The Rise and Fall of Sega 104
jayintune writes "2old2play has a look into Sega's past, examining where they went wrong in the console wars. What did they do to lose their competitive edge, and how did they fall victim to the PS2 and Xbox?" From the article: "Sega started as a small business from which spawned a gaming giant. As with all great Empires, they eventually rot, crumble, and fall from their own ever-grasping hand. After the Genesis they tried to go in too many directions at once and spread their resources too thin. They knew they would have major competition from other game developers, but I bet when they started, they never imagined they would be their own worst enemy."
Playing the "What-if" game... (Score:5, Interesting)
Had Sega not even considered, not for a single moment, the disaster that was the 32X (and to a lesser extent, conveniently skipped over the Mega CD) and instead concentrated on the Saturn, we could well still have Sega in the running today. Sega post-Mega Drive (Genesis) had no real focus; if they had really tried, they could have stayed in the running against Sega (it was, after all, their market with Nintendo to lose). Souring both customers and retailer's pallets, they really were the architects of their own destruction.
It would have helped a great deal had Sega known how to market at all. So many great computer/gaming companies are prone to this: Sega, Acorn, Commodore, SNK...
Re:Playing the "What-if" game... (Score:5, Interesting)
In fact had they not released the Saturn and held on to the 32X/CD combination (which was technically almost as good as the Saturn, plus it was backwards-compatible) for longer they'd probably still be in business now.
Re:Playing the "What-if" game... (Score:4, Insightful)
The biggest problem wasn't the 32X itself, but rather the infighting between Sega of America and Sega of Japan. Sega of Japan, in my opinion, has always been completely inept at running the company, and yet they've always had the power of final say, despite being a company founded by an American.
Sega of America, smartly, IMO, wanted to use the 32X as a bit of a stop-gap between the generations, because they knew it would be a lot more affordable than a PSX or Saturn, and it had decent enough power. Sega of Japan, however, shoved the Saturn down Sega of America's throat. An early and forced launch, no software ready, etc. Not only was America not ready for the Saturn, but of course this alienated retailers like KayBee which didn't stock the Saturn at all as they didn't get stock at launch, and developers as well. All the while, SOJ but B and C-list developers on 32X titles, and didn't devote production facilities to it as they were busy making the Saturn.
Then you have issues like Naka threatening to quit because Bernie Stolar took the NiGHTS engine without his "permission" for SOA to make Sonic Xtreme. SOJ has always been run like shit, and the only reason they managed to stay afloat so long was Sega's American and European successes and Okawa bailing them out as he was a billionaire. In fact, had he not died, he probably still would've been funding them for new R&D.
Re:Playing the "What-if" game... (Score:5, Insightful)
Furthermore, the 32X as a stop-gap was a horrible strategy. Yes a Genesis+32X would cost about $220, or less than a Playstation, but there's no CDROM drive! Worse, the 32X had dual Hitachi chips running at 23 MHz, while the Saturn had dual 28MHz chips. Meaning that the 32X wasn't nearly as good as the Playstation for doing 3D.
It's simple really, the Sega CD sold 6 million units world-wide. Compare that to Sega later stating it would continue to support the Dreamcast if 5 million units sold. Now consider how many more units would have sold in 1993 and 1994 if Sega hadn't distracted the public and itself with the 32X. There would have been more games produced for the system, and more machines sold. Developers wouldn't have been screwed from the debacle, and more likely to support the Saturn. Finally, developers who wanted to develop for the next-gen console would have had an extra year to ready their titles for the Saturn instead of the 32X.
Alternatively, Sega's biggest blunder was not having the Genesis display 128 or 256 colors instead of 64. NEC's PC Engine/TurboGrafx 16 could do 512 at once, at it was released in Japan in 1987. With 128 or 256 colors, the SNES would not have had such a visual advantage, and the Sega CD video would have been much more enticing.
Re:Playing the "What-if" game... (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't misunderstand me. I still agree that one of their biggest downfalls has been the inability to work properly together. I just disagree that we can blame any one side.
Truth is though, SEGA just plain had issues. Like their hardware choices. The Saturn had a weird SMP system that was almost impossible to program for -- only a tiny fraction of the games made for it were able to fully utilize the SMP setup. I still wonder if Genesis couldn't have competed better with SNES's sound-system, though I'm not sure considering that the Gensis's synthesis did at least beat out the PC-Engine's. (IMO they should have both been watching the way sound systems were working. The PC industry should have already shown them how people were interested in things like MOD files, and the SNES's use of a system that kind of vaguely worked like a GUS makes me think that SOMEONE was paying attention. Remember, consoles were supposed to stay ahead of the PC industry in things like that back then.) Not to mention their determination to go with a graphical acceleration method on the Saturn that very few thought would catch on (and which did not catch on -- frankly _I_ could have told them it would continue in the direction it was already on.) Of course, they managed to get all the hardware more or less right on one system, the Dreamcast (relatively easy to program for, good graphics acceleration, good sound system, and so on,) but, then they made the decision to panic and pull out before properly giving it time to start between the people with downloads (come on, a modded PSX was EASIER to copy and download stuff for, yet PSX hasn't quite stopped production even today) and just because the PS2 was overall better at a few things like raw polygon power (yes, the PS2 could look better as things like Xenosaga showed us, but, Soul Calibur showed us that people were underestimating the Dreamcast.)
If they had better marketing, better support for game designers (geez, did they even ONCE approach Square for example? Or, better yet, they should have tried Enix...) and most importantly, better decision making in all fields from hardware to company direction, SEGA might be where Microsoft now is. Instead they are hanging by the tips of their fingers over a their final demise.
Re:Playing the "What-if" game... (Score:5, Insightful)
1. they're a mostly privately held company, making them nigh immune to hostile take-over.
2. They have billions in cash and liquid assets, and no debt, and turn a profit every quarter (how exactly do you go under like this?).
3. Despite the PSP (and all the dozen or so previous challengers), they still OWN the handheld market, and are selling DS Lites faster than they can make them, and despite being "obsolete" the GBA in its various forms ain't doing shabby either.
4. They seemed VERY well received at E3 this year, and have a number hotly awaited titles aimed at launch for the Revolution, a marked improvement over the Gamecube launch (which admittedly they botched, largely by launching the console and then not having must have titles come out for another 18 or so months.) Name them? Let's see: Twilight Princess, Mario Galaxy, Red Steel, and a New Dragon Quest Game. Plus more titles that look really promising.
Of course, Sony hasn't really been doing much to ingratiate itself with the public lately, and there's always a possiblity for some backlash, especially if they don't get their backwards compatibility problems sorted out before launch. Of course, I really don't expect a backlash to happen unfortunately, but there's always hope. I suspect the cattle will line up and fork over their $600 like good little consumers. I'm also disappointed at Capcom buddying up with Microsoft on Live Arcade. I want "Legend of the Mystical Ninja" on virtual console dammit.
Re:Playing the "What-if" game... (Score:1)
Re:Playing the "What-if" game... (Score:1)
Fluffy (Score:5, Informative)
Which isn't to dump on it for having those attributes, but don't expect anything like journalism.
Re:Fluffy (Score:5, Informative)
X-Box? (Score:5, Interesting)
Nintendo had their own fanbase that didn't leave them and didn't buy into the "mature games" fad, mostly because they were actually really young, or really liked FPS games, because the N64 basically only had FPS games and kids games, so that's why Nintendo's still here. That and Game Boy. It was just enough to let Nintendo try again with the Cube, where they got more kinds of games, almost killed the kiddy image, and then still got third place thanks to Microsoft who stole all the FPS games other than Timesplitters (because Free Radical are Nintendo fanboys at heart).
Re:X-Box? (Score:4, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:An empire? (Score:2)
Saturn pricing did them in (Score:5, Interesting)
In the end, Sony took a foothold that eventually crushed Sega. The Sony name became so big in the console world that years later, then the Dreamcast arrived a full year before the PS2, many gamers said, "We'll wait for the PS2." Wow! That shows you how hard Sony got a foothold. And we all know the rest...
Personally, I am sad that Sega isn't in the console wars anymore. I still think they were the best. I still have my Dreamcast and Saturn.
Re:Saturn pricing did them in (Score:3, Insightful)
I think Nintendo is ready for a nice comeback with the Wii. The graphics looked amazing when I looked at Galaxy Mario and Zelda twilight princess. I encourage those to google for the video's? I dont care if the specs aren't as nice as the ps3 or xbox360. The games look good enough and the price and the way its developed for everyone is going to be a huge appeal.
The games will return again after the developers will see more Wii than either the ps3 or xbox
Re:Saturn pricing did them in (Score:1)
Sony just keeps shooting itself in the foot.... too expensive, bad marketing and overly complicated to program for..
long live the big 'N' hehe
Re:Saturn pricing did them in (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, and don't forget Sony lied and over-spec'd the PS2's performance. Marketing by deceit helped keep people from buying a Dreamcast. If you remember, the Dreamcast version of DOA2 loo
Re:Saturn pricing did them in (Score:1)
The Dreamcast was just too little, too late. It was an AWESOME console. Awesome games, the whole 9 yards... but it never really took off, because customers felt burned by the previous 2 generations... and Sony's hype machine. Lets face it, b
Confusion (Score:4, Insightful)
too many mediocre games (Score:4, Interesting)
When I was younger, I'd see Sega commercials on TV, but I never saw much in the way of games that were truly interesting. Looking back, there's still just a handful that were released, and many involved the myriad "peripheral-crazy" systems. I was mildly interested back in the Genesis days, and there were some cross-platform games that were genuinely better on the Genesis. But that was it, for me, until the Dreamcast.
In hindsight, I personally think the Dreamcast could've done very well if for 2 things -- Sega had added another thumbstick to the right side, and they hadn't thrown all their money and goodwill away in the mid 90's. It's still a damn good system, and given the short amount of time it was on the market it has a surprising amount of good games. But given the bad timing and the lack of popularity of its previous systems, it's not surprising that even a good console fails.
Re:too many mediocre games (Score:1)
Re:too many mediocre games (Score:1)
They did. Three for the GBA and one for the DS.
Re:too many mediocre games (Score:3, Insightful)
The dreamcast in all honesty looks better than the PS2 (Soul calibur anyone?) and has some awesome games, but it was way too far ahead of it's time. It had online play and all the stuff today we consider vital, the problem was Sega brought it out before anyone else and never fully exploited it.
Re:too many mediocre games (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:too many mediocre games (Score:1)
Re:too many mediocre games (Score:2)
I don't own either system, but I have a few games for each because I know people who have them (GT4, Xen
Re:too many mediocre games (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:too many mediocre games (Score:3, Interesting)
I still play DC and PS2 depending on whose house I'm at. Mostly GT4 or Katamari on PS2, and DOA2 or Rush:2049 on the DC.
Like I said, PS2 has a lot more polygons, but in genera
Re:too many mediocre games (Score:2)
Yeah that explains Nintendo's pulling out of the console market. It's not Sony's fault if Sega can't market their products properly. Nintendo even today make a killing off 'fun' games.
but it was way too far ahead of it's time. It had online play and all the stuff today we consider vital, the problem was Sega brought it out before anyone else and never fully exploited it.
In other words, they failed to market their prod
Ummm.... (Score:1, Informative)
Sega their own worst enemy and Sony's bullshit... (Score:4, Interesting)
1) Sega was their own worst enemy. With the release of the Sega CD, then the 32X and the Sega Saturn no one knew what worked with what and those that bought the Sega CD probably felt stupid when they saw the Saturn. Sega splintered their own market by trying to make Genesis into a wanna be PlayStation. Nevermind that the Saturn itself seemed poorly supported and thought out. The upgrade path should have been Genesis -> Dreamcast, but Sega farked that up pretty good.
2) Sony, the original PS and their PS2 bullshit. Sony piled on the type about the Emotion Engine and the PS2's rendering abilites (note that it was Microsoft and not Sony that made the claim about rendering Toy Story level graphics in real time). The Dreamcast sold well initially and Sega couldn't keep up with demand, but it lost steam after the PS2 announcement and, if I recall, games were hard to come by in the first year. Sega just didn't have the financial strength to support Dreamcast after the failures of the SegaCD and Saturn and it is my understanding that they took a chance with the Dreamcast and the chance didn't pay off. You can still find many used Dreamcast units at your local EB Games store that were traded in for PS2s.
Re:Sega their own worst enemy and Sony's bullshit. (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't think it's wise to wait ten years between console roll outs. They messed up with the CD/32x/Satrun but something should've come between the two.
Very true (Score:1)
Re:Sega their own worst enemy and Sony's bullshit. (Score:2)
Truth be told real game makes who write hear state that the gamecube has the best graphics and some games look better on the gamecube. Sony knows how to hype.
However I think the ps3 might go the way of the 3do. Wii is likely to be a hit
Re:Sega their own worst enemy and Sony's bullshit. (Score:3, Informative)
People keep on claiming this, but miss the truth. Yes, Sony never said the PS2 could render Toy Story in real time. They said it could render the cutscenes from Final Fantasy 8 in real time. Final Fantasy 8's cutscenes were about as complex graphically as Toy Story, so it's a completely equivilent claim.
Yes, Sony never said "Toy Story" but they might as well have. They claimed the same thin
Re:Sega their own worst enemy and Sony's bullshit. (Score:2)
Yes, Sony never said "Toy Story" but they might as well have. They claimed the same thing.
Render sure.. but at what frame rate?
CD-X (Score:2)
Sega don't make mistakes (Score:1)
Sega Sammy's arcade and home consumer products were actually boosting a disapointing pachinko buisness.
Re:Sega don't make mistakes (Score:2)
Re:Sega don't make mistakes (Score:1)
Re:Sega don't make mistakes (Score:1)
Re:Sega don't make mistakes (Score:1)
SEGA Channel (Score:1)
16 bit wars... (Score:5, Interesting)
1. SEGA FAILED TO LISTEN TO THEIR CONSUMERS DURING THE TRANSITION TO 16 TO 32 BITS
2. EXTERNALITIES FINISHED SEGA
Let's analyze Sega's success during the 16bit era:
* Successfully executed a 1st moving advantage move: By the time Nintendo came out with the SNES, Sega was developing their 2nd Generation software (Sonic, Shinobi 3, Madden, etc.). Let's be realistic, their 1st gen stuff (Altered Beast, Super Thunder Blade, Golden Axe was very very bad, they were basically technical showcases. No exciting gameplay whatsoever.) The big exception is Phantasy Star II. It served the purpose of turning heads.
* Tapped on the American thirst for high end Sports Simulations: EA's lineup (Madden, college and other franchises) were the start of advanced sports franshises (The NES offerings featured many Super Deformed characters, other than Tecmo's entries, there were no serious sports on the NES).
* Started the successful bashing of Nintendo: While Nintendo NEVER acknolwedged Sega as a competitor (Big example: Nintendo did not Advertise on any Videogame publications, they stuck to Nintendo Power), Sega exploited with "Sega Does what Nintendon't" campaign, the "Blast Processing" campaign against the SNES (which was all Bull... a good lesson that has been applied by Sony in the past generations). This set up the precedent that you can win or slow down a platform on pure marketing speculation.
* Capitalized on a Mainstream Platform: The SNES featured a slower more processor that was more tailored for games, while the 6800 on the Genesis was a more general-purpose and well known platform- This allowed many western developers from Amiga and Commodore to jump and put out impressive software - up to that point, many people thought that American/European developers were not capable of putting out quality products.
* Played ball with 3rd parties: This is partly Nintendo's own making (Read "Game Over"). Once Sega became a "friendlier" player with 3rd parties, the "crown jewel" developers started publishing games on the Genesis. Nintendo managed to hold off Capcom on Street Fighter II (The main Reason why the SNES caught up with the Genesis), but ultimately SFII made it to the Genesis.
After all this success, it was a dogfight, Sega started preparing for the next generation, and Nintendo tried to defuse Sega by speculating on a Nintendo CD (The Phillips/Sony debacle that interestingly was the root of the creation of the Playstation)
At this point Sega put out probably their best technological lineup (examples: Vectorman, Treasure's Gunstar Heroes, Sonic 3 etc.) but Nintendo had the goves off with Starfox, FFIII, the upcoming Donkey Kong, etc. Sega thinks they can replicate 1st mover advantage with a CD platform. Sega CD comes out, and other than Silpheed and Sonic CD and Starwars, the platform is plagued with FMV Crap. So they started developing a next gen 2d platform (Saturn). (ERROR 1: Instead of looking at the future, they decided to fight Nintendo on 2D - They didn't see Virtua Fighter at the arcades???).
At some point during Saturn's development, the biggest mistake is made. For some reason somebody thinks that they can release an 32 bit "add-on" to capitalize on the Genesis installed base. The 32x is born. Sorry Sega, no add on has been successful!!! (Interestingly, some people have not learned this lesson yet; read: Microsoft's Xbox 360's HD-DVD rumored add on).
At this point, the consumer must be very confused. Should we wait for Saturn or buy 32x??? I would have paid money to see those marketing staff meetings.
Final Nail in the coffin: Sony unveils the PlayStation (externality) and Sega rushes to add 3D capabilities to their pure 2D platform. With an overpriced platform that is very hard to program for, Sega manages to release many beautiful games (some of which never make it to our shores). The rest is history, Nintendo blunders again by undermining 3rd parties and ignoring the media leap, and it's all Sony.
Let's hope that we have a dogfight again soon... we will stand to win like we did during the 16bit days.
Re:16 bit wars... (Score:5, Informative)
1. It's not rumored, it was offically announced long ago. http://www.xbox.com/en-US/community/news/events/e
2. It's a movie addon, not a game addon, so it doesn't matter at all to the overall xbox 360 strategy whether it succeeds or fails. Microsoft has said that they will not have hd-dvd games. Compare it to buying the dvd remote for a ps2 or an xbox 1 (or that whacky silver gamecube put out by some third party which also played dvds), don't compare it to the 32x. It simply allows you to watch hd-dvd movies, nothing more or less.
Re:16 bit wars... (Score:2)
Re:16 bit wars... (Score:2)
What was the selling point for upgrading from the 16 bit
Re:16 bit wars... (Score:2)
Can't really fault the console division for that. A lot of the Genesis/Megadrive launch titles were just near-perfect translations of popular Sega arcade games.
Re:16 bit wars... (Score:2)
Yeah, he's pulling "very very bad, they were basically technical showcases. No exciting gameplay whatsoever" straight from his ass. I bought the Genesis (as with many others) specifically FOR those titles, I loved the arcade titles and the Genesis did a bang-up job of capturing the gameplay. Nintendo had very little of that arcade-y feel with their
Re:16 bit wars... (Score:2)
Re:16 bit wars... (Score:2)
The 65816 (a 16-bit kludge of the 6502) in the SNES was *not* more tailored for games, and was probably the most inferior component of the SNES. The SNES had better sprite graphics hardware (with cool effects like scaling) and better sound hardware (most games implemented something similar to MIDI synthesizer with s
What competitive edge? (Score:1)
Re:What competitive edge? (Score:2)
Re:What competitive edge? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What competitive edge? (Score:1)
You're missing the point... (Score:1)
The point is the US market is the single largest games market in the world. Being #1 in the US qualifies you as a contender in fiscal terms, matters of taste are irrelevant.
Re:You're missing the point... (Score:1)
Genesis left hanging? (Score:1, Interesting)
SEGA caused the Playstation (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:SEGA caused the Playstation (Score:2, Informative)
I also don't know of a single game that spent any tim
Re:SEGA caused the Playstation (Score:1)
More, as-yet unlisted reasons Sega hurts (Score:2)
2) Shenmue: $20,000,000 on one video game. Still the record as far as I know. There was no way ANY game, especially for the Dreamcast, could ever have made that much money back then. This is seen by some as the biggest single reason for Sega's buyout by Sammy.
Re:More, as-yet unlisted reasons Sega hurts (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason Sega failed was (1) Their VMUs were almost useless, due to short lived batteries, and (2) They pissed their pants when facing another Sega VS. Sony scenario, which wasn't helped by Microsoft entering the fray, and (3) They went with GD-ROM instead of DVD as a storage medium. Sony and Microsoft both capitalized on their abilities to act as "all in one" entertainment systems, complete with DVD playback.
The biggest problem, however, was that Sega didn't learn enough from the Master System's failings, they came close to success with the Megadrive, until Ninendo released their Super Famicom system. Then it went back to reinventing the wheel, waiting to see if market share was available (despite a reluctance to properly promote their consoles), then bailing on it when the bean counters couldn't see why the systems weren't selling. The 32X was an *okay* addon peripheral, but there was so much backing behind the Saturn, that pretty much everyone who bought it were left in the dark with a high tech paperweight. There was so much potential in the Saturn, but they failed to claim their niche, losing to Sony, which resulted in the same. There was even potential in the SegaCD, but again, they failed to market it sufficiently/properly. When you have that many gamers buying into that much hardware, eventually your gamers will give up on you when you fail to support it, if at all. Even Atari demonstrated this fact.
In the end, Sega's failing is simply explained: They lost their focus, and gave up far too easily at the slightest sign of adversity.
And before anyone mods me troll, I put in a few months at Sega of America as a QA tester, and watched as all of the above took place, back in the Genesis days. You wouldn't believe the time they wasted on the SegaCD as a "FMV Box", when it's overall graphical prowess was on a par with, if not obviously superior to the Super Famicom in the day. It was downright embarassing to see how they operated.
Re:More, as-yet unlisted reasons Sega hurts (Score:1)
kudos !
Re:More, as-yet unlisted reasons Sega hurts (Score:2)
The fundamental problem was the Genesis' 64 color limit. Eventually developers alternated colors on the odd and even frames to fake more colors, but that doesn't work on fast moving games or FMV. The TurboGrafx 16 could do 512 colors. If the Genesis had th
Re:More, as-yet unlisted reasons Sega hurts (Score:2)
Re:More, as-yet unlisted reasons Sega hurts (Score:2)
The NEMO was an interesting idea. Load times would have stunk, but I assume the tapes would have had data capabilities too, meaning lots and lots of graphics, limited only by whichever 1.72MHz or 3.58MHz chip ran the box. Getting third party developers would have been the greatest challenge, an
Re:More, as-yet unlisted reasons Sega hurts (Score:2)
I played the NEMO prototype (which was a monstrous wirewrap board) back in 1990 or so, and it was a fairly impressive experience. The data took up a sm
Re:More, as-yet unlisted reasons Sega hurts (Score:1)
It was not the 32X, Saturn or Dreamcast. (Score:5, Interesting)
What did the arcade player see when he hit the arcades? Space Harrier, Outrun, Powerdrift, Afterburner, Thunderblade, Galaxy Force, Super Hang On, Super Monaco GP, Virtua Fighter, Daytona USA (along with a stream of other mostly inferior 2D affairs). But any of those games really suffered as home conversions, because SEGA's home consoles could not afford the twin-68000 supercaler and polygonizer graphics of SEGA's arcade boards.
What SEGA should have done, instead of 32X, is to release a powerful home console with 2x68000 plus custom chips that could do all the effects of the arcades. Yes, it would have been an expensive console, but yet again it would be the only console that one could play a decent game of Outrun. And later they should have released a polygonal beast like the PS1.
SEGA did a similar mistake with Commodore: when the world was going 3D, both SEGA and Commodore insisted on powerful 2D graphics without any support for 3D. Meanwhile, the PC world got Wolfestein 3D and Doom, while the console world got PS1.
Nintendo did not do the same mistake. After their best console ever (the Nintendo SuperNES) which had a limited number of special 3D tricks (mode 7, superfx chip), they released a proper 3D console, the Nintendo 64, which had some awesome games.
The 32X (Score:2)
Re:The 32X (Score:2)
The 32X had arcade perfect ports of Space Harrier and Afterburner
No, the 32X ports of Space Harrier and Afterburner where much less than 'arcade perfect'. I know it not only because I own the systems and I was a frequent arcade player, but because I can run those versions side by side with the arcade version (emulated on my PC) and see the differences. The 32X versions have smaller sprites and no so smooth animation.
Furthermore, the 32X versions came long after the games were arcade hits.
so did the
3D or not 3D... (Score:3, Informative)
I think you are confused about what happenned to Commodore (by which, I assume you mean the Amiga line). The Amiga always had superior 2D graphics, from the start in 1985. The PC wasn't able to touch it until about 1993 or 1994, when VGA cards became ubiquitous in the PC scene. Even then, you were limited compared to what the Amiga could do, because the VGA card was essentially
Re:3D or not 3D... (Score:2)
I think you are confused about what happenned to Commodore (by which, I assume you mean the Amiga line).
It is funny that you think I am confused with so many mistakes/innacuracies from your side. Read on. By the way, I own an Amiga 500, 600 and 1200.
Amiga had the best sound - 4 channel FM stereo as well as digital sample playback - since 1985
Amiga had 2 channels of stereo sound and 4 channels of mono sound. It did not have an FM sound chip (like the Atari ST, for example). The maximum hardware pla
Re:3D or not 3D... (Score:2)
Thanks for the clarification here - I didn't mean to imply that there was an FM sound chip, which I know there wasn't - everything else you wrote is correct.
Wrong. It is the other way
Re:3D or not 3D... (Score:2)
The custom chip was called the Akiko, which was responsible for two things:
Dreamcast (Score:4, Interesting)
It's only sad that the last commercial games for the DC were created in 2001 or so.
I would have loved to see how a recent game developed for DC would compare to a recent PS2 game; I dare bet the DC's version would have blown away the PS2's.
I guess the most imporantly reason for Sega losing out on the (IMHO) inferior PS2 is the piracy; you could use burned CD's without any expensive hardware modification. They may have failed at marketing, but from what I can see they just didn't make enough money from the games to throw at marketing anyway.
Re:Dreamcast (Score:2, Interesting)
I bought a used DC for about 40 bucks back then, just for Jet Set Radio and Soul Calibur, and boy were those two games worth it. I do fail to understand the hype surrounding Shenmue, though.
Re:Dreamcast (Score:1)
Re:Dreamcast (Score:2)
I totally agree, even now I still much prefer the DC over the PS2. I dunno what's going on (maybe it's something in the water) but everyone seems to be in Dreamcast nostalgia mode. IGN has relaunched their DC section and I keep seeing Dreamcast nostalgia threads all over the web. I guess people are now starting to realise that they really miss the "Old" Sega.
Sadly "New" Sega aren't much cop IMHO. They've had a few classic titles, particularly OutRun2 and the
Are they? (Score:2)
Re:Are they? (Score:1)
NFL (Score:2)
pax romana? (Score:2)
Hmm it seems someone doesnt know what Pax Romana means. The console war was hardly peaceful , Sega was not on top and it has nothing to do with Romans.
Rise and Fall and Rise (Score:2)
I loved the Master System, Genesis, Game Gear, and Saturn hardware as much as the next geek. But Sega is in a much better place now. Everyone's living room. May it always be so.
What really loved was the Games anyway, Now we can all l
Not poor SEGA... (Score:1)
The honest truth (Score:2)
The DreamCast had crazy great capabilities, well beyond that of anything else in that gen, but people weren't ready to plunk down hard earned cash to make it happen. We had a DreamCast in our home, and we loved it. But can you imagine if the DreamCast came out when downloadable or online play was possible a
First isnt always a good thing... (Score:2)
For Factual information on the Fall of SEGA... (Score:2, Informative)
SEGA Base [eidolons-inn.net]
Essentially, I get from this that a lack of co-operation between the American and Japanese branches were it's biggest problem. (Oh, and Nintendo screwing them over with the Congress didn't help either.)
The Dreamcast would have had to have been a spectacular success to pull SEGA out of its financial doldrums, and the people at SEGA seemed to know it was a longshot (see the following article):
"Come on, Mr. Yukawa, get up!" [slate.com]
Poor summary of a complicated company (Score:2)
The History Of Sega (Score:1)
It has many articles on what various factors led to the downfall of Sega, as well as what made it so great and which games were worthwhile on all of the various systems (with a reasonable bias towards the Genesis).
I think that the single greatest achievement of the Genesis-era Sega was The Sega Channel. It provided me with years of entertainment as a rambunctious kid, and no facet o