Quantcast

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 95

Thread: Was Saturn doomed to fail or could it somehow have sold more than the PS1?

  1. #16
    Master of Shinobi Gentlegamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,291
    Rep Power
    43

    Default

    Didn't Sega's old buddy EA screw it over by not releasing sports games on Saturn?

  2. #17
    Master of Shinobi
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,436
    Rep Power
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer View Post
    Didn't Sega's old buddy EA screw it over by not releasing sports games on Saturn?
    No, that was the Dreamcast, they wanted exclusivity for all sports titles and Sega just brought that studio that made the DC sports games. For the Saturn you had a shitload of nba/nfl/nhl/madden titles.

  3. #18
    Hedgehog-in-Training Hedgehog-in-TrainingOutrunner
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    572
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer View Post
    Didn't Sega's old buddy EA screw it over by not releasing sports games on Saturn?
    EA has done everything in its power to deconstruct Saturn, from PS1-friendly statements to deliberate game delays

    but none of this is a problem, the biggest and most accurate was that SEGA had no way to sell its products, the logic is very simple, its product does not reach the stores so it does not reach consumers and therefore none of its games gets good sales. the criminal siege in my analysis was closed at all points in that time.

  4. #19
    Mega Driver Hedgehog-in-TrainingMaster of Shinobi Gryson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    1,375
    Rep Power
    62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blades View Post
    Is there an interview that says this?
    It's from a Japanese newspaper quote from ~1996 - I don't have access to it right now. To paraphrase: "We have to sell about eight games per console to make a profit, and we're just managing to do that in Japan, but in North America we're only selling about 4 games per console." Of course, the profits for Sega-published games were much higher than 3rd-party published games, so I imagine the eight-game target was an average.

    Quote Originally Posted by zyrobs View Post
    For the Saturn you had a shitload of nba/nfl/nhl/madden titles.
    Not really - EA came to the party very late and released just a small handful of sports games on the Saturn. Before 1997, I think EA had released only one Madden game and one FIFA game on the Saturn (and a few racing games). Things were the same on the PlayStation, though. Basically, EA was a non-player during the period when Sega and Sony were really neck and neck.

  5. #20
    The Future is Yesterday Hedgehog-in-TrainingESWAT Veteran Leynos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    1999
    Posts
    5,446
    Rep Power
    70

    Default

    If 32X never happened. SS had easy to develop for hardware and better marketing esp in the west with a proper time for a launch window to market. Better pricing in the US. Probably had a good shot to run with PS. I always felt if both SEGA and Nintendo didn't fuck up on their hardware, PS1 would have kinda fallen by the wayside. The next PC Engine.

    Life!? ... What console is that on?

    [PSN] Segata-S //[Switch] FC-SW 3892 5228 2895 //[XBL]Dogi99


  6. #21
    End of line.. Hero of Algol gamevet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    9,544
    Rep Power
    134

    Default

    Sony would have had to really fuck it up, to fail. They had a huge fanbase for their electronics, and their console was seen as one for adults. Nintendo would have been in worse shape, if they had tried to directly compete with Sony that gen. Marketing a family friendly system with carts that wouldn't get destroyed by kids under 12, when they left them laying the floor, was an easier sell than CDs.
    A Black Falcon: no, computer games and video games are NOT the same thing. Video games are on consoles, computer games are on PC. The two kinds of games are different, and have significantly different design styles, distribution methods, and game genre selections. Computer gaming and console (video) gaming are NOT the same thing."



  7. #22
    Master of Shinobi
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,436
    Rep Power
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gryson View Post
    Not really - EA came to the party very late and released just a small handful of sports games on the Saturn. Before 1997, I think EA had released only one Madden game and one FIFA game on the Saturn (and a few racing games). Things were the same on the PlayStation, though. Basically, EA was a non-player during the period when Sega and Sony were really neck and neck.
    You are right, I double checked and it seems that three-letter sports games are divided up between EA, Acclaim, and Sega.

    EA:
    FIFA Soccer 96
    FIFA Soccer 97
    FIFA Road to World Cup 98
    NBA Live 97
    NBA Live 98
    NHL 97
    NHL 98
    Madden NFL 97
    Madden NFL 98

    Acclaim:
    NBA Jam Extreme
    NBA Jam Tournament Edition
    NFL Quarterback Club '96
    NFL Quarterback Club '97

    Sega:
    NBA Action
    NBA Action 98
    NFL '97
    NFL '97
    NHL All-Star Hockey
    NHL All-Star Hockey 98

    EA wouldn't have had any reason to release anything before 96 though, since both consoles only came out in mid-late 95, and there were already two "next gen" machines that never took off - one of them with actual ties to Electronic Arts (the 3DO was conceived by the EA CEO), so I can imagine they weren't in a lot of hurry. EA back then was still an emerging group, not the market-breaking mega-studio it became in the 00s and onwards.
    Last edited by zyrobs; 02-09-2021 at 09:05 PM.

  8. #23
    The Future is Yesterday Hedgehog-in-TrainingESWAT Veteran Leynos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    1999
    Posts
    5,446
    Rep Power
    70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gamevet View Post
    Sony would have had to really fuck it up, to fail. They had a huge fanbase for their electronics, and their console was seen as one for adults. Nintendo would have been in worse shape, if they had tried to directly compete with Sony that gen. Marketing a family friendly system with carts that wouldn't get destroyed by kids under 12, when they left them laying the floor, was an easier sell than CDs.
    If N64 was CD-Rom and Saturn had easy to develop for hardware and good marketing. Sony would have fallen by the wayside like NEC, Phillips, and Panasonic. At that time Panasonic was just as large as Sony. Sony capitalized on Nintendo and SEGA fucking up. Square was practically a 2nd party studio for Nintendo. The only reason they went to Sony was because of the disc space.

    Life!? ... What console is that on?

    [PSN] Segata-S //[Switch] FC-SW 3892 5228 2895 //[XBL]Dogi99


  9. #24
    Raging in the Streets Blades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,626
    Rep Power
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leynos View Post
    If N64 was CD-Rom and Saturn had easy to develop for hardware and good marketing. Sony would have fallen by the wayside like NEC, Phillips, and Panasonic. At that time Panasonic was just as large as Sony. Sony capitalized on Nintendo and SEGA fucking up. Square was practically a 2nd party studio for Nintendo. The only reason they went to Sony was because of the disc space.
    There's a book about how Sony developed the PSX called "Revolutionaries at Sony". In short, implementation of "graphics acceleration" in the CPU die with the geometry transform engine was like nothing seen before. Saturn could never have made such a leap unless Sega was willing to become the leader in home graphics and go head-to-head with SGI in IC fabrication.

    Nintendo just hired SGI to do this for them and got a neutered SGI workstation complete with blurry textures.

  10. #25
    End of line.. Hero of Algol gamevet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    9,544
    Rep Power
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leynos View Post
    If N64 was CD-Rom and Saturn had easy to develop for hardware and good marketing. Sony would have fallen by the wayside like NEC, Phillips, and Panasonic. At that time Panasonic was just as large as Sony. Sony capitalized on Nintendo and SEGA fucking up. Square was practically a 2nd party studio for Nintendo. The only reason they went to Sony was because of the disc space.
    Panasonic was backing 3DO, which was an absolutely expensive console, that could never be a mass market item. Sony, as they've always done (with their electronics), released a console that wasn't the best at everything, but did what was good enough at everything, for a fraction of the costs of the competition. Sony pretty much dropped prices to force out Sega that generation, and did the same to Xbox the following generation. Yeah, it was a dirty tactic, but they've been around long enough in the electronics market, to know how to put out the best bang for the buck.

    The Saturn probably was fairly easy to develop for, until Sega scrapped the original design and started throwing in more hardware to keep up with the PlayStation's design. Sony caught everyone off guard, including Nintendo.
    A Black Falcon: no, computer games and video games are NOT the same thing. Video games are on consoles, computer games are on PC. The two kinds of games are different, and have significantly different design styles, distribution methods, and game genre selections. Computer gaming and console (video) gaming are NOT the same thing."



  11. #26
    The Future is Yesterday Hedgehog-in-TrainingESWAT Veteran Leynos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    1999
    Posts
    5,446
    Rep Power
    70

    Default

    PS4 succeeded for the same reason PS1 did. Took advantage of the competition fuck ups. Wii U and XBO reveal with the DRM. Always online. Kinect and buy a 360 instead garbo. Sony just said PS4 plays used games and was going to price PS4 at $500 but seeing MS doing the $400 tag was a late change. Now PS5 is doing the shit XBO got in trouble for lol (Godfall)

    Life!? ... What console is that on?

    [PSN] Segata-S //[Switch] FC-SW 3892 5228 2895 //[XBL]Dogi99


  12. #27
    End of line.. Hero of Algol gamevet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    9,544
    Rep Power
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leynos View Post
    PS4 succeeded for the same reason PS1 did. Took advantage of the competition fuck ups. Wii U and XBO reveal with the DRM. Always online. Kinect and buy a 360 instead garbo. Sony just said PS4 plays used games and was going to price PS4 at $500 but seeing MS doing the $400 tag was a late change. Now PS5 is doing the shit XBO got in trouble for lol (Godfall)
    MS fucked up by releasing the Xbox One at $500 with the kinect and having inferior hardware. They also didn't pursue exclusive 3rd party titles, like they had done with the 360. The PS4 was also bolstered by the momentum Sony had created with the end of the PS3's run of exclusive titles. They had Uncharted 3, The Last of US, Gran Turismo 6 and Killzone 3 at the end of the console's run, while the 360 kind of fizzled out with the same old, same old.
    A Black Falcon: no, computer games and video games are NOT the same thing. Video games are on consoles, computer games are on PC. The two kinds of games are different, and have significantly different design styles, distribution methods, and game genre selections. Computer gaming and console (video) gaming are NOT the same thing."



  13. #28
    Master of Shinobi
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Age
    39
    Posts
    1,297
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gamevet View Post
    Panasonic was backing 3DO, which was an absolutely expensive console, that could never be a mass market item. Sony, as they've always done (with their electronics), released a console that wasn't the best at everything, but did what was good enough at everything, for a fraction of the costs of the competition.
    Also, Panasonic didn't own the 3DO or get much, if any, of the licensing fees. It had to be sold at a profit which was why it was so expensive initially, and would have limited how much money and resources it was worth them investing. Panasonic bought the M2 outright, which would have addressed this issue, but in the end they apparently decided that going head to head with Sony wasn't worth it. Was that the right choice? Probably, IMO. The M2 seemed to be technically in a strange spot when it would have been released: clearly better than the Playstation but significantly weaker the Dreamcast and later.

  14. #29
    Master of Shinobi
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,436
    Rep Power
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gamevet View Post
    The Saturn probably was fairly easy to develop for, until Sega scrapped the original design and started throwing in more hardware to keep up with the PlayStation's design. Sony caught everyone off guard, including Nintendo.
    The VDP1/2 was the same originally and they still would've had to make development tools out of nothing, so no, it would have been exactly as difficult to develop for the Saturns "original design".

  15. #30
    Hero of Algol
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,114
    Rep Power
    191

    Default

    I love the Saturn for what is but there's no way in hell it would outsell the PS1 in the long run.

    It was underpowered, much harder to develop for, more expensive to produce and lacked lots of hardware features in comparison.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •