LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Peter Moore: I didn't kill the Dreamcast
- Thread starter Eddie-Griffin
- Start date
Synless
Member
Signal Rockets
Banned
The Dreamcast and the GameCube went underrated compared to the PS2 and Xbox.
Team Andromeda
Member
Peter Moore was the best boss SEGA America had, far better than that lying prick Tom
SkylineRKR
Member
Yeah ofcourse this played a part. I've always seen the DC as a stop gap too. PS2 was announced and every outlet hyped it up as something far more powerful and Sony had all the support. Every time I saw a new DC game I would think PS2 would do it better. But then PS2 launched and it looked kind of lacklustre, because expectations were set unrealistically high. However, PS2 was better than DC out of the gate if i'm honest. Even the launch PS2 software outperformed the DC. It had bad IQ because of aliasing etc, but TTT looked better than DC fighters (in terms of character details, lighting, ground textures etc) and it was 2 v 2. SSX also looked better than most DC games. And this was only launch. PS2 had a better controller, DVD support, backwards compatibility, bigger storage through its card, it was overall a more premium looking device and also less noisy.
Its funny that Sega fans, including myself, would always come up with ports that looked worse on PS2. But those were ports (and frankly, no single PS2 owner gave a shit about Headhunter lol, it was an awful game with terrible controls and AI), and many off Naomi hardware even. Which essentially was 95% a Dreamcast. I mean, reverse it, and ask yourself if the DC can run a port of MGS2, Ace Combat 4, GT3, Silent Hill 2 and Pro Evolution Soccer. I think not. Its graphical features were another ballgame. The PS2 however could never deliver a clean image, its visuals were always hampered somewhat by aliasing.
PS2's first year was slow, while DC received many games in its first year. DC was on the market for 2 years when PS2 came out in the west, so it already had second or even third wave software. Some games already had sequels. The DC honestly was a good purchase in 1999, if you were bored by your N64 and PSX. But, PSX still got amazing software, Even in 2000 legendary classics like Vagrant Story, Chrono Cross and FFIX. DC had nothing on those. I said it before but I never part with my PSX in the meantime, and I am glad i didn't. The DC was fun, sure, but a lot of it was quick fix like Crazy Taxi and couch co op play already died out (we did play a few of them though), barely anyone I knew wanted to play 2D fighters anymore so a DC alone wouldn't cut it for me. I needed to play those immersive games like MGS, SH, GT and Square RPG's as well. PSX always had my preference, and I think many stayed or returned, thus DC attach rate didn't hold up (I think the PSX consistently outsold it as well).
To sum it up, Dreamcast just never had a chance.
Last edited:
The very first playstation blown out the dreamcast by a huge margin. IIRC for the sole year of 1999, 2x more playstations were sold than dreamcasts for its entire lifetime.
Last edited:
Crayon
Member
This is great, thank you for writing. "PS2 hype" really does not describe the impossible situation of the dreamcast. PS2 hype was intense but we get hype to varying degrees with any name brand console launch. The successor to a very successful console on the way is was just one more thing. It happened to be one of the things out of sega's control, and I think that's why it gets focused on.
SkylineRKR
Member
Yeah thats why DC never stood a chance. Sony could delay the PS2 to 2002 and the PS1 would outsell the DC anyway. I believe the PS1 cost 129, and then was slashed to 99 bucks right before DC came out. And it wasn't on the way out yet. 1999 was a stellar year for the PS1. And a chunk of 2000 too. High profile games like Final Fantasy, Soul Reaver, Resident Evil, Driver, Tony Hawk and Gran Turismo still appeared and pretty much schooled the DC library in everything but graphics. Some of those were eventually ported to DC (and granted, Tony Hawk 2 DC is probably my fave TH ever), but everyone had played them on PS1 already.
To me the DC simply wasn't better. It was fun to play a few rounds of Powerstone, Crazy Taxi and all but once past the graphics those are shallow quick fix, albeit very fun, games. This amounts to a huge chunk of the DC library, and I played nearly all games it has in the west. RE CV, Shenmue, Skies, Grandia 2, D2 were bigger games. Then there was janky B-tier stuff like Carrier, Maken X (pretty good) and Illbleed. Many PS1/PC uprez ports; some great, like Rayman 2, TH and Soul Reaver and some I didn't feel for some reason, like V-Rally 2 and Vigilante 8. While I liked them on PS1 earlier. I remember seeing Nightmare Creatures 2 and nearly puked lol.
I love Blue Stinger though, for how ridiculous it is. And I still don't know if I prefer the JP or western version lol.
Last edited:
AlteredForms
Banned
I'm pretty sure that's what a guilty person would say
GamesDontSuck
Member
We need a Dreamcast Mini.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
The software has literally ALWAYS been the issue you can't seem to understand this no matter how much the same consequences repeat.
No, this is a subjective argument but is also irrelevant and bad faith. Quality has nothing to do with getting people to buy games. Bad games appeal to people and sell too.
The rest of your post seems like your trying to convince yourself, thicc style.
I think the gaming journalists have thrown EA into peoples minds so much that people forget it was Midway that sold Genesis consoles, not EA, at least not to the extent people keep imagining. I feel like people just repeat what they hear.
Don't get me wrong, EA was a nice company to have on board, but Midway was selling millions of games with consoles around the peak of the Genesis. They contributed, but even Sega's own NFL games sold over a million copies while no Maddens did, and neither did Road Rash.
That would be 1993 which is impossible.
Tio be fair other companies were already trying to do that, but Sony has the money to take the loss on the 'mainstream player' idea.
SkylineRKR
Member
Dreamcast launch, my bad.
They pulled the plug on E3 1997 for the western market. Effectively saying not to buy that system and not to support it. And it took until late summer 1999 for them to have a new system ready for that market.
They pulled the plug on E3 1997 for the western market. Effectively saying not to buy that system and not to support it. And it took until late summer 1999 for them to have a new system ready for that market.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Officially, but they had already pulled the plug start of 1997, 1996 was a bad year for Sega and the amount they wated and mistake made took them from number 1 gaming company in the US, to a struggling 3rd, which used to be their biggest market, and then a steep dive in Europe. Only Japan had initially did better, though that started declining as well, but they could have kept support going in Japan, but SOJ wanted to bury the Saturn even in Japan for some odd reason.
I would also argue in Japan releasing the DC in 1998 was also a mistake, not only did they bungle whatever they still could have done with the Saturn there, but Sega was clearly not ready with software support in 98. They could have done a multi-country launch in 1999 with the same amount of better software support out the gate. Instead, they left a bad taste in Japanese consumers mouths, which ruined their one decent "success" in the country across all their consoles and handhelds.
If you're talking America, PS2 cut the price in may 2002 to $199 to undercut the Xbox $100, which forced Xbox to respond by matching the price later. Making the PS2 cost as much as the GC, which after Xbox matched the PS2's price, the GC cut to $99.
Problem is, even if PS2 was delayed, the DC would still have to cost no lower than $199 at this time to stay alive, but without the software sales the consoles still wouldn't be moving as much as they should.
yes, and it didn't help that Sega pushed some of these appeal questionable games as graphics kings, so some people would initial buy Shenmue 1 for the graphics and power coverage in the media, but then it wouldn't have the right wom to get people to buy the console and jump on the wagon of buying more copies of Shenmue.
Fun games, but people didn't want to buy a console for them, and some of the arcade games were still being pushed in the arcades during chunks of the DC ports shelf runs, so the question would be, why not just play that game at the arcade instead of buy it on a DC?
SportsFan581
Member
Just because I quoted you didn't mean my entire post was referencing your post. You and a few other users had referenced Sega's "inability" to sell software on their consoles (included your quote below) and even some comparisons were made between the SNES top sellers and Genesis in a way that made it seem as if the Genesis/MD didn't move a ton of software.
I was just pointing out the obvious that Sega had no trouble selling software to console owners in any of the generations they participated in. The first three they averaged 16 software units per console sold, which is ridiculously better than anyone else. In the case of Genesis/MD they even sold 100m more units of software with 15 or 20m fewer consoles sold than Nintendo. Saturn's tie rate was also considerably better than the PS1s. Even though the DC disappointed by Sega's tie rate standards it was still right there with the competition. People that owned Sega consoles typically bought more software than other console owners or at worst bought the same amount.
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
I didn't see anyone bring up the SNES, but regardless, the software issue was a Sega issue across all their consoles, the Genesis just had an outlier period between 1991-1994. It's not a one system thing.
Sega didn't even understand why Sonic was originally a hot seller, and how the MK momentum led to other third-party sales growth and then they crumbled the house. Sega even eventually kicking out the guy who was responsible for Sega being competitive in the US.
You're playing word games, the whole conversation was software to move hardware and you are well aware of that, not attach rates, no one argued about that. Attach rate doesn't have much relevance of hardware isn't moving.
mansoor1980
Gold Member
SportsFan581
Member
The OP of the thread you created actually listed attach rate as the primary reason they couldn't afford to keep producing the system.
Seemed relevant to me. Again, I was just pointing out that this specific issue wasn't a constant problem for Sega, with the DC being the only system they released that didn't have high attach rates. The article even mentions that hardware sales rates were actually increasing at the time the decision was made.
Peter Moore's phrasing there leads me to believe that if the attach rate was higher they would have limped along. I speculated that this was due to the consoles status as a piracy darling at the time, leading users that were driving the sales towards to the end to purchase the hardware but no software. Which would realistically create the situation the OP references. We have different opinions on it I guess.
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
That's nice, butt hat isn't what we were discussing, and now you're trying to move the goal posts again.
Out conversation was about games moving hardware, and Sega did not have the games to move hardware.
I do not understand why you find that controversial.
Except him bringing up the console losses the sentence right before. Attach rate indicates not only is there games being sold (and no rampant piracy in the US, someone already posted the NPD charts) to make money where console lost, but that they are also attracting console buyers.
Neither of which were happening.
https://redirect.viglink.com/?forma... Overall Dreamcast NPD Software Sales
As was said before, software was already an issue since pretty early on in the DC life. In the market where it sold the most and had the people most likely to buy games for the DC than any other market, Sega's number one place sans Saturn not post-market.
SportsFan581
Member
It's literally the subject in the OP.
Exactly! It sounds like they had an attach rate number they felt they needed to hit to justify those continued losses.
I'm not sure what kind of charts you are looking at where users were registering their pirated games to be tabulated for some chart somewhere, but all I can say as a user at the time, is that the DC was the darling of the warez scene at the time. And everyone I knew with a system had burned games for it. Certainly anecdotal though. I don't think anyone was tracking the eDonkey downloads back then.
I don't really have goalposts to move, LOL. However, I do think this forum has an "ignore list" feature that will allow you to ignore my posts if they are bothering you.
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
This doesn't work, we had multiple exchanges in a different conversation, you can go backwards and pretend that didn't happen. Not to mention you originally jumped in, it was a conversation involving multiple users about Sega not having the games to move hardware, not attach rate.
I have no issue with a separate conversation on that issue, my problem is you're trying to fuse two different topics together.
I'm not even the only user who pointed out that the software sales were already low in the US, and they even gave you a link with more game data than I originally posted )Which I reposted and you skipped addressing again), showing as they said, that the software was already an issue form the start. It had nothing to do with piracy. You keep trying to figure out some way to make an excuse for bad software sales no matter how much evidence is presented to you.
DC was already dealing with a software and hardware adoption problem very fast.
As I sad before, unless NFL fans are the only people who don't pirate games, than piracy would not explain the sales of those or other sports games.
Again,
Last edited:
SportsFan581
Member
All my posts are still in the thread, LOL. Not sure how I can deny anything I posted (or would need to).
I'm also not sure where I ever denied that the final figures on most of the DC games were low. I just said that sales volume for the units they were selling was still matching the rest of the industry at that point, if they expected more out of those units they probably had their expectations a bit high. I think it was even you that said hardware was selling well in the early going. If they were selling acceptable amounts of hardware and combining that with a typical software attach rate I don't see how their software sales were a problem from the start.
Like I said, ignore list.
Edit: Nothing personal at all @
Eddie-Griffin
you seem to create 50% of the threads in the gaming section and I <3 the effort and enjoy a lot of the discussions. I'll annoy you in many more threads in the future I'm sure.
Last edited:
SkylineRKR
Member
The DC started off well, but only in the US. Every console released after DC would eclipse those numbers easily. Gaming itself had simply grown.
Its just that DC dropped off really quickly. I compared it to Vita before I think. That also had a huge launch lineup and first week sales were decent. But the early adaptors and impulse buyers aside both systems had no compelling system sellers to sustain growth. Launch software sold well on DC, which is typical for a console since the library is small and people buy their console with a few games. You'll see a lot of mediocre launch games having decent sales numbers but then a sequel bombs into obscurity. After launch window nearly every game sold so so. They came around and went. For many gamers, the type who aren't into niche stuff, there really wasn't much to play. Sell through of the system itself was so so as well. They found out Sega had a lot of unsold stock by the end of 2000, warehouses were full of Dreamcasts they couldn't sell to retailers. I think Sega made look DC demand better than it actually was. It seems to me they simply stuffed channels.
Because DC was just in nothing a potential hit. Launch day yes, any new system is in huge demand for a few weeks. But then its about maintaining growth. And Sega had absolutely nothing to pull this off with. Many gamers dropped their DC fairly quickly. What I noticed was that no one with a DC actually gave up on supporting their PS1 or even their N64. The library was ofcourse a problem, for many impulse buyers it was probably too niche. Later on it was almost all arcade ports, and most of them with little to nothing added to them. This trend worked on Saturn and early PS1, but I think gamers wanted more down the line as gaming itself grew. Capcom was a huge DC supporter, yes, but nearly all their games were arcade ports. Good games, like CvS2, Tech Romancer and Project Justice, I would buy remasters of those, but that was the overall look of their library. And I feel its partially because Sony initially denied 2D and shmups. Most of those games like Gunbird, Gigawing etc, Sony didn't allow those games unless they were released in bundles and at a budget price. Meanwhile Capcoms relevant big budget projects, like DMC, Onimusha etc, they went to Sony. And those games were early million sellers and likely moved systems too.
Its just that DC dropped off really quickly. I compared it to Vita before I think. That also had a huge launch lineup and first week sales were decent. But the early adaptors and impulse buyers aside both systems had no compelling system sellers to sustain growth. Launch software sold well on DC, which is typical for a console since the library is small and people buy their console with a few games. You'll see a lot of mediocre launch games having decent sales numbers but then a sequel bombs into obscurity. After launch window nearly every game sold so so. They came around and went. For many gamers, the type who aren't into niche stuff, there really wasn't much to play. Sell through of the system itself was so so as well. They found out Sega had a lot of unsold stock by the end of 2000, warehouses were full of Dreamcasts they couldn't sell to retailers. I think Sega made look DC demand better than it actually was. It seems to me they simply stuffed channels.
Because DC was just in nothing a potential hit. Launch day yes, any new system is in huge demand for a few weeks. But then its about maintaining growth. And Sega had absolutely nothing to pull this off with. Many gamers dropped their DC fairly quickly. What I noticed was that no one with a DC actually gave up on supporting their PS1 or even their N64. The library was ofcourse a problem, for many impulse buyers it was probably too niche. Later on it was almost all arcade ports, and most of them with little to nothing added to them. This trend worked on Saturn and early PS1, but I think gamers wanted more down the line as gaming itself grew. Capcom was a huge DC supporter, yes, but nearly all their games were arcade ports. Good games, like CvS2, Tech Romancer and Project Justice, I would buy remasters of those, but that was the overall look of their library. And I feel its partially because Sony initially denied 2D and shmups. Most of those games like Gunbird, Gigawing etc, Sony didn't allow those games unless they were released in bundles and at a budget price. Meanwhile Capcoms relevant big budget projects, like DMC, Onimusha etc, they went to Sony. And those games were early million sellers and likely moved systems too.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Vitas problem was the 3DS rebounded, Sony could have taken advantage of the early period by taking one to Nintendo and didn't and tripled down on things people complained about.
But DC is different, because while general US sales were good, software sales weren't universally good, you had a few games that would manage to eventually reach 1 million off the hype then stop, and the other games just weren't retaining interest or bringing more people to buy the console, sports aside. So even the traditional "launch game" benefit that wouldn't come with the sequels as you say, wasn't really there for the DC anywhere, including the US.
That happened with the Saturn and Genesis too, make both seem like they were still competitive when the high was gone, and then there's unsold units. Saturn didn't get hit that bad because they didn't have a reason to mass over produce, and those eventually sold at discount and clearance prices, where as Sega of America had to write-off $61 million in unsold Genesis inventory in 1996 for the Genesis strongest market.
The issue is Sega really themselves, pushed those niche games and shallow arcade experiences without much added as big releases foe their consoles, including the DC.
The games you mentioned are really part of the problem here, as well as Sega getting gaming mags to push Shenmue as a next0geenration gaming experience graphical showcase, they had other software they could have done that with which would have resulted in more units sold.
If you look at the PS2 launch games for the US specifically, Sega outside Madden and arguably Ridge Racer V, didn't really have a counter to what people were buying early on.
For every Capcom vs. SNK, Skies of Arcadia, Phantasy Star Online, Shenmue, Seaman, Blue Stinger, House of the Dead, you had ONE or TWO PS2 games selling 2x or more that combined.
Even if you removed the PS2 and looked at last gen consoles, or the Xbox, GC, the results are similar.
Many of those same niche games, or games with limited appeal, didn't do hot when Sega first went multiplatform either.
Some of those launch games weren't that hot either, Ridge Racer V wasn't that much of a seller, but it showed how low DC software was moving.
I would argue Sega's choices in what they pushed for the DC, were lessons they did not learn from the games they were pushing on the Saturn, which all followed very similar trends, with the only major games of appeal being sports games as well.
It's as if Sega of Japan, and the new restructured Sega of America after SOJ fired a bunch of people post-Genesis, wanted to run as far away from what made the Genesis successful and appealing as much as possible. Like they wanted to pretend it didn't even exist.
SkylineRKR
Member
TTT outsold every DC game in existence. It sold as much as Sonic Adventure, Crazy Taxi and NFL combined. Even RR5 outsold Sonic Adventure.
And yes, DC was very similar to Saturn. I had both systems and approx 60 games for them each. They were the same. It was mostly fighters and shmups. Really short games in general. Saturn however had a slightly more diverse library actually. Saturn had Shining Force, Dragon Force, Panzer Dragoon. Such games do not exist on DC, perhaps if you go JP only it had such as Sakura Wars but that was also on Saturn. Saturn also had single player FPS like Alien Trilogy, Doom, Duke, Exhumed and Quake. And those last 3 were top tier. DC had 3 arena shooters (Outtrigger had no online in Europe for example, so it was worthless), and perhaps the shitty Soldier of Fortune port. Platform, adventures, point and click, decent soccer games... Saturn had all this. Because in its first year or 2 the Saturn got pretty much the same games as the PSX. It was widely supported by third parties at first.
Dreamcast third party support was almost non-existent, or they clearly didn't believe so much in the DC as barely any did a (timed) exclusive for it. This was, I think, again a factor in the good launch period of DC. It looked as if Namco, Capcom etc were fully committed. Namco started with SC1 for example, one of the highest rated games ever, but then bailed already. Capcom did RE CV, and then exclusively threw their niche 2D stuff on it, with some late ports of classic RE games and Dino Crisis. EA wasn't there and while Visual Concepts beat them in terms of quality, there was no football game (PSX had 2; ISS Pro Evo and FIFA). EA was also more than sports. Medal of Honor came out weeks after the Dreamcast. DC could absolutely use this game. Eidos did support DC, but mostly late ports from PSX too... but I guess they did at least come out.
Midway did good, they released Hydro Thunder, Showtime and Blitz day one and those were arcade perfect. Dreamcast was the best way to play these games. But they weren't really huge sellers either, I think the first Blitz did kind of well. Midway was actually one of the better publishers here, though MK Gold was trashed for being shit and MK4 was already hated to begin with. Activision also released their games later on DC. The third party support was kind of risk free and most importantly not a threat to Sony at all. PSX would continue to be first in line.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Not sure about that one WW. Definitely not US.
Problem is many of Midways releases sold better on other consoles. This goes for some Capcom and Namco releases too, and pretty much most western support, of what the DC had anyway because it turned into a niche JP third-party device.
Lack of a soccer game in Europe was also really strange. hey only released Virtua Striker there, one version of it, late, and rebranded it iirc.
Then you had what Sega pushed not helping matters in regards to third-party games. Evolution series was not much of a highlight for the system, Element gimmick gear, powerstone, Psychic Force, etc, these weren't the games they needed.
Then their first party was equally strange with the choices they made to spotlight, Seaman, Shenmue, Virtua Cop 2 which was basically content free compared to House of the Dead, Virtual-On, Space Channel, Sonic Shuffle, Sega Bass Fishing.
These are side-projects to expand an audience to grab the niche consumers, or complimentary to bigger more appealing choices. Sega is the only one that would stake their success on those type of games primarily. We've never seen that anywhere else from any other console dev outside late Atari which was already a foot in the grave.
Imagine if Microsoft staked Xbox One continuing to be sold on Screamride, D4, and Cuphead.
theclaw135
Banned
Could be. There is some ambiguity as to when the plug was pulled (at the factory). IIRC despite the timing of the announcement, no Dreamcast unit manufactured in 2001 has been discovered.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
I recall Sega-16 finding one years ago. But google doesn't actually search for individual words so you'd have to go digging to find that thread.
Pasta la Vista
Member
I wanted this and a Saturn mini, but after the genesis model 2 mini I dont trust them to do anything right.
cartman414
Member
It was a step down from the Saturn controllers. I mean, the d-pad, less buttons, and the cord sticking out from the back.
SkylineRKR
Member
The pad was fucking terrible. There is absolutely no redeeming factor about it. The D-pad hurt because it was sharp. The stick was way too sturdy and had no good grip. The buttons were small and just didn't push well, they were too sharp also. Overall, this thing was bad for your hands... all edges were sharp and why was it angled inward? The cord, lol yes, don't get me started on it. The triggers were awful too. There was only 6 buttons which was problematic at the time since PSX was the norm at the time. PSX already dabbled with 2 sticks (Dual Shock), DC had only one.
The VMU was the one redeeming factor about the controller, but it would empty nearly over night and then you had the terrible beep. For storage the VMU sucked ass. I think could never fill the PS2 memorycard for example.
Nights pad was better. It had a good feeling D-pad, comfy face buttons. That pad simply felt superior and the DC version felt like a budget version of it. I understand 6 face buttons can be too complex for the masses, but they could change it for DC, with also 4 shoulder buttons for example. And in the wake of the Dual Analog which was already out I would add a second stick also. This was a new generation right? N64 already had dual stick control of sorts (the second stick were buttons), PSX started to support it more and more. Sega did nothing of the sort with DC. They essentially released a neutered version of the Nights pad. Another thing thats hard to grasp.
I absolutely fucking hated the DC pad.
There were some soccer games. UEFA Striker, very bad and also on PSX. SWWS was on DC but this had nothing to do with the very good Saturn versions and the little I played of it was awful. And there was Giant Killers, which was a sim and came out around summer 2001. There were a few but they were generally terrible. What would help a bit was a game as good as NBA 2K, since that one was the best Bball game I had ever played up to that point.
Virtual On was absolutely magnificent, but for some reason published by Activision in the west. It was nearly unplayable with the DC controller, imo. OG virtual on played far better on pad, because the Saturn pad was better and there were less mechanics to translate to pad.
Sonic Shuffle was ruined by the load times. It was a bad party game. Sega staked their success on it because they just aren't a triple A developer (or the equivalent of it around 2000). Even today, their biggest in house games are Sonic who are a mixed bag and generally janky, and Yakuza which found its audience but isn't a series that will move much past a million per game.
The VMU was the one redeeming factor about the controller, but it would empty nearly over night and then you had the terrible beep. For storage the VMU sucked ass. I think could never fill the PS2 memorycard for example.
Nights pad was better. It had a good feeling D-pad, comfy face buttons. That pad simply felt superior and the DC version felt like a budget version of it. I understand 6 face buttons can be too complex for the masses, but they could change it for DC, with also 4 shoulder buttons for example. And in the wake of the Dual Analog which was already out I would add a second stick also. This was a new generation right? N64 already had dual stick control of sorts (the second stick were buttons), PSX started to support it more and more. Sega did nothing of the sort with DC. They essentially released a neutered version of the Nights pad. Another thing thats hard to grasp.
I absolutely fucking hated the DC pad.
There were some soccer games. UEFA Striker, very bad and also on PSX. SWWS was on DC but this had nothing to do with the very good Saturn versions and the little I played of it was awful. And there was Giant Killers, which was a sim and came out around summer 2001. There were a few but they were generally terrible. What would help a bit was a game as good as NBA 2K, since that one was the best Bball game I had ever played up to that point.
Virtual On was absolutely magnificent, but for some reason published by Activision in the west. It was nearly unplayable with the DC controller, imo. OG virtual on played far better on pad, because the Saturn pad was better and there were less mechanics to translate to pad.
Sonic Shuffle was ruined by the load times. It was a bad party game. Sega staked their success on it because they just aren't a triple A developer (or the equivalent of it around 2000). Even today, their biggest in house games are Sonic who are a mixed bag and generally janky, and Yakuza which found its audience but isn't a series that will move much past a million per game.
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Not really, the N64 buttosn were not a replacement for a stick with how it was implemented in most games 9where often if they were used for a cameras at all, only for two of those 4 buttons in trms of control if the game supported it, with the other two being some other weird feature or odd positioning) and most PS1 and even early PS2 games, were still not utilizing the 2nd stick.
2nd stick was still not a standard, even analog stick wasn't still a standard, people make that association because N64 was the only console to force it, but when the same devs were given an option they had choice or no analog support on the PS1 and Saturn, and PS2 still had that as well after DC decided to try forcing it to. 2nd stick and Analog did not become standards until the Xbox, which all of a sudden almost the entire industry all at once gave analog support for games even if they could avoid doing so, that analog mode on the PS2 controller suddenly was almost never able to be turned off, and 2nd sticks were now a default control mechanism for the game camera.
When you look at the situation and the games coming out at the time that most players were dealing with before then, and the fact Sega themselves said devs didn't want two sticks, it makes sense why Sega chose to avoid a 2nd stick.
it doesn't make sense why they downgraded the Saturn 3D gamepad, and made the material cheaper, and had the cord position where it was, and the weird spaceship angular look that people didn't like about the N64 controller, but at least not having two sticks made sense.
Sega only seemed to push Virtual On in Japan temporarily, in the west they kind of just added it to the pile of "look at these games we have" without much marketing or awareness. Could have been a showcase multiplayer game and possibly, something they underutilized in regards to adding a featured online-mode.
As for Yakuza, until recently and only for a couple, generally was a 500k seller, and that was arguably the path Shenmue was already on which is why their massive campaign for it was always short-sighted.
As for Sonic, they were really banking on the franchise to bail them out, but Sonics perception of being a large game franchise never really matched with the series sales. Which for a time Sega was spamming in output to try and keep themselves a float, even when they first went third-party. Mobile ended up helping them a lot in this regard, to the point where Sega FY reports will included downloads so they can say the "Sonic franchise has sold billion units" which is of course misleading but eh.
Out of curiosity I looked at Kotaku and IGNs best Dreamcast game lists which several gamers agreed with online with slight changes in order and few nonincludeds.
IGN
- Soul Calibur
- Skies of Arcadia
- Powerstone 2
- Marvel Vs. Capcom 2
- Jet Set Radio
- Rez
- Sonic Adventure 2
- Phantasy Star Online
- Grandia 2
- Typing of the dead
Kotaku
- Jet Set Radio
- NFL 2K1
- Ikaruga
- Shenmue
- Power Stone 2
- Rez
- Space Channel 5
- Seaman
- Sonic Adventure
- Skies of Arcadia
- Soul Calibur
- Samba De Amigo
- Marvel Vs, Capcom 2
- Crazy Taxi
When you list games this way for other consoles, usually there are some appeal limited, and/or niche games included but you also have some modest to huge favorites in there as well, but with DC (and also Saturn but not tot he extent of DC) this isn't the case.
Most of these games don't really entice people to buy systems, some of which we both brought up before. NFL 2K1 aside, Crazy Taxi 1 was the only real difference but it's reach was capped due to the content, and much of its sales may have been due to being near launch.
Rez, MvsC2, Samba, Seaman, Shenmue, Rez, Power Stone 2, Grandia 2 are not the type of games that move hardware. It's really peculiar how these games were the face of the console, and a 3rd of these games were actually pushed by Sega over other games that would have more appeal or at least, drive more hardware adoption. The games themselves, outside a few, were not bad but it's a question of why someone playing MVC2 in the arcade 50 times would want to drop cash on a new console and a copy of that game, along with Shenmue and Res, when they can get Tekken Tag, Ridge Racer V, Madden, and Time splitters on PS1, or Halo, Dead or Alive 3, and Project Gotham on Xbox.
I wonder of Sega of Japan ever really understood what they were doing, or why the Genesis took off in the west. I think they just refused to figure it out. It doesn't seem they understood why the Saturn was initially successful in Japan as well.
Last edited:
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
Correct. One C-suite marketing exec did not kill Dreamcast. SEGA, having only really one truly successful console with the Genesis, was never able to replicate that success with their follow-ups. The Saturn did so badly, I think Dreamcast was a step in the right direction, but just too little, too late. It wasn't really any one thing that killed it, it was just SEGA was not good at running a successful, long-term global business in the console space. I think after the failure of the Saturn, they just didn't really ever recover enough to have a real chance again.
Last edited:
SkylineRKR
Member
In the end Sega were a fluke on the console market, we talked about the perfect storm of the Genesis before (Sonic, sports, R rated content). Before and after, not many gave much about Sega hardware.
Their heritage is arcade games. And they thrived when Arcades were thriving. But people don't really need to play them at home save for a few. Street Fighter was one of the exceptions, it works as home just as good. Tekken similar. The fighter market however was oversaturated with inferior copycats and straight rip offs. I wonder how many gamers actually bought Golden Axe The Duel (way to use a kinda known Genesis IP), or Galaxy Fight on Saturn. And on DC I doubt many were waiting in line to buy Star Gladiator 2, Tech Romancer (I know, its good) and Project Justice (its very good). Hell, almost no one bought Street Fighter 3 Double Impact, because SF had gone into a niche after SNES and too many revisions. Around the year 2000, no one outside a niche and an exception gave much fucks about 2D or arcade games in general. And it was like the bulk of what the DC offered and indeed what Sega pushed.
The Sega games even didn't sell at a 10 bucks price point, such as Afterburner Climax, Daytona USA and House of the Dead 4. I bought them day one, but most gamers apparently didn't care. Its easy to see there was simply no market for them. And yes, this experience was the majority of what the DC offered. There was no demand for most of these. Sometimes a fluke like Crazy Taxi, which is good for Sega but the bad news is, you can only do this once. Its a quick fix game about a Taxi you can't expand into a universe without losing its appeal. You can repeat the same over and over, which they did, and CT2 sold way worse (perhaps down the fact DC was already dead), and CT3 likely even worse... by then you could do this as a side activity in GTA.
Worldwide Soccer 2000 was a reskin of that N64 Michael Owen game, and there was also the awful 90 Minutes.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
You have to add this started late genesis, and then expanded to pretty much their entire line up of Pico, Game gear, Saturn, Sega's PC Ports, and Dreamcast. Oddly,
Oddly, Street Fighter EX3 a launch window title for the PS2, seemed to get more attention than SF3 Double Impact, and the separate Third Strike combined, probably because it was in 3D and there was still some novelty there, but SF as you said was sinking I would say since after Alpha 1. SFEX1 had novelty of being SF2 in 3D basically with some other wacky characters but then that died off as the brands appeal did.
But Sega was always trying to push multiple games, or ambitious unique experience that often backfired (Shenmue their biggest backfire) instead of major appealing quality games, or taking advantage of something trending. Stuff like Last Bronx or Fighting Vipers 2, or pushing third party games like freaking Silent-Scope on DC weren't exactly the system movers they needed.
It reminds me of the loud TG16/PC Engine fans, and some of those niche games they always put on the pedestal, but few actually brought. Which ended up leading to NECs fast decline, and their successor system PCFX tripling down on that, became a whole console that was niche and only sold a few hundred thousand, the software sales on that thing must have been horrifying.
Some of Sega's decisions were weird, they made several ports of varying quality of their older arcade games, and then sold them high-priced in packs or compilations on the Saturn as if people wanted to buy a console for Thunder Blade or OutRun from the mid-80's in the late 90s.
They outsourced VF3TB, they barely marketed Virtual-On 2, they basically rereleased Daytona again.
What's more is they refused to add much content to home ports for several systems, compared to the competition that did. By the Dreamcast you would think that would change but we got the same bare-bones for unreasonable prices. Without much change either to give an incentive to buy.
We can talk about Crazy Taxi 2 and 3(Xbox) failing, but then Simpsons Hit and Run and a bunch of clones, or similar in concept games come out and all sell better. Sega had to evolve Crazy taxi for the sequels but didn't do it the way they should.
Same goes for much of their action, fighting, and shooting lineup, and what they didn't have this problem with were games with potential, but Sega made them one-offs. This happened on Saturn and Dreamcast.
Virtua Strikers was okish, but wasn't what people were looking for.
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
PS2 had such an eclectic library: it had the JRPGs, sport games, racing games, fighting games. The only thing it didn't have was a Shenmue.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Dreamcast died due to Sega's constant slip flopping hardware strategy. Game companies had enough. So many of the big companies like Namco, Konami, EA (some more I probably missed) didn't bother releasing games. And if they did, they released hardly any.
Many of these third party game makers made games for GC and Xbox OG, so it shows it's not some kind of PS2 partnership monopoly. They just didn't trust Sega with their millionth piece of hardware to support for who knows how long.
Gamers amped up buying DC in good numbers right away. I think DC sold 10M units in a short amount of time which is pretty good considering how many big third party companies bailed. What happened is sales probably thinned out when they noticed all those devs were waiting to do PS2 games.
And those missing games are what give Sega consoles breadth, since Sega always focuses on arcadey ports. Good for Sega and arcade lovers. Not good for people who want something different.
DC was also a system that was supposedly easy to pirate games. So if anything, you'd think gamers who have no problem modding or copying discs would love buying DC too propping up sales. DC was also a dirt cheap system at $200 US. So price is no issue for gamers.
Many of these third party game makers made games for GC and Xbox OG, so it shows it's not some kind of PS2 partnership monopoly. They just didn't trust Sega with their millionth piece of hardware to support for who knows how long.
Gamers amped up buying DC in good numbers right away. I think DC sold 10M units in a short amount of time which is pretty good considering how many big third party companies bailed. What happened is sales probably thinned out when they noticed all those devs were waiting to do PS2 games.
And those missing games are what give Sega consoles breadth, since Sega always focuses on arcadey ports. Good for Sega and arcade lovers. Not good for people who want something different.
DC was also a system that was supposedly easy to pirate games. So if anything, you'd think gamers who have no problem modding or copying discs would love buying DC too propping up sales. DC was also a dirt cheap system at $200 US. So price is no issue for gamers.
Last edited:
SkylineRKR
Member
I never understood why games like 18 Wheeler were pushed. I played it in the arcade in 1999 or 2000, before it was ported. It was literally fun for 5 minutes. Let alone playing it on a pad at home. There was no real incentive to try again, it was no crazy taxi and it was slow. It was linear checkpoint driving in a slow ass truck and over in 15 minutes. There were several games like this, some felt really useless on console and more like filler. Sports Jam, another useless port. And while PSX has its myriad of arcade games too (more than DC perhaps), it was complimented by meaty games such as MGS, SH, FF, SMT, Siphon Filter, Spyro, Crash etc. Dreamcast had almost nothing as Shenmue was barely accessible to many. I agree with the weird Shenmue push, screenshots in EGM et all only showed combat in HK. It looked like a next-gen brawler, and its what I initially wanted it to be. Then the full game's battles can be counted on 2 hands. The few exceptions such as Evolution and Blue Stinger had worse quality than PSX games. They just looked better because of the better specs, but they arguably played worse.
CT, well one of their few arcade to home hits (but more like a one hit wonder), take the music license away and not many gamers liked it much anymore. Its appeal was the music and real life brands. Then there was Ferrari, brilliant racing game, but despite being from the Arcade, it was very difficult to master. Our arcade had the 3 screen setup, but I would mostly go to SR2 since that was easy to just pick up and play. Sega also pushed this game for console, and on PS2 it completely bombed.
Thats why I kept my PSX. If I wanted to play something meaty, like Crash Warped, FFVIII or Parasite Eve, I would fire up my PSX. Thats why its ridiculous to think the DC would be a success under any circumstance. Sega didn't have the games and vision for it. The console was marketed as 'its thinking', but most I played were short arcade ports.
Last edited:
CuteFaceJay
Member
Dreamcast will forever live within Xbox. Don't worry Peter.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Actually this shows the issue was always that software never really sold very well on Sega systems, even at a minimum for break even or barely at times. Capcom and Namco has decent sales that weren't enough for the hype at the time, and then sales fell through the floor. Namco pulled back and cancelled releasing Time Crisis II on it, and Capcom had some deal with them so I assume was forced to keep going until they finally backed off. Which may explain the exclusives, some of which didn't leave DC until years later.
Arcade stuff would have sold better if they added benefits to the home releases, but they were dry, and even in the arcade some of the games were dry but were pushed instead for their graphics, which had some coin but then those games didn't have staying power, but then they would port those games to home most of the tie "as is" which was frankly a dumb strategy, but made more insane by the fact they had used that same strategy for 3 consoles and a handheld and it didn't work once.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
I don't think they really pushed stuff like 18 Wheeler as you say, it just came out to a whimper for whatever reason made it an easy release like other stuff like the later Fighting Vipers 2. There were great meaty games in its short lifespan, third party like Grandia II, StarLancer, D2 and Code: Veronica and first party like Skies of Arcadia, PSO, and Shenmue (and other genres that were normally arcade but these entries were simy and/or demanded time invested instead like F355, Aero Dancing 1-3 and MSR or games sitting inbetween the meatiest and most arcade like MDK2, Gundam Side Story or Maken X and such) and there would have been more with a full console life cycle just like Saturn had plenty. Also some not so great games that show they did want to make more stuff like that too like Headhunter. Not that hard to understand. Not that hard to not project one's preference as the de facto objective reason something did or didn't sell as if no product you dislike out there succeeds and no product you like fails either. Many of their games were great, there would be many more under different circumstances and it's to the detriment of gaming that they fell through the cracks.
Last edited:
Kokoloko85
Member
The truth is, everyone killed and hurt Sega.
Sega’s decisions killed Sega, Playstation killed them big time in the PS1/PS2 generation. Nintendo made things not easy for them during Nes,MasterSystem, Snes/Megadrive generation. And MS put some nails in the coffin too at the end
Sega’s decisions killed Sega, Playstation killed them big time in the PS1/PS2 generation. Nintendo made things not easy for them during Nes,MasterSystem, Snes/Megadrive generation. And MS put some nails in the coffin too at the end
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Not to mention that arcade games on the other consoles previous or same gen as DC generally added to the games at their home released instead of them being released dry, and in DC era's case some of the arcade games form Sega or that Sega pushed from others were more about flash over substance anyway which is why many of them didn't last long in the arcade, a fatal issue when arcades were dying fast for that very reason. Then they would port those arcade games 'as is" to the Dreamcast which was frankly dumb, and they used that same Strategy with the others too.
I mean Fighting Vipers 2 was a decent looking arcade game but it was shorter than the first game on the saturn and didn't have much content, and then it was brought to the Dreamcast near as is. A franchise btw, that was designed to appeal to American audiences. Which wanted more to their games and ports, and Sega just thew games like it and many others on their home consoles, while their competitors were adding more characters, more stages, bonus content, story and plot stuff, etc.
Sega also seemed to throw darts at some games on the N64/PS1 and pushed for them to come over to the DC in their marketing at times, often games that weren't even moderately good sellers.
Yeah a few odd games pushed by Sega for the media were basically just eye-candy but weren't good when you played or brought the game, and that ended up backfiring pretty fast. Shenmue itself in the US was misleadingly marketed mostly as an action movie brawler as a showcase for graphics, and the TV adds were intentionally selective. Then people actually got the game or saw footage online of the game and the wom slowed sales. Add in games like Evolution, which Sega partnered with for TWO games despite the first one not even being a decent seller for the console and didn't have good reception, that makes it harder to sell consoles.
That's the thing, while Sega could have done a bit better if they marketed more depthful games, they still didn't have many of them that would appeal to buyers and that was an issue since late-life Genesis and Saturn too.
Their deeper exclusive games they pushed most were,
Shenmue
Skies of Arcadia
Blue Stinger
Sonic Adventure
Sonic Adventure 2
Code Veronica
Headhunter
Phantasy Star Online
D2
Gimmick gear
Seaman
Evolution 1-2
Where the rest of their marketing were mostly on shallow titles (or compromised PC ports) so this list wasn't going to move the consoles or the software Sega needed to make the Dreamcast a success, lead by Sonic, Shenmue and Phantasy Start at the front.
If you look at PS2, Xbox GC, or even PS1, and N64 during that period of 1998-2001, all had a better list and still had the games of lesser content, and the console makers all chose their partnerships much more strategically so there were less Evolutions and such coming out, or as you said bad ports, or just any old game being pushed for quantity.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
This is silly reasoning, we have the sales, people weren't buying those games no matter how great someone may think some of them were. They were not appealing to people they were not helping sell consoles, and the DC's software sales were bad even early on. The Saturns software and hardware sales also suffered for the same reason, with the exception of Japan until the end of 96, where it started losing appeal there and that was before the PS1 had the big hitters release.
More games is fine, but what are those games that there would be "more" of with a longer lifecycle of the DC? More Fighter Vipers 2? More Capcom Vs. SNK? More Shenmue? More Head Hunter? More Seaman? That wouldn't solve the problem that they didn't have the game people wanted to buy a console for, and combine that with some of their more silly decisions choosing what partner games to push, it makes the DC a hardsale.
The guy your quoting already mentioned games earlier he said were great amazing games, but still knew they were not what the DC needed to survive alone.
The determinate to gaming line is silly.
CleverCaviar
Member
can't help read that thread title like a line from Billy Joels "We didn't Start The Fire"
SkylineRKR
Member
D2 is one of my favourite DC games in fact (having beaten both the JP and English versions), but many people hated it. It was a weird game, and not really all that accessible either. It had no sales appeal. It was also very gory, which I applauded, some scenes bordering on hentai.
Skies was excellent, but again, it had little appeal. The battles were a huge step back from games like CT, Xenogears and many other PSX RPG that had already been released and I played. I liked Skies, but, it was obviously a game that would not reel in a fraction of the PSX RPG crowd. Even Code Veronica, which I bought at launch, felt like a step back compared to RE3 in terms of gameplay and weapons. Its also the worst paced classic RE until Zero came out. PSO, well, online, was up in Europe when DC was basically discontinued. MSR also came out then while good, was in a weird place. I actually found it frustrating and rather unfun to progress in. Bizarre fixed this with PGR which was much more fine tuned and accessible, it would become my favourite Xbox launch game.
None of these games had much selling potential, not even CV since it wasn't even numbered (because of Sony). RE was also past its prime at the time. It was a good get none the less. Headhunter, I hated it bar the OST by Kyd, you'd be better off firing up MGS1 or Syphon filter on PS1. I don't think much potential was shown there. Its not like prolific studios would commit to the system and Sega itself wouldn't be able to create system sellers as well. DC had a great lineup within a short timespan, but mostly for purists. I doubt DC would ever chase and find mainstream success seeing the studios Sega had and the output they delivered after the DC of which many games tanked.
Last edited: