Who would like to see Sega make a hardware comeback?

[Pantherboy]

I myself think it would be a good idea for them. They certainly have been back on track for a while now... money wise... Now that ESPN and EA made the licensing deal.. I think its time for them to go back and do what they started doing with the Genesis... I would like to hear everyones thoughts on this.. good and bad.. it don't matter...

 

[michealo]

no

i would never buy another sega unit

sega cd, 32x, saturn, dreamcast

all abandoned

 

[S1nF1xx]

Sega had the reputation of having the least advanced gaming console on the market. The Dreamcast was under powered, and no one has to say anything about the Saturn. Their last two consoles really blew, and that's why they went belly-up.

Plus, Sony took over the market for casual gamers now. Even though I think their products are crap too. So there just isn't any room for another console manufacturer.

Maybe once all consoles are fully PC based in a couple years, other companies can make hardware for them. But until then I doubt we'll see a new company release a successful console.

 

[Saloma Teale]

As much as I would like to say Yes to this idea, I know that it just wouldnt be feasable. I am a HUGE Dreamcast fan however, and have over 100 games for it. Alot of them are imports.

The reason i dont believe this could happen is because of the current platform market. It is being OWNED by Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft. To introduce another platform at this time could potentially hurt a company like Sega. There would be huge risks involved. IE, what happens when Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft releases their next gen console? Will said next gen console outperform the new Sega Console? Will Sega be able to sign enough titles to it's new console besides just itself being the main game designer?

There's alot of questions there just to name a couple of the big ones that I personally see looming over Sega if they have any intention of introducing a console. it's a big iffy thing.

 

[Pantherboy]

Along the lines of the dreamcast... It was the most powerful system (During its Time) the year it was launched.. 99.... but what hurt it was that it tried to jump the gun and be a year early... Ahh.. the dreamcast days... it was a great system...

 

[Firebot]

Why go back to what killed them in the first place?

Genesis was good because of exclusive games like Sonic, not because the system itself was that great. Sega Genesis itself was weak (remember games like Altered Beast when it first came out?) until the Sonic franchise was created right before the SNES was to ship out. Add to this strong 3rd party developers signing up with them (EA, Capcom, Acclaim, Konami) and it made for a great system.

Nintendo had 2 console failures in its history (Virtual Boy, N64). Sega has half a dozen (their console before Sega Master System came out, Sega CD, 32X, Saturn, Game Gear). By the time Dreamcast came out, Sega had lost almost all of its 3rd party developers who were weary of Sega's past system failures, and sold the Dreamcast to consumers at a massive loss. When you add in the development costs of creating new generation systems one after the other and not seeing any results (Sega CD -> 32X -> Saturn -> Dreamcast), and the PS2 about to come out to cut in on the profits, Sega's future was clear, and they had to bail on the hardware side of the business.

Dreamcast was actually a pretty good system, but time finally caught up to Sega's multiple failures.

 

[S1nF1xx]

^ OMG I forgot all about the virtual boy. That thing was so funny. It made half the people that tried to play it dizzy as hell. Funny stuff.

 

[Vile]

The Dreamcast was under powered.

Wrong. At the time the DC was a very powerful console, and it was way ahead of its time.

 

[Syphon Filter]

Wrong. At the time the DC was a very powerful console, and it was way ahead of its time.

Exactly. And remember the GameGear when nintendo only had the gameboy? The gamegear was way more advanced than the gameboy.

Sega have a habit of being too early with advanced hardware. Sega's hardware was not the problem IMO, but I cant say where exactly they went wrong.

Sega had the reputation of having the least advanced gaming console on the market. The Dreamcast was under powered, and no one has to say anything about the Saturn. Their last two consoles really blew, and that's why they went belly-up.

Plus, Sony took over the market for casual gamers now. Even though I think their products are crap too. So there just isn't any room for another console manufacturer.

Maybe once all consoles are fully PC based in a couple years, other companies can make hardware for them. But until then I doubt we'll see a new company release a successful console.

You're entire post is complete and utter bull IMO. So Microsoft were wrong to being out the Xbox because Sony has captured the entire casual gaming market? And nintendo might as well pack up shop too, forget the Cube and all the great games on it?


There is always room for more competition, as long as the product is good and the applications are of decent standard. Obivously if someone brought out a black and white only games console that had to run off tape drives then it would fail horribly.

 

[Pantherboy]

Obivously if someone brought out a black and white only games console that had to run off tape drives then it would fail horribly.

LMAO...

 

[MaxPower]

Sega had the reputation of having the least advanced gaming console on the market. The Dreamcast was under powered, and no one has to say anything about the Saturn.

I don't know if they're machines were underpowered. I think it was always Sega had to jump the gates and be out first. Example, the genesis came out in 1989 and Super Nintendo was 1991. Saturn came out before the playstation too ( i don't know ho long but i think it was atleast a few months). Also i'll say the Saturn was underpowered because Sega didn't mean it to be a 3D platform because they didn't really exist during the time before Playstation came out. But what killed the Saturn was it's lack of support because i understand that it was very hard to develop for. I think it had 5 processors or some crazy number like that. And then the Dreamcast was out atleast a year before PS2. So it was mostly a matter of being too early and their hardware not aging well. But i do remember that most Dreamcast games did look better than most 1st generation PS2 titles.

 

[Vile]

Exactly. And remember the GameGear when nintendo only had the gameboy? The gamegear was way more advanced than the gameboy.

Sega have a habit of being too early with advanced hardware. Sega's hardware was not the problem IMO, but I cant say where exactly they went wrong.

Yup. I do agree with you on those points. I only said what I did above to indicate that S1nF1xx' post was completely bogus and incorrect.

People were not ready for the DC. It was a well built solid system with plenty of good games...People just weren't ready for it.

 

[Staples]

I'd rather see their games actually be good again. A Sega system with primarily exclusives from Sega will not survive.

 

[S1nF1xx]

Exactly. And remember the GameGear when nintendo only had the gameboy? The gamegear was way more advanced than the gameboy.

Sega have a habit of being too early with advanced hardware. Sega's hardware was not the problem IMO, but I cant say where exactly they went wrong.



You're entire post is complete and utter bull IMO. So Microsoft were wrong to being out the Xbox because Sony has captured the entire casual gaming market? And nintendo might as well pack up shop too, forget the Cube and all the great games on it?


There is always room for more competition, as long as the product is good and the applications are of decent standard. Obivously if someone brought out a black and white only games console that had to run off tape drives then it would fail horribly.

Actually if you think of it for 5 seconds it makes sense.

IMO there is absolutely ZERO room for anyone in the console market unless they come out with a mind-blowing product that blows away the Xbox 2 and PS3 and somehow gets a ton of third-party support. I don't see it happening.

Sony captured most of the market because they went after the casual gamers. Sports games and other tons of third party games to get a huge game selection. They went after adults, teens, and kids. And now they own that market share and I don't see how anyone other than maybe MS could currently steal that from them.

Before the PS, Nintendo and Sega were primarily targeting kids and teens. So Sony went out and went after the adults and older teens. Now Nintendo is still clinging on to the kiddie market with the GC, and dominating in the hand held arena.

It's all about being established in the market. It's hard to knock out #1 when they own almost the entire market.

Now for the record, I really don't care that much about consoles. IMO they are all piles of shit compaired to PC's for gaming. So I'm just calling it as I see it. And like most things on forums, it's personal opinion.

 

[DarkLegacy]

I was a long time Sega Fan through the ages. Ever since the very First, Sega Master system that I still currently own. Alot of sega systems failed becuase they took risk that other companies wouldn't. They came out with technology that wasnt polished up & was way to ahead for its time.

Sega Master - If it was for the strong hold that Nintendo had for RPG's & other software companies, The Sega master would of whopped this thing left & right. The games looked a hell of alot better on the Sega Master than the Ninendo. i really enjoyed Phantasy Star as well on it.

Sega Genesis: I've had this system for maybe 13 years now. Still works but the power button acts up from time to time. I still play my retro games on there. Again, the SNES had that strong lineup of RPG games but I still liked the genesis over the SNES. The Genesis had some great RPG's in its own respct, Phantasy Start, shining Force to name a few. The introduction of the Sonic line was enough to keep me intrested & loyal. Alot of the low key games were fun as hell to, like Gunstar Heros & General Chaos.

Sega GameGear: I didnt care what anyone said back in the days of the Gamegear. It was a way better handheld than the Gameboy period. The battery life is what made the Game Gear fall. If it wasnt for that, gameboy would probally be dead already.

Sega CD: I have the original Drive version. The more harder one to find. Now this thing I would admit, sucked. It did have a few good games on it like Sewer Shark, Night Trap, Sonic CD & so forth. I look at the Sega CD as setting the standard of CD Based Game consoles. No one even thought about that till the Sega CD came out.

Sega Nohmad: Excellnt idea, just the screen was to small to play most of your genesis games. Battery life became a problem as well.

32X: The only Sega system I dont have. I did have it but went screwy on me, wouldnt read the games I had anymore. Now I was surprisedthis flunked cus it was a great idea. The games that were on it looked extremly good. Especially noticable titles like the Mortal Kombat serious. You could really see the differnce in the SNES/Genesis versions & the 32X one.

Sega Saturn: I liked this system alot. The lack of software support is what killed it in the long run. Especially when there deal with EQ went sour. They lost a huge player when that happend. I still have my saturn & alot of import Games. The Capcom games ran so well on here & I was really into capcom games at the time. What killed them wasnt the fact that Sony had a better system, it was the fact that Sony had like 100 times the amount of money Sega did. If you look at the long list of developers that Sony has. It would be more than Sega, Nintendo, SNK, & Microsoft have put together. Alot of new companies came into the picture deleveloping there first game for the playstation. That is what killed the Saturn in my view. It was a great system overlooked.

Sega Dreamcast: Even though sega died, It went out in style. The Dreamcast was extremly impressive in my opinion. Although alot of people were bashing Sega at the time, im sure more than half of them went to get the dreamcast when it first came out. I got mines on the 11th, 2 days after, Damn Toys R Us lol. It was the first system to have a game that looked better than it was in the Arcades. Soul Calibar. Had hits like Marvel vs Capcom, a perfect Arcade Port. The Sonic Games were ok, Resident Evil Code Veronica I had, I liked that as well & of course, the introduction of the 2K sports line.

Would I like to see sega make a comeback, Hell yeah I would. Im still loyal into saying there my favorite company no matter what comes out. I own both the X-Box & Playstation 2 (No Gamecube). I really enjoy both of those systems, they are both great in there own respect. As much as I would like to see Sega make something new, I know they would get destroyed. Microsoft & sony have way to much money for Sega to even be a challenge, No matter how strong, or how well there system would be, they would just fall to the fact that they cant afford the developers like those 2 can. Nintendo is feeling this pressure now, they'll be the next to go down.

-DarkLegacy

 

[Vile]

Actually if you think of it for 5 seconds it makes sense.

IMO there is absolutely ZERO room for anyone in the console market unless they come out with a mind-blowing product that blows away the Xbox 2 and PS3 and somehow gets a ton of third-party support. I don't see it happening.

Sony captured most of the market because they went after the casual gamers. Sports games and other tons of third party games to get a huge game selection. They went after adults, teens, and kids. And now they own that market share and I don't see how anyone other than maybe MS could currently steal that from them.

Before the PS, Nintendo and Sega were primarily targeting kids and teens. So Sony went out and went after the adults and older teens. Now Nintendo is still clinging on to the kiddie market with the GC, and dominating in the hand held arena.

It's all about being established in the market. It's hard to knock out #1 when they own almost the entire market.

Nintendo has always targeted a younger audience, but Sega was in the middle. (Geared towards both)
Sony was so successful because the had the biggest library of games available compared to the other consoles.

Now for the record, I really don't care that much about consoles. IMO they are all piles of shit compaired to PC's for gaming. So I'm just calling it as I see it. And like most things on forums, it's personal opinion

It shows, since you got your info wrong
Either way, you are comparing apples & oranges. Each of these platforms servers a different purpose, and it makes absoutely no sense comparing them. Some people like playing with a mouse and keyboard, and like to use a higher resolution. These people stick to a PC. Some people don't like bothering with having to apply patches, updates, modifications, etc and they stick to consoles. Not to mention that there are plenty of exclusive games that are not available on PC. Each platform serves its own purpose and it really is irrelevant comparing them to each other.

 

[Syphon Filter]

Actually if you think of it for 5 seconds it makes sense.

IMO there is absolutely ZERO room for anyone in the console market unless they come out with a mind-blowing product that blows away the Xbox 2 and PS3 and somehow gets a ton of third-party support. I don't see it happening.

Sony captured most of the market because they went after the casual gamers. Sports games and other tons of third party games to get a huge game selection. They went after adults, teens, and kids. And now they own that market share and I don't see how anyone other than maybe MS could currently steal that from them.

Before the PS, Nintendo and Sega were primarily targeting kids and teens. So Sony went out and went after the adults and older teens. Now Nintendo is still clinging on to the kiddie market with the GC, and dominating in the hand held arena.

It's all about being established in the market. It's hard to knock out #1 when they own almost the entire market.

Now for the record, I really don't care that much about consoles. IMO they are all piles of shit compaired to PC's for gaming. So I'm just calling it as I see it. And like most things on forums, it's personal opinion.

What I am saying is that people said the same thing during then time that Nintendo was in just about every kids home.

"OMFG...Nintendo has nailed the entire market, everyone else might as well quit and go play with themselves"

Then Sony came along (which was admittidly partly to do with Nintendo in the first place) and gave the world the PSX. Then it happened again with the PSX/PS2 era...

"OMFG...Sony has nailed the entire market, everyone else might as well quit and go play with themselves"

Microsoft decided to not do that and came up with the Xbox. Which is a fine console and has been bought by many many people. Microsoft are not he only ones with money out there to make something like that work. It's just that they are the ones that did. In time to come I am sure there will be more consoles, some will fail horribly and some will suceed and who knows, maybe, just maybe someone will topple Sony??

*/Shock Horror/*

 

[Techx]

never was a fan

 

[WickedAngel]

Sega has never had a problem with providing advanced technology and good games. It's a matter of management. They released games at the wrong time, canceled the wrong games, supported games that shouldn't have been supported, and so on. Add to this the fact that their marketing department was completely underfunded and you have a system which had great games and vast potential that will never be tapped.

 

[S1nF1xx]

The other part of what I was arguing is that within the next few years, consoles will just be PC's. So there will probably be a huge swing in the market. There may be many manufacturers that build the same type of console. It's just a theory, but if you look at current trends that's what they're heading towards. Consoles are trying to emulate PC's. Pretty soon they'll be the same thing. Again, just my theory, but I see it as possible.
And in the mean time, I don't see anyone coming out with a super-revolutionary console.

 

[darktiger]

I wouldnt..It is hard enough keeping up with games on the PS2, Xbox, GameCube, PC...

 

[Vile]

The other part of what I was arguing is that within the next few years, consoles will just be PC's. So there will probably be a huge swing in the market. There may be many manufacturers that build the same type of console. It's just a theory, but if you look at current trends that's what they're heading towards. Consoles are trying to emulate PC's. Pretty soon they'll be the same thing. Again, just my theory, but I see it as possible.
And in the mean time, I don't see anyone coming out with a super-revolutionary console.

Using that logic, all consoles (even current ones) can be considered PCs, since they all have similar hardware..

Not quite...

 

[S1nF1xx]

Using that logic, all consoles (even current ones) can be considered PCs, since they all have similar hardware..

Not quite...

Well, if you look at the Xbox it IS a PC.

But as I've said several times. It's my theory, my opinion. Not my accurate preditiction.
So it really isn't open for argument, since I'm not trying to prove anything.

 

[Pantherboy]

The way I see it is that Consoles are always going to be trying to Outperform Pc's because of their "Turn on and Go" technology. Whereas with a PC you have to wait for it to boot up and load everything because it is a multifunction device. and PC's are infinitely upgradeable where Consoles are "you buy what you get"... I myself am a PC Gamer but I still have consoles. I was and still am a Sega Fan... I like competetion though.. thats what has brought Games and Technology this far this fast...

 

[Vile]

Well, if you look at the Xbox it IS a PC.

But as I've said several times. It's my theory, my opinion. Not my accurate preditiction.
So it really isn't open for argument, since I'm not trying to prove anything.

I've done more than looked at my X-Box, I've modded it, swapped the hard drive, etc and it was one of the eaiset consoles to mod.

That being said, every console can be considered a PC using your logic, simply because they use hardware like a PC.

Cars have wheels and bikes have wheels. A car is not a bike, and a bike is not a car, simply because both have wheels.

Blah this little debate is clichéd

 

[QHalo]

Exactly. And remember the GameGear when nintendo only had the gameboy? The gamegear was way more advanced than the gameboy.

This thing owned both of those

 

[Pantherboy]

Ahh.. the Turbo Express... Sadly I never got to play one of those.. lol...

 

[Syphon Filter]

This thing owned both of those

Hehe...thats the first time i have even seen one!!

 

[Irishllama]

I've done more than looked at my X-Box, I've modded it, swapped the hard drive, etc and it was one of the eaiset consoles to mod.

That being said, every console can be considered a PC using your logic, simply because they use hardware like a PC.

Cars have wheels and bikes have wheels. A car is not a bike, and a bike is not a car, simply because both have wheels.

Blah this little debate is clichéd

Comparing a bike and a car is just stupid... I mean seriously... Find me a bike that cost 30,000 dollars please? Also find me a bike that has 250 hp or more, and also find me a bike that has air bag's, a Radio, Cig lighter(s)... Bike's and car's are extremly different...Bike's have 2 wheel's, possiable 3... car's have 4. and only 4. no more (not talking about trucks), no less.

 

[Pantherboy]

Comparing a bike and a car is just stupid... I mean seriously... Find me a bike that cost 30,000 dollars please?

Hows this for just a bicycle wheel?

http://www.singletrackworld.com/article.php?sid=547

Also find me a bike that has 250 hp or more

Umm... depends on your definition of bike..
www.honda.com
www.suzuki.com

and also find me a bike that has air bag's, a Radio, Cig lighter(s)

Hehe.. can't help ya there on the airgbag... Although Honda Goldwings do offer a radio and Cig Lighter...

 

[Vile]

Comparing a bike and a car is just stupid... I mean seriously... Find me a bike that cost 30,000 dollars please? Also find me a bike that has 250 hp or more, and also find me a bike that has air bag's, a Radio, Cig lighter(s)... Bike's and car's are extremly different...Bike's have 2 wheel's, possiable 3... car's have 4. and only 4. no more (not talking about trucks), no less.

As stupid as that example may be, it's to prove a point. A very simple and obvious point for that matter, which most people in this thread do seem to understand.

 

[Irishllama]

Egh, no it just not the same.

I think a good example should be.

Counter strike and Halo 2... They are both FPS... But, Are completly different.

(fits mood for gaming section)

 

[Netrat33]

turboexpress!! damn...that thing was cool!
too bad it cost WAY too much money

*I think it was 300 much like the turbographx with a cd-rom*

I want turbographx to come back still my personal fav of the "16-bit wars"

 

[Firebot]

This thing owned both of those

Heh, it owned them in the pocketbook as well. Think it was something like 250-300$ for this versus 50$ for a Gameboy at the time?

It kinda sucked that the Gameboy won out the handheld market in the early 90s mainly due to Tetris. Both Game Gear and Turbo Express were lightyears better, but Gameboy had Tetris!~!~!! Battery life simply wasn't there at the time. We would has seen systems like the PSP and the Gameboy DS much sooner; instead Gameboy's monochrome screen was the only handheld available for almost 10 years because no one else stood a chance of competing against it..

 

[Vile]

Egh, no it just not the same.

I think a good example should be.

Counter strike and Halo 2... They are both FPS... But, Are completly different.

(fits mood for gaming section)

Wow, you really didn't understand, lol.

No offense intended, but you are completely missing the point.

The original statement I was making is that one should not compare a PC and a console directly, due to the fact they have similar hardware.

Apparently you are not understanding what is being said, and I'd rather not sit here and try to explain the same thing over and over, so I'll just leave it at that.

 

[MaxPower]

Now for the record, I really don't care that much about consoles. IMO they are all piles of shit compaired to PC's for gaming.

That's a pretty broad statement. Sure the PC has superior hardware and much more advanced graphics. However, the gap isn't as big as it used to be. But i don't play games for stunning graphics alone. I like variety that's something that PC's can't give you. Can anyone name the last must have PC title that wasn't a FPS or an MMORPG (two genres that i don't care for) ??

Give me a great gameplay over top notch graphics anyday.

 

[QHalo]

Heh, it owned them in the pocketbook as well. Think it was something like 250-300$ for this versus 50$ for a Gameboy at the time?

It kinda sucked that the Gameboy won out the handheld market in the early 90s mainly due to Tetris. Both Game Gear and Turbo Express were lightyears better, but Gameboy had Tetris!~!~!! Battery life simply wasn't there at the time. We would has seen systems like the PSP and the Gameboy DS much sooner; instead Gameboy's monochrome screen was the only handheld available for almost 10 years because no one else stood a chance of competing against it..

The thing about the TurboExpress is that it played the actual games that the TurboGraffix 16 played. Which made it worth the money, because you could play all your games that you had for your console on your portable. I think it was just horrible marketing that did it in. Because it was by far a better product. Betamax anyone?

 

[S1nF1xx]

I've done more than looked at my X-Box, I've modded it, swapped the hard drive, etc and it was one of the eaiset consoles to mod.

That being said, every console can be considered a PC using your logic, simply because they use hardware like a PC.

Cars have wheels and bikes have wheels. A car is not a bike, and a bike is not a car, simply because both have wheels.

Blah this little debate is clichéd

I fail to see the point of this post.

I said consoles are starting to emulate PC's in their functionality, and may become the same thing one day. And I stated my theory/opinion on what I think may happen. If you don't like it brush it off. Like I said, it was just my opinion/guess. I'm not trying to prove anything, or prove I'm right.
But you're on some almighty Jihad to somehow prove my silly-ass guess wrong. It was an opinion, and you're trying to argue it. Feel free to disagree, that's fine. But there's no point in trying to disprove an opinion.

There is a difference in what someone believes is fact, and what someone has as an opinion.

 

[Irishllama]

I know =D , i was at school during webdesign class, and i was REALLY BORED... sorry. lol

 

[Vile]

I fail to see the point of this post.

I said consoles are starting to emulate PC's in their functionality, and may become the same thing one day. And I stated my theory/opinion on what I think may happen. If you don't like it brush it off. Like I said, it was just my opinion/guess. I'm not trying to prove anything, or prove I'm right.
But you're on some almighty Jihad to somehow prove my silly-ass guess wrong. It was an opinion, and you're trying to argue it. Feel free to disagree, that's fine. But there's no point in trying to disprove an opinion.

There is a difference in what someone believes is fact, and what someone has as an opinion.

Roll your eyes as much you like. I'm not trying to prove, disprove, argue or discredit your opinion.