posted by ASSEMbler on Feb 5, 2009:
http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/n...-much-against-sega-abandoning-hardware/?biz=1
Looks like he thought that Sega should have never quit the console business.
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
posted by sabre470 on Feb 5, 2009:
The PSX success over the Saturn shifted consumers from SEGA to Sony. Despite the mass of AAA titles on Dreamcast consumers lost trust in SEGA but hey look at Sony today, I love my PS3 (now) but in the beginning it was not that brilliant and it could be easily labelled as the Saturn of the 21st Century (in terms of complexity). Although now I think it's a great machine just as the Saturn was but full potential is hard to tap.
But look at Nintendo, IMO the N64 and the GC were poor consoles (software wise) when you compare them to the SFC or the PSX but Big N managed a brilliant comeback with the Wii, though I still need to try to play my Wii on a regular basis, it's pretty, white but a bit useless for me as a hardcore gamer. But fun with friends.
Yes abandoning hardware was a sane business decision, for fans definitely not but hey shit happens... SEGA still makes arcade hardware AFAIK so never say never the industry is constantly on the move, maybe one day who knows, for now there is enough players on the market and SEGA still needs to refocus itself on making good games.
The Dreamcast was IMHO the best hardware SEGA came up with, I don't think hardware was ever the problem either, rivalry between the US and Japan was always a problem with SEGA, R&D spending not focused enough on common goals, poor marketing on the DC maybe??? SEGA was full of problems and not aligned, look at Sonic Xtreme how much was wasted there???
ASSEMbler said:
http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/n...-much-against-sega-abandoning-hardware/?biz=1
Looks like he thought that Sega should have never quit the console business.
The PSX success over the Saturn shifted consumers from SEGA to Sony. Despite the mass of AAA titles on Dreamcast consumers lost trust in SEGA but hey look at Sony today, I love my PS3 (now) but in the beginning it was not that brilliant and it could be easily labelled as the Saturn of the 21st Century (in terms of complexity). Although now I think it's a great machine just as the Saturn was but full potential is hard to tap.
But look at Nintendo, IMO the N64 and the GC were poor consoles (software wise) when you compare them to the SFC or the PSX but Big N managed a brilliant comeback with the Wii, though I still need to try to play my Wii on a regular basis, it's pretty, white but a bit useless for me as a hardcore gamer. But fun with friends.
Yes abandoning hardware was a sane business decision, for fans definitely not but hey shit happens... SEGA still makes arcade hardware AFAIK so never say never the industry is constantly on the move, maybe one day who knows, for now there is enough players on the market and SEGA still needs to refocus itself on making good games.
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
posted by saturn_worship on Feb 5, 2009:
oh....those JAPANESE SAMURAIS...'til the last breath..
oh....those JAPANESE SAMURAIS...'til the last breath..
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
posted by Barc0de on Feb 6, 2009:
there's so many things wrong but i m too tired to make arguments, someone please take the lead.
sabre470 said:
The Dreamcast was IMHO the best hardware SEGA came up with, I don't think hardware was ever the problem either, rivalry between the US and Japan was always a problem with SEGA, R&D spending not focused enough on common goals, poor marketing on the DC maybe??? SEGA was full of problems and not aligned, look at Sonic Xtreme how much was wasted there???
The PSX success over the Saturn shifted consumers from SEGA to Sony. Despite the mass of AAA titles on Dreamcast consumers lost trust in SEGA but hey look at Sony today, I love my PS3 (now) but in the beginning it was not that brilliant and it could be easily labelled as the Saturn of the 21st Century (in terms of complexity). Although now I think it's a great machine just as the Saturn was but full potential is hard to tap.
But look at Nintendo, IMO the N64 and the GC were poor consoles (software wise) when you compare them to the SFC or the PSX but Big N managed a brilliant comeback with the Wii, though I still need to try to play my Wii on a regular basis, it's pretty, white but a bit useless for me as a hardcore gamer. But fun with friends.
Yes abandoning hardware was a sane business decision, for fans definitely not but hey shit happens... SEGA still makes arcade hardware AFAIK so never say never the industry is constantly on the move, maybe one day who knows, for now there is enough players on the market and SEGA still needs to refocus itself on making good games.
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
posted by Taucias on Feb 6, 2009:
Irony, thy name is Sega...
It amazes me how much Sega fell apart after they quit making hardware, when software was always their strength.
ASSEMbler said:
http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/sonic-creator-was-very-much-against-sega-abandoning-hardware/?biz=1
Looks like he thought that Sega should have never quit the console business.
Irony, thy name is Sega...
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
posted by Barc0de on Feb 6, 2009:
now that I m all good..
Also, the N64 and GC have so far had more good games than the Wii. Big sales don't mean shit, same as the PS1. There's actually more games for me on the n64 and the GC than the PS1 and PS2 that I consider fun. Also, keep in mind that many of the NES/SNES titles were just crap. Those platforms have many games because they were popular, not because the other way around! They didn't become popular because they had many crap games!
now that I m all good..
The Saturn/PS3 comparison is very inaccurate. The Saturn had fundamental architectural issues that hindered its ability to produce 3D games - the PS3's architecture is supported by good libraries from day one and isn't really THAT complex to manipulate, it just contains an older technology in its graphics subsystem compared to the competition. Considering the wide use of CELL processors they are well documented and applications are not hard to write for those in the know.
The PSX success over the Saturn shifted consumers from SEGA to Sony. Despite the mass of AAA titles on Dreamcast consumers lost trust in SEGA but hey look at Sony today, I love my PS3 (now) but in the beginning it was not that brilliant and it could be easily labelled as the Saturn of the 21st Century (in terms of complexity). Although now I think it's a great machine just as the Saturn was but full potential is hard to tap.
But look at Nintendo, IMO the N64 and the GC were poor consoles (software wise) when you compare them to the SFC or the PSX but Big N managed a brilliant comeback with the Wii, though I still need to try to play my Wii on a regular basis, it's pretty, white but a bit useless for me as a hardcore gamer. But fun with friends.
Also, the N64 and GC have so far had more good games than the Wii. Big sales don't mean shit, same as the PS1. There's actually more games for me on the n64 and the GC than the PS1 and PS2 that I consider fun. Also, keep in mind that many of the NES/SNES titles were just crap. Those platforms have many games because they were popular, not because the other way around! They didn't become popular because they had many crap games!
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
posted by sabre470 on Feb 6, 2009:
Sure big sales doesn't mean shit, I agree Wii doesn't offer a lot of great games, let's just say that however good the N64 & GC were they didn't get me too excited. I'm glad you have a different opinion, I'm just sharing mine. Still RE and RE4 got me hooked on my GC for hours.
I think it is fair to say that my preference in term of console generation goes to the MD/SFC/PCE generation so that may hinder my judgement on other generations. Although I am really into the 360 and PS3, I love stuff like GoW and for the first time in my life I finished a GTA!!!
I don't know if I am a Japanese Samurais but I'm learning the language so who knows???
Yeah OK I could have picked up a better example... Agreed Saturn had fundamental problems.
Barc0de said:
now that I m all good..
The Saturn/PS3 comparison is very inaccurate. The Saturn had fundamental architectural issues that hindered its ability to produce 3D games - the PS3's architecture is supported by good libraries from day one and isn't really THAT complex to manipulate, it just contains an older technology in its graphics subsystem compared to the competition. Considering the wide use of CELL processors they are well documented and applications are not hard to write for those in the know.
Also, the N64 and GC have so far had more good games than the Wii. Big sales don't mean shit, same as the PS1. There's actually more games for me on the n64 and the GC than the PS1 and PS2 that I consider fun. Also, keep in mind that many of the NES/SNES titles were just crap. Those platforms have many games because they were popular, not because the other way around! They didn't become popular because they had many crap games!
Sure big sales doesn't mean shit, I agree Wii doesn't offer a lot of great games, let's just say that however good the N64 & GC were they didn't get me too excited. I'm glad you have a different opinion, I'm just sharing mine. Still RE and RE4 got me hooked on my GC for hours.
I think it is fair to say that my preference in term of console generation goes to the MD/SFC/PCE generation so that may hinder my judgement on other generations. Although I am really into the 360 and PS3, I love stuff like GoW and for the first time in my life I finished a GTA!!!
I don't know if I am a Japanese Samurais but I'm learning the language so who knows???
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
posted by neoblast on Feb 6, 2009:
hell, naka's right. Dreamcast wasn't selling that bad actually and a lot of people played it. I guess they would have found profits if they had let dreamcast go live on a few more years, it could compete perfectly with the ps2 and who knows if they could have unleashed more potential than the showed in shenmue 2.
It was Peter Moron the on who really killed the dreamcast, I have always thought there was something fishy about him getting that near to microsoft at those days...
hell, naka's right. Dreamcast wasn't selling that bad actually and a lot of people played it. I guess they would have found profits if they had let dreamcast go live on a few more years, it could compete perfectly with the ps2 and who knows if they could have unleashed more potential than the showed in shenmue 2.
It was Peter Moron the on who really killed the dreamcast, I have always thought there was something fishy about him getting that near to microsoft at those days...
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
posted by Jamtex on Feb 6, 2009:
Back on topic, Dreamcast, Segas best machine? I think not... it was probably the cleanest designed machine and you could argue that the Sega Megadrive / Genesis did better in the west and the Sega Saturn did better in Japan (don't make me pull sales figures up to prove it).
As for Segas other machines, the SG100 was little more then a generic Z80 + Texas Instruments GPU machine (hello Colecovision, MSX, etc), the Mark III / Master System was a nice machine but suffered from a lack of third party support, the Megadrive was nearly there but suffered from nearly being an arcade board but was horriblely crippled taking years before programmers got the best from the machine and the Mega CD was badly sold, NEC knew how to do a CD-ROM upgrade, hello Duo... plus the Super 32X was a nice idea but was a bit too late, underpowered (considering the Saturn...) and lacked decent software... the Saturn was probably the best machine that Sega did but they crippled that with a horrid mish mash of components that only a few companies really got to grips with.
SOA and SOJ seemed to be fighting each other a lot of the time which really made things messy. Although they should have kept making hardware, I can't see what they would have done, either a machine based on a soup up Naomi set up or a generic PC based system ala Xbox.
You are right there.
Barc0de said:
Also, the N64 and GC have so far had more good games than the Wii.
Yes but you are a self confessed raving nintendo fanboy so your opinion is going to be biased. I am sure if you sat down a wrote an objective list of fun games on the N64/GC and PS/PS2 then I am still sure the PS/PS2 would still have more games...
Big sales don't mean shit, same as the PS1. There's actually more games for me on the n64 and the GC than the PS1 and PS2 that I consider fun.
Back on topic, Dreamcast, Segas best machine? I think not... it was probably the cleanest designed machine and you could argue that the Sega Megadrive / Genesis did better in the west and the Sega Saturn did better in Japan (don't make me pull sales figures up to prove it).
As for Segas other machines, the SG100 was little more then a generic Z80 + Texas Instruments GPU machine (hello Colecovision, MSX, etc), the Mark III / Master System was a nice machine but suffered from a lack of third party support, the Megadrive was nearly there but suffered from nearly being an arcade board but was horriblely crippled taking years before programmers got the best from the machine and the Mega CD was badly sold, NEC knew how to do a CD-ROM upgrade, hello Duo... plus the Super 32X was a nice idea but was a bit too late, underpowered (considering the Saturn...) and lacked decent software... the Saturn was probably the best machine that Sega did but they crippled that with a horrid mish mash of components that only a few companies really got to grips with.
SOA and SOJ seemed to be fighting each other a lot of the time which really made things messy. Although they should have kept making hardware, I can't see what they would have done, either a machine based on a soup up Naomi set up or a generic PC based system ala Xbox.
Yuji Naka : We never should have stopped making hardware
posted by sabre470 on Feb 6, 2009:
Nah SEGA's best console was the MD + MCD + 32X I mean what a beast were they trying to beat Lego in terms of block stacking capabilities???
I would add that for me the sexiest one is the Wondermega MkI
ray: ray: ray: ray:
Yes I meant in terms of design.
Jamtex said:
Back on topic, Dreamcast, Segas best machine? I think not... it was probably the cleanest designed machine and you could argue that the Sega Megadrive / Genesis did better in the west and the Sega Saturn did better in Japan (don't make me pull sales figures up to prove it).
Nah SEGA's best console was the MD + MCD + 32X I mean what a beast were they trying to beat Lego in terms of block stacking capabilities???
I would add that for me the sexiest one is the Wondermega MkI
ray: ray: ray: ray: