preference for the system or its games, but an analytical perspective on historical events.

Team Andromeda
04-29-2011, 06:18 AM
This post wins the thread. TA just ignores the main points and picks on minor issues in the posts

I like setting the matter straight. You and others may not like it, but I do get bored of the miss information/double standards regarding the Saturn or SEGA in general from the likes of you.


Exactly: Sony also had a massive userbase and excellent PR at the time

So did SEGA after the Mega Drive and So did NCL with the Famicom, and like SONY NCL had billions in the bank too. The way you talk is likes both NCL and SEGA should have thrown in the towel the moment SONY entered the Video gaming Industry.


The MD's hardware was far from perfect too

No hardware is perfect, The Saturn and PS2 most prob being the worst in that regards (in the way they went about their GFX) but in the end it will always go back to Market share, not which machine is designed the best or the simplest to develop games on


Now the Saturn did great 2D and great 3D, the PS2 was really powerful inthe right hands. Ok they may have been a bitch to code for and make games for, but the power was there.

Like one developer said, to program for the Saturn was the learn the hardware, to program for the PS was the learn C+ . To me it's a programmers job to get the best out of the hardware he or she is given, that should be their Job .

Its why I hate even to this day , developers trying to use 360 code on the PS3, that is not using the PS3 to it's fullest at all.

jerry coeurl
04-29-2011, 07:10 AM
The Saturn definitely could have had a more developer friendly design, and it was marketed very poorly in the United States. Still, it's home to a number of my favorite games of all time (Burning Rangers, Dragon Force, Guardian Heroes, Mr. Bones, NiGHTS + X-mas NiGHTS, the Panzer Dragoon series, Radiant Silvergun, numerous 2D & 3D fighters, all of Sega's arcade hits, and a ton of shmups), so at the end of the day I still love it.

It definitely soured the general public on the Sega brand, but on the strength of the software alone it's one of my very favorite consoles of all time.

Da_Shocker
04-29-2011, 07:29 AM
Originally Posted by kool kitty89
The System 11 is basically the same hardware as the PSX with double the VRAM, so of course the system 11 would be weaker than the model 2 in similar areas to the PSX. (you'd have more freedom with textures with the system 11 though)

The Saturn having closer arcade ports means nothing other than programming skill. (and there's no doubt that Sega had some of the top programmers in the world)

Put them to work on the PSX hardware with similar experience and see what happens.

Are you saying that Namco couldn't program as well as AM2?

TVC 15
04-29-2011, 07:46 AM
I'd have to see detailed performance figures on VDP1 to be absolutely sure (or to make more specific comparisons -ie exactly HOW much higher the PSX's fillrate is), but from everything I've gleaned on the subject, this certainly seems to be the case.
The only mitigating factor would be if the Saturn's VDP1 does actually have some sort of minimalistic buffering and not just single pixel read/write for texture mapping like the Sega CD, Jaguar, 3DO, most PC software renderers, etc.

I know the PSX's max fillrate is 33 Mpixels/s, and that's about 8x the speed of the 3DO (technically the 3DO could peak at 5 Mpixels/s, but that's assuming every fetch is in fast page mode, and that's not realistic, and beyond that, the peak texture speed would only be reached with the CPU totally halted) and even more compared to the jaguar (again, takes full main bus bandwidth to achieve with other processors halted/waiting).
And if the Saturn's VDP1 worked the way I've been led to believe, it would peak at 9.54 Mpixels per second, but that's assuming all fetches are in burst mode. (with fetches as random accesses -but writes still assumed in burst mode- you'd be cut back to 4.77 Mpix/s -assuming the SDRAM's random access response is faster than 140 ns- so real-world performance would be somewhere between the 2)
And even with buffering or caching, the Saturn's VDP1 still would peak at 9.54 M/s highcolor texture rendering.

The performance should be the same for 8-bit pixels unless VDP1 has some special buffering for 256 color rendering.

And that's not comparing flat shading or gouraud shaded filling. Neither of those requires fetching textures, but just filling regions of the framebuffer with the proper color (or color/shade gradient) and could thus be much faster. However, the PSX GPU has a 32-bit connection to the 33 MHz VRAM bus for a 133 MB/s peak transfer rate vs 28.64 MHz at 16-bits for the Saturn framebuffers giving 57.3 MB/s, so peak fillrate for flat and gouraud shading would have a significant advantage for the PSX. (256 color mode on the Saturn might change things if VDP1 is able to plot 2 8-bit pixels per write, and given how simple that sort of buffering would be -compared to texture source/destination buffering, I'd be surprised if VDP1 didn't have support for that . . . but 256 color mode would be flat shaded only, so gouraud shading is out of the picture).

Actually the other day funnily enough I stumbled on this little technichal nugget on the assembler forum, regarding the Saturns fill-rate performance...


So I`ve been looking through some docs (VDP2 manual is epic), schematics, and running a bit of code... they really went nuts didn`t they? Anyway, the main clock can run at 26.8 or 28.6MHz (for NTSC), and I guess a random read from SDRAM then takes two cycles, with page mode access taking one cycle. Is that right? What about VDP2 banked mode, are there any timing restrictions in setting up the cycle pattern registers?

By drawing large, single-color polygons I was able to measure a fill rate of about 22Mpixels for VDP1 running at 26.8MHz. So I guess that under ideal conditions it can write one pixel per clock. Considering what the manual has to say about high-speed shrink mode, I assume that it normally loads every pixel of the texture even when it is not needed. So the pixel filling performance will drop when using a large texture to draw a smaller on-screen object?

Of course this is under very ideal rendering conditions, and I don't have the technichal know how to prove or disprove but i just thought it was interesting. Seems if this source is proven correct that under ideal conditions the Saturns fill-rate wasn't that terrible actually. Of course I may be wrong it is somebody just doing a few simple tests.

I hope I'm not fuelling any fire here, I really quite enjoy the technical discussions, these early 32-bit consoles are quite fascinating regarding their limitations and how they managed to display 3D in some quite unique ways before GPU began to standardise rendering methods.

It was posted by DamageX in this thread...

t=http://www.assemblergames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3092030920

sheath
04-29-2011, 10:55 AM
On Playstation selling million in six months in NA, that would be Sony's typical "shipped to retailers" as sold statement. When the Dreamcast actually sold 1 million units to consumers by November 1999 Sega issued a press release (http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.video.sega/browse_thread/thread/3c7261754c3f7576/bda462e0698e7a9b?lnk=gst&q=Dreamcast+1+million+sold+Playstation#bda462e0698 e7a9b). Note paragraph two which cites NPD group figures placing the PS1's first million at 1.5 years from launch. This press release was all over the net and nobody contested that figure. IGN even ran a few articles about the Dreamcast selling faster than PS1. I think Daily Radar and Vic Ireland tried to discount it by saying that the Industry had just grown by that much and it wasn't actually an achievement.

Da_Shocker
04-29-2011, 11:34 AM
On Playstation selling million in six months in NA, that would be Sony's typical "shipped to retailers" as sold statement. When the Dreamcast actually sold 1 million units to consumers by November 1999 Sega issued a press release (http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.video.sega/browse_thread/thread/3c7261754c3f7576/bda462e0698e7a9b?lnk=gst&q=Dreamcast+1+million+sold+Playstation#bda462e0698 e7a9b). Note paragraph two which cites NPD group figures placing the PS1's first million at 1.5 years from launch. This press release was all over the net and nobody contested that figure. IGN even ran a few articles about the Dreamcast selling faster than PS1. I think Daily Radar and Vic Ireland tried to discount it by saying that the Industry had just grown by that much and it wasn't actually an achievement.

It's pathetic what Vic Ireland had become during the DC's run. I'm glad his kissing Sony's ass then getting screwed royally by Sony.

Da_Shocker
04-29-2011, 12:00 PM
Oh yeah for the people(TNG 16bitter) mentioning the Saturn port of Daytona and comparing it to Ridge Racer. Someone name me 1 racing game on the N64 or PSX that has all 3 of these features

-300,000 textured map polygons per second
-39 opponents on a track (Ridge Racer has 11)
-60 fps animation

Anyways it would've been interesting to see guys like AM2, AM3 and all these other arcade divisions built games from the ground up on the Saturn rather than port all of these arcade games.

16bitter
04-29-2011, 12:18 PM
According to Next Generation magazine, the installed base of Playstation by October 1996 was 1.74 million in NA, with the Saturn at .9. By January, the Playstation had an installed base of 3.2 million, with the N64 at 1.7 and the Saturn at 1.6:

Who won the video game wars of 1996?

[...]

As expected, it was Nintendo 64 that - coming fast out of the gate, late in the year - made the biggest splash with games such as Mario 64 and Shadows of the Empire. Gamers flocked to the machine in droves, leading many retailer to compare N64 mania with the "Cabbage Patch Kids" craze of the 1980s.
Sony also managed a strong showing for the Christmas period, the result of strong momentum built up over the whole year. With important titles such as Twisted Metal 2, Gameday '97 and Tomb Raider releasing just as Christmas sales were heating upm Playstation was a lock for success.
Taking a totally different (its competitors would say 'desperate') route, Sega found success in a "Three Free" software give-away.

Contrary to Nintendo's claim at system launch, supply of N64s was not limited to a meager 500,000. The extra available units, at least in part to underwhelming sales in Japan and an alleged ramping up of production output, resulted in an impressive North American installed base of 1.7 million

[...]

shortages were prevalent throughout the country

[...]

But despite Nintendo's obvious success, Sony still has to be credited with hanging on to the number one spot as the industry went into 1997. Sony had the most lose as Nintendo 64 arrived, yet Sony has further solidified itself as market leader.

[...]

With a North American installed base of 3.2 million (10 million worldwide), Sony is the undeniable market leader in the next-generation, and the holiday of '96 marked the beginning of its run at mass market success with a software to hardware sales ratio of 5 to 1. In December alone, Sony sold over 1 million Playstations and 3.5 million games, earning the company - for this brief period - more than $12 million a day.

[...]

The buzz around N64 and limited supplies of the machine already failing to meet the overwhelming demand enabled Nintendo to take advantage of their circumstances by practically opting out of the advertising war.

[...]

Beyond the launch campaign, one commercial for Wave Race 64 and a "talking Game Boy" ad late in the fall, Nintendo never even bothered to launch a holiday-specific campaign.
Advertising strategies of Sega and Sony were in stark contrast to that of Nintendo. Leading the way in overall exposure was Sega with a $50 million campaign

Next Generation28

Da_Shocker
04-29-2011, 12:21 PM
I find it funny that they would say that Sega was desperate yet there were times when systems had pack in games. Hell there were times when systems came with 2 friggin controllers.

16bitter
04-29-2011, 12:28 PM
I find it funny that they would say that Sega was desperate yet there were times when systems had pack in games. Hell there were times when systems came with 2 friggin controllers.

Sega was doing well in 1996? Now that, that's funny.

The N64 outsold Saturn in totality in three months.

Da_Shocker
04-29-2011, 12:33 PM
Sega was doing well in 1996? Now that, that's funny.

The N64 outsold Saturn in totality in three months.

They also had a whopping 2 games at launch only fueled by the most hyped game of that decade fuckin Sario 64 aka the greatest thing sicne sliced bread.

16bitter
04-29-2011, 12:40 PM
Oh yeah for the people(TNG 16bitter) mentioning the Saturn port of Daytona and comparing it to Ridge Racer. Someone name me 1 racing game on the N64 or PSX that has all 3 of these features

-300,000 textured map polygons per second
-39 opponents on a track (Ridge Racer has 11)
-60 fps animation


Saturn Daytona doesn't have all those features. So that's a bit of a no-go.

For one, the game doesn't manage 30 frames per second, let alone 60.

It's also letterboxed for NTSC. And even with that caveat, it has horrendous pop-in, with arguably a third of the track coming into view pathetically late.

Bragging about Saturn Daytona on a tech-scale is about like being proud of your kid for passing third-grade math when he's 15.


Anyways it would've been interesting to see guys like AM2, AM3 and all these other arcade divisions built games from the ground up on the Saturn rather than port all of these arcade games.

Oh. You mean it would have been nice if Sega's arcade plans were integrated with its home console work? Yeah, that would have been far preferable.

As Sony showed.

16bitter
04-29-2011, 12:44 PM
They also had a whopping 2 games at launch only fueled by the most hyped game of that decade fuckin Sario 64 aka the greatest thing sicne sliced bread.

Well, if Nintendo was so bad, what does that make Sega?

It is a rather telling point though, that Nintendo made massive amounts of money on a chipset passed up by Sega -- as opposed to the Saturn chipset, which was so ungainly it lost the parent cash even on its sell-thru rate -- with their mascot at the forefront while Sega buried Sonic alive under arcade ports that didn't have much brand-value outside of Japan, as shown by Saturn's lackluster sales.

I'm glad you brought it up, actually.

evilevoix
04-29-2011, 12:46 PM
Daytona USA is indeed shitty looking. I have the CE edition which is a little better and uses the analog controller well so control is 10's graphics are like a 5-6.

Melf
04-29-2011, 12:51 PM
Saturn Daytona doesn't have all those features. So that's a bit of a no-go.

For one, the game doesn't manage 30 frames per second, let alone 60.

It's also letterboxed for NTSC. And even with that caveat, it has horrendous pop-in, with arguably a third of the track coming into view pathetically late.

Bragging about Saturn Daytona on a tech-scale is about like being proud of your kid for passing third-grade math when he's 15.

And yet it still manages to be more fun than Ridge Racer. The real tragedy with Daytona is that each successive version was worse than its predecessor. Daytona CE has better visuals and more tracks, but the gameplay suffers (I just never found the control to be as smooth and fluid as the original). The DC version looks great and is chock full of stuff, but you have to spend the better part of a day tweaking the steering just to make it play decent, and even then it's still off.

evilevoix
04-29-2011, 12:54 PM
I slight Hijack so I apologies here but doesn anyone know where I can get Japanese SCART Cables for the PS1 or the Saturn and so on?

As far as the N64, I really liked that system, Mario 64 was epic, Zelda was a perfect game, the system had some of the greatest games ever made for any time period. IDK why people had the N54 so much, truly an original system.

16bitter
04-29-2011, 12:58 PM
And yet it still manages to be more fun than Ridge Racer.

So did Mario Kart.

The technical issues were what people were looking at, which begs the question of whether it should have been released at all. It gave a very bad impression.

And not necessarily a truthful one. But looking at it next to Ridge Racer, just as it was with VF versus Toshinden (Remix helped, granted, but it also was mea culpa after a net-effect of negativity, and still wasn't nearly as flash as the Sony-side), made the Saturn look like it was lacking power.

I think Sega would have been better off if they had opted for a launch that featured their second-wave, even if that meant releasing in November. I think their fears over price-overhead -- i.e. the idea that they would be stuck at $400 throughout the year, maybe beyond -- precipitated the panicked early launch.

In other words, the Saturn's poor price-structure -- its design issues -- were creating a negative market-space for Sega in America from day one. And they never recovered from it.


The real tragedy with Daytona is that each successive version was worse than its predecessor. Daytona CE has better visuals and more tracks, but the gameplay suffers. The DC version looks great and is chock full of stuff, but you have to spend the better part of a day tweaking the steering just to make it play decent, and even then it's still off.

Emulation.

Da_Shocker
04-29-2011, 01:07 PM
Well, if Nintendo was so bad, what does that make Sega?

It is a rather telling point though, that Nintendo made massive amounts of money on a chipset passed up by Sega -- as opposed to the Saturn chipset, which was so ungainly it lost the parent cash even on its sell-thru rate -- with their mascot at the forefront while Sega buried Sonic alive under arcade ports that didn't have much brand-value outside of Japan, as shown by Saturn's lackluster sales.

I'm glad you brought it up, actually.

I'm glad you bought that up. The PSx dominated worldwide but the N64 ended up finishing 3rd place in Japan. What does that say about America? I find it amusin how u rip into the Saturn for being such a bad chipset yet you have failed to mention the dismal 32X, Pico, SCD, the Nomad and just about every other NEEDLESS add on that drug Sega under. I'm not saying the Saturn was perfect but it wasn't the sole reason Sega failed.