Support NeoGAF

[NiiloPielinen]

You should read the book Console Wars

Console Wars (book) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sega of America wanted to do a lot of things that were smart but got vetoed by Sega of Japan.

 

[Boaty McBoatface]

Sega made the best games on the planet and took risks no other companies were willing to make - I don't care if they didn't sell as much in the end we should be grateful we were blessed with such brilliant pieces of work.

 

[Krizalidx11]

It failed because they forgot to tell developers around the world it's coming out


Annnnnnddddd

 

[dcx4610]

As someone who grew up during the height of Nintendo/Sega and was lucky (or not) enough to have the NES/Genesis/SNES/Sega CD and 32X , it was Sega always playing catch up for me.

The Genesis was a big leap over the NES with graphics and sound. I got the Genesis for Christmas and even my uncle commented watching me play Last Battle that it looked way better than the NES they had back at home. When the SNES came out, it was pretty much game over for Sega to me. I still supported them because I liked games and wanted to have the most options available.

Still, outside of exclusives, all of the multi-plats with few exceptions (Disney and sports mostly), were better on the SNES. Better sound, graphics and color. Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter were big ones. With MK, yes it had blood but it looked and sounded pretty bad. The SNES version didn't play very well but graphically, it was pretty close to the arcade and the sound was very good. With Street Fighter, you had a much lower color palette and bad voices. I liked the music since the sound chip was closer to the arcade but the SNES music was good as well.

I remember being excited for the 32X and getting MK2 hoping for a near arcade perfect port. But even then, the SNES version was arguably better and you didn't need a $150 add-on.

Sega just never was able to improve their sound and color capabilities to match or surpass Nintendo and at least for me, that kept me mostly with Nintendo. Sega's answer to a problem was throw more hardware at it and it was never all that good until the Dreamcast and by the then, it was too late. I think Nintendo had the right approach by using the same hardware but taking advantage of special chips in carts to give that hardware additional capabilities.

 

[lame gag1990]

So you were wrong about Mortal Kombat, now you're wrong about Sega. Come on dude, just give it up.

 

[Team Andromeda]

Sega made the best games on the planet and took risks no other companies were willing to make - I don't care if they didn't sell as much in the end we should be grateful we were blessed with such brilliant pieces of work.

It was a great ride. SEGA on the Saturn and Dreamcast were something else and the best

RIP Isao Okawa.

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

While diehard Sega fans can cite a hundred classics, to most casual gamers in the 1990s, the Sega Genesis was a hit for two reasons only: Sonic and Sports.

You forgot Midway also. The fact Nintendo got them on N64 over the Saturn should tell you Sega screwed that partnership up.

IIRC, Sega burned bridges with the 32x and Sega CD,

While a factor, as a cause this was a myth, as the whole point of the 32X was to extend the life of the Genesis so they had already messed up the Genesis before the 32x. Meanwhile SNES was starting to have its second wind before DKC, DKC just quickened the pace.

Saturn was rather succesful in Japan. It did outsell the N64 there. In the end I think the Saturn amounted about a quarter of the PS1 sales but it obviously had a much shorter life span. This made it tough for Sega, they had to axe a system prematurely that wasn't even a total flop in Japan but everywhere else.

It barely outsold the N64 by 500k or something like that, and the N64 had better software rates and came out years late. People keep saying the Saturn was a success yet games shared with the PSX couldn't even sell a 4th as much on the Saturn and they almost got lasped by Nintendo which basically didn't have any of the games that made PS popular while the Saturn had piles of them. I'm sure they sold enough to make a profit on what they had but I think that was more about breaking even, given Sega's overall financial situation by 1997.

If anything doubling down on Japan after poor sales elsewhere was the worst decision they made, especially with some great titles that came out after 96. imo.

he format wasn't in huge demand before Sony hyped it.

Uh DvD's were flying off the shelves before the PS2 so this is silly.

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

So you were wrong about Mortal Kombat, now you're wrong about Sega. Come on dude, just give it up.

I was never wrong about MK< you didn't read the thread like several other people and thought it was about quality and game comparisons when it was only about sales.

This is also a sales thread, please list these blockbuster selling FP Sega made games that weren't Sonic or VF when they made consoles, i'll wait.

 

[lame gag1990]

I was never wrong about MK< you didn't read the thread like several other people and thought it was about quality and game comparisons when it was only about sales.

This is also a sales thread, please list these blockbuster selling FP Sega made games that weren't Sonic or VF when they made consoles, i'll wait.

I did. I posted sales figures. You were wrong.

What do you determine a "blockbuster"? Shenmue sold 1.2 million copies. There's one for you. Done.

It's a little tricky to find sources. Here's a few according to this source: https://www.vgchartz.com/article/270395/dreamcast-turns-19-top-10-best-selling-games-on-the-console/

Crazy Taxi: 1.81 million.
NFL 2K: 1.2 million.
Shenmue 1.18 million.
NFL 2K1: 1.09 million.

That's Dreamcast. You weren't waiting for long.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

Soul Calibur is not in the list of the OP's DC games, so that makes me question the entire premise of this thread.

And that's before getting started on how Sega took a gamble with a 2D-oriented console with the Saturn, when the industry was moving toward 3D.

Or how the Sega CD and 32X went nowhere.

Or how the DC's software was easily piratable, which made Valve pull the plug on porting HL2. (remember BleemCast?)

Sega made too many mistakes. Shinobi is dead, and they needed indie devs to remind them that the Streets of Rage and ToeJam and Earl franchises are till profitable.

Nah, Sega failed because their leadership is trash. They have no visionaries.

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

I did. I posted sales figures. You were wrong.

What do you determine a "blockbuster"? Shenmue sold 1.2 million copies. There's one for you. Done.

It's a little tricky to find sources. Here's a few according to this source: https://www.vgchartz.com/article/270395/dreamcast-turns-19-top-10-best-selling-games-on-the-console/

Crazy Taxi: 1.81 million.
NFL 2K: 1.2 million.
Shenmue 1.18 million.
NFL 2K1: 1.09 million.

That's Dreamcast. You weren't waiting for long.

And as soon as you see Vgchartz you knew he lost the argument.

(btw I already mentioned Shenmue in the OP you didn't read which is the only one that could be a considered an exception based on sources not VGchartz.) (also I will give you Crazy Taxi looking at NPD data as it barely, but still did make it to 1 mill, but this does not apply to the NFL games, but even then these are minimum and aren't multi million sellers like Sonic was which was the main point but ok. )

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

The Dreamcast failed because the human race is flawed.

 

[lame gag1990]

And as soon as you see Vgchartz you knew he lost the argument.

(btw I already mentioned Shenmue in the OP you didn't read which is the only one that could be a considered an exception based on sources not VGchartz.)

I did read it. You specifically asked me "please list these blockbuster selling FP Sega made games that weren't Sonic or VF when they made consoles, i'll wait." so I obliged. Are you that stupid that you don't know what you asked me? You create these threads and you try to come off as like you know the secrets to something that nobody thought of. It's already common knowledge why the Dreamcast failed at this point. It was 20 years ago. You haven't discovered or theorized anything new in that time period. Basically, your threads are nonsense.

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

Soul Calibur is not in the list of the OP's DC games, so that makes me question the entire premise of this thread.

Soul Calibur isn't a Sega made FP title, that was Namco, (also didn't sell that high on Dreamcast, couldn't even crack 300k in japan. and that was a large chunk of its sales.)

Sega made too many mistakes. Shinobi is dead, and they needed indie devs to remind them that the Streets of Rage and ToeJam and Earl franchises are till profitable.

Nah, Sega failed because their leadership is trash. They have no visionaries.

But you should consider the fact that Sega isn't the only company that made mistakes or had conflicts, but what got the other companies out, or brought them some time before they fell, were the games. Of course what you said are factors but imo I would argue those factors are bigger because they didn't have the larger base that would eat up games in large numbers despite all these bad moves.

There was nothing wrong with the games, they just didn't really reach many people. Seaman and Nights weren't lighting the world on fire but they are unique,

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

I did read it. You specifically asked me "please list these blockbuster selling FP Sega made games that weren't Sonic or VF when they made consoles, i'll wait." so I obliged.

Your strawman doesn't work here. Sorry. You don't like the thread and want to complain about the Dreamcast threads being useless because it died 20 years ago why did you enter the thread? Clearly you have a problem, good day. There's no theory sales are objective, and the fact we are even talking about games barely scrapping one million, few games at that, just proves my point that they didn't have much in the way of major games with outreach.

Now go on home now. You can not post in thread you don't like mr.20 years ago.

 

[Outrunner]

That's false.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

Soul Calibur isn't a Sega made FP title, that was Namco, (also didn't sell that high on Dreamcast, couldn't even crack 300k in japan. and that was a large chunk of its sales.)



But you should consider the fact that Sega isn't the only company that made mistakes or had conflicts, but what got the other companies out, or brought them some time before they fell, were the games. Of course what you said are factors but imo I would argue those factors are bigger because they didn't have the larger base that would eat up games in large numbers despite all these bad moves.

There was nothing wrong with the games, they just didn't really reach many people. Seaman and Nights weren't lighting the world on fire but they are unique,

Soul Calibur was the DC killer IP that sold Dreamcasts. That and Sonic Adventure. It counts.

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

Soul Calibur was the DC killer IP that sold Dreamcasts. That and Sonic Adventure. It counts.

This didn't literally happen though. It wasn't a large blockbuster hit, it was massively well received critically though. Great game.

But it's not Sega or a FP game so it doesn't count either way.

 

[zeorhymer]

I thought they failed because they were always chasing. The Saturn debacle didn't help any.

 

[Celine]

Yes, Sega's first-party software was never as popular as Nintendo's first-party software.
However the opening post makes the often repeated mistake to directly compare Sega to Sony which doesn't make sense if you want to deeply understand the evolution of console business.
Sega, just like Atari or Nintendo, was a breed of console maker whose fortune arise from being a pure game company, this had a series of implications that made their approach to produce consoles to be completely different from the Sony one.
Sega was a first-party driven console maker that is a console maker which spearhead their console adoption through its own in-house software and considered other publishers as competitors.
Of course they accepted other publishers software on their platform in exchange of a license fee but they always aimed to be the dominant force, software wise, on their consoles while third-parties are followers.

When Sony entered the videogame business they didn't aim to conquer the number one spot just by doing what Nintendo or Sega were doing but better, what Sony did was to analyze the current state of the industry and create a new business model based on a strong platform holder that would push hard for the platform diffusion (utilizing also the far greater resources a mega corporation possess compared to humbler videogame companies) while leaving third-party software the leading role to attarct consumers.
Sony published some very popular games on PS1 but the software that really made the PS1 rolling was a constant stream of hits from third-party publishers (stuff like Namco arcade hits conversions, Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, Final Fantasy VII, EA sport games and so on).

What really happened during the 32-64 bit generation was in reality a battle between a previously dominant busines model against a new one that raised to prominance.

Due to corparate cultural background and different priorities a first-party driven cannot attract the same level of third-party support as Sony leveraged with the PlayStation consoles.
All the attempt in that direction would fail.

Sega commited many mistakes that hastened their demise as a console maker and chief among them was Sega's focus to just compete at any cost to become the next number one company against Nintendo and Sony instead of focusing on strenghten the company because in life there are always good times and bad times and when the bad times comes you better have your house in order to resist to the storm.
Sega's managemnt was a very short sighted company.

What I believe is that, in general, the third-party driven model was destined to supplement the first-party driven model.
Of course I expect people to point out to Nintendo to deny my conclusion however I'd wager that Nintendo should be considered as a special exception instead of the norm.

[I cut a bit the post because I need to go]

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

The Atari and Nintendo numbers are wrong on that chart, but yes you make a point, though one thing to consider is before Tom Sega wasn't trying to be competitive in the way of chasing the competition, so I don't really think the company was ever really made for that in the first place which may have helped the internal conflicts that followed, Sega main relationship with third parties before that point was licensing out there IP.

 

[SumJester]

You should read the book Console Wars

Console Wars (book) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sega of America wanted to do a lot of things that were smart but got vetoed by Sega of Japan.

I felt this one incredibly basied to Sega of American (Kalinske in particular), that DID plenty of stupid decisions, like massacration of Streets of Rage 3 or sabotaging Phantasy Star 4 because sport games were the way. (This "One trick poney" mentality made a good dent on the Sega CD and Saturn).


Let's be real Sega sucesses and failiures were a joint effort by both branches.

 

[Celine]

The Atari and Nintendo numbers are wrong on that chart.

The Nintendo number can't be wrong (for what it considers).
The only disclaimer is that the VB sales are only as March 1996 so not definitive because the console was discontined after that point.



EDIT:
I better add the notes:
Note: Virtual Boy total shipment is until March 1996. So may not be definitive as the system was discontinued in the fiscal year ending March 1997.

* What is referred as "First-party software" is actually an approximation calculated by summing every million-seller.
Since most Nintendo games sell at least 1 million units it should be a close enough approximation.

** Only software which has physical version is considered.
If a game has a physical version and a digital version then it is included but if it is digital only it is excluded.


The Atari number is an approximated estimate based mostly (because the VCS is by far Atari most successful console) on the Atari Corp press release from mid 1988 which states that the VCS had sold around 25M units by that point in time:

https://atariage.com/forums/uploads/monthly_01_2008/post-9346-1201143700.jpg

Just like the Sony (PlayStation), Microsoft (Xbox) and Sega numbers are approximated estimates due to some consoles data missing (namely PSV for Sony, Xbox One for Microsoft and SMS for Sega).

 

[ManaByte]

I felt this one incredibly basied to Sega of American (Kalinske in particular), that DID plenty of stupid decisions, like massacration of Streets of Rage 3 or sabotaging Phantasy Star 4 because sport games were the way. (This "One trick poney" mentality made a good dent on the Sega CD and Saturn).


Let's be real Sega sucesses and failiures were a joint effort by both branches.

Kalinske does deserve credit for going to SOJ at the start of the Genesis era and basically telling them they were idiots and laying out the plan that made the Genesis a success in the US (dropping the price, marketing, etc). The shockwave from that though was the rift between SOA and SOJ that never mended and eventually sunk the entire company.

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

The Nintendo number can't be wrong (for what it considers).
The only disclaimer is that the VB sales are only as March 1996 so not definitive because the console was discontined after that point.



EDIT:
I better add the notes:
Note: Virtual Boy total shipment is until March 1996. So may not be definitive as the system was discontinued in the fiscal year ending March 1997.

* What is referred as "First-party software" is actually an approximation calculated by summing every million-seller.
Since most Nintendo games sell at least 1 million units it should be a close enough approximation.

** Only software which has physical version is considered.
If a game has a physical version and a digital version then it is included but if it is digital only it is excluded.


The Atari number is an approximated estimate based mostly (because the VCS is by far Atari most successful console) on the Atari Corp press release from mid 1988 which states that the VCS had sold around 25M units by that point in time:

https://atariage.com/forums/uploads/monthly_01_2008/post-9346-1201143700.jpg

Just like the Sony (PlayStation), Microsoft (Xbox) and Sega numbers are approximated estimates due to some consoles data missing (namely PSV for Sony, Xbox One for Microsoft and SMS for Sega).

Nintendo included hand held so that threw me off.

But Atari sold over 30 million with the 2600, that's widely known.

But missing is 5200, 7800, Jaguar, Lynx, and XEGS. Assuming the computers dont count.

It's closer to 40 honestly, but could be more due to the 80's lack of transparency stuff going on back then. It figures almost Ataris sales numbers were leaks or slipped in unknown investor releases. Even when they were winning or profitable.

You know now that I think about it we've only had 5 "major" console manufacturers with multiple consoles and at least 10 million consoles sold. Or even surviving after the second console.

NEC could have been 6th if they didn't cut their own success with the PC engine short and messed up the sucessors, then put out that pc-fx machine with that non-existant game they demoed lastly.

 

[Rat Rage]

Sega consoles failed because Sega's management made too many business mistakes.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Sega's first party game libraries during Saturn and DC got worse and worse. Too much focus on arcade stuff, which was more a 8/16 bit thing, their sports games were the worst during Saturn, had awful EA Sports on Saturn and none on DC (sports games were a big draw back then).

Sega is trying to sell to gamers versions of Virtua Racing and Daytona USA, and gamers preferred something different and meatier like GT. Sega is trying to pitch Virtua Fighter, and PS1 has a better version of Toshindin, Tekken games (IMO much better than VF), and other fighters when that genre was the craze.

During DC, they never got any kind of real support (if any) from EA, Square, Konami, limited bits from Namco. I thin the only key company that did was Capcom some reason.

First party games were one nail in the coffin, hit and miss third party were the other 3 nails.

The Sonic mascot only resonate 30 years ago due to splashy graphics and speed. Games back then (aside from shitty sprite based racing games) never blazed across the screen. Mario is a much better platformer which 10x the gameplay and secrets, but if someone wanted pure eye candy Sonic was the way to go.

But systems got bulked up over time and any game now from AAA games to a $5 indie game can be a speed demon. So that rush of clearing a level in under 1 minute in Sonic is lost. The games from what I remember (unless they really changed a lot lately) were shallow games with hardly any secrets per level, hardly any enemies, and unlike Mario doesn't really change a lot (Mario does all kinds of shit). The main thing to do was find rings and rush to the end of the level. The faster you clear it the more points you get.

 

[Dane]

Wrong, Sega success was not only due to Sonic, it was their strong third party support with the Genesis thanks to less restrictive policies such as the limit of releases per publisher and censorship, aligned with the excellent marketing by the US team, once SoJ became jealous and started to interfer with everything before the Saturn release is where the company headed to the wrong way and finally broke.

Yes, Sega's first-party software was never as popular as Nintendo's first-party software.
However the opening post makes the often repeated mistake to directly compare Sega to Sony which doesn't make sense if you want to deeply understand the evolution of console business.
Sega, just like Atari or Nintendo, was a breed of console maker whose fortune arise from being a pure game company, this had a series of implications that made their approach to produce consoles to be completely different from the Sony one.
Sega was a first-party driven console maker that is a console maker which spearhead their console adoption through its own in-house software and considered other publishers as competitors.
Of course they accepted other publishers software on their platform in exchange of a license fee but they always aimed to be the dominant force, software wise, on their consoles while third-parties are followers.

When Sony entered the videogame business they didn't aim to conquer the number one spot just by doing what Nintendo or Sega were doing but better, what Sony did was to analyze the current state of the industry and create a new business model based on a strong platform holder that would push hard for the platform diffusion (utilizing also the far greater resources a mega corporation possess compared to humbler videogame companies) while leaving third-party software the leading role to attarct consumers.
Sony published some very popular games on PS1 but the software that really made the PS1 rolling was a constant stream of hits from third-party publishers (stuff like Namco arcade hits conversions, Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, Final Fantasy VII, EA sport games and so on).

What really happened during the 32-64 bit generation was in reality a battle between a previously dominant busines model against a new one that raised to prominance.

Due to corparate cultural background and different priorities a first-party driven cannot attract the same level of third-party support as Sony leveraged with the PlayStation consoles.
All the attempt in that direction would fail.

Sega commited many mistakes that hastened their demise as a console maker and chief among them was Sega's focus to just compete at any cost to become the next number one company against Nintendo and Sony instead of focusing on strenghten the company because in life there are always good times and bad times and when the bad times comes you better have your house in order to resist to the storm.
Sega's managemnt was a very short sighted company.

What I believe is that, in general, the third-party driven model was destined to supplement the first-party driven model.
Of course I expect people to point out to Nintendo to deny my conclusion however I'd wager that Nintendo should be considered as a special exception instead of the norm.

[I cut a bit the post because I need to go]

Exactly, most people on the internet seems to think that Playstation success is entirely due to exclusives, it's not, it was the affordable price + support + easy to develop +hardware + massive third party support as Genesis did. Most of the exclusive games were just exclusives out of convenience and basically the only balanced great choice: The Saturn died quickly and it was an ass to code, the 64 which did have a decent third party support was using the expensive and limited cartridges, so that's why you had games being on PS1+PC such as Tomb Raider 2 and 3, Resident Evil and etc. If the Saturn and 64 were hits, Resident Evil, FFVII and others would have been surely multiplatform day one. Why y'all see many once exclusive franchises on the 32-128 bits being multiplatforms now? Because the Xbox and Playstation share similar hardwares and have great sales figures.

It failed because they forgot to tell developers around the world it's coming out


Annnnnnddddd

Not sure why Peter is on this, he and Bernie Stolar( yes that guy) actually tried to save Sega with the Dreamcast, which had an excellent launch in the US, something that the Saturn should had in the first place. It was Isao Okawa who wasn't optimistic about the company being on the console market.

 

[SkylineRKR]

You forgot Midway also. The fact Nintendo got them on N64 over the Saturn should tell you Sega screwed that partnership up.


While a factor, as a cause this was a myth, as the whole point of the 32X was to extend the life of the Genesis so they had already messed up the Genesis before the 32x. Meanwhile SNES was starting to have its second wind before DKC, DKC just quickened the pace.


It barely outsold the N64 by 500k or something like that, and the N64 had better software rates and came out years late. People keep saying the Saturn was a success yet games shared with the PSX couldn't even sell a 4th as much on the Saturn and they almost got lasped by Nintendo which basically didn't have any of the games that made PS popular while the Saturn had piles of them. I'm sure they sold enough to make a profit on what they had but I think that was more about breaking even, given Sega's overall financial situation by 1997.

If anything doubling down on Japan after poor sales elsewhere was the worst decision they made, especially with some great titles that came out after 96. imo.




Uh DvD's were flying off the shelves before the PS2 so this is silly.

It outsold the N64 regardless. While the Saturn was seen as a colossal flop almost everywhere. 5.5-6 million Saturns is over half of its total WW sales. It was most succesful in Japan and also far more succesful than their previous systems and the DC over there. They actually were ahead of Sony by late 1996 still. Final Fantasy and onward releases on PSX pretty much crushed the Saturn. The console videogame market was still very Japan centric at the time. It was a big market. Consoles and games released in Japan first, they were treated first. Its in that era not a weird thought to hold on to that system, being a Japanese company (technically Sega was founded in the US but you know the drill). I could see them being at a crossroad.

The problem with Saturn overseas was that Sega US effectively killed it in the spring of 1997 with no successor available for about 2 years at all.

I kind of mixed it up with DVD. In Japan it was largely ignored until PS2 came out, Matrix film was actually the best selling piece of software.

But overseas DVD players cost like 1000 dollars before 2000. They were gaining traction but there wasn't a killer app for the format yet until Matrix came out. Then, when the PS2 came out the format absolutely skyrocketed. DVD would probably catch on anyway, but PS2 no doubt sped the process up. It was a reasonably affordable player at the time. So yeah it would probably help Dreamcast too, since the format actually started to sell well from 1999 onward. Problem ofcourse, how much would such a drive cost in late 1998 when DC was assembled. It would've been impossible to launch at a profit and/or a competitive price.

 

[Celine]

Nintendo included hand held so that threw me off.

Not just Nintendo, the approximated figures for Sony, Sega and Atari also include home consoles and handheld consoles.
It's the total number of video game consoles sold by each manufacturer.

The only disclaimer is that I excluded consoles without interchangeable software (Home Pong, Color TV6-15, Game & Watch, SNES Classic, Atari Flashback etc.) and add-ons (Famicom Disk System, Mega CD, 32X, PlayStation VR etc.).

But Atari sold over 30 million with the 2600, that's widely known.

But missing is 5200, 7800, Jaguar, Lynx, and XEGS. Assuming the computers dont count.

It's closer to 40 honestly, but could be more due to the 80's lack of transparency stuff going on back then. It figures almost Ataris sales numbers were leaks or slipped in unknown investor releases. Even when they were winning or profitable.

The "widely known" (for example whatever is written in wikipedia) do not interest me much because most often than not it's sourced very poorly (that is the sources are sketchy) by people who have no idea what they are looking at.
What I'm interested in is shipment data directly sourced by the console manufacturer.

As an example, since we are talking about the subject, the total shipment of Lynx in USA by May 1992 given by Atari to Famitsu was: about 1 million units.
Obviously it's not a definitive figures but it gives an indication where it landed in the end.

The Jaguar shipped in total a paltry figure of 125K consoles.

If I had to guess Atari consoles total sales it would be between 30M and 35M.
As evidenced by the approximation symbol (~) the figures in the chart (with the exception of Nintendo) don't pinpoint the exact figures because it would be an exercise in futility without the actual sell-in data by the manufacturer.

Assuming the computers dont count.

Correct, as labelled only stand alone video game consoles with interchangeable software are considered in that chart.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Sega was a disfunctional company with SEGA Usa making different decisions/investing in different directions.

They released a pletora of consoles in a short period of time...

If they focused on the Dreamcast it could do very well.

This

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

Not just Nintendo, the approximated figures for Sony, Sega and Atari also include home consoles and handheld consoles.
It's the total number of video game consoles sold by each manufacturer.

The only disclaimer is that I excluded consoles without interchangeable software (Home Pong, Color TV6-15, Game & Watch, SNES Classic, Atari Flashback etc.) and add-ons (Famicom Disk System, Mega CD, 32X, PlayStation VR etc.).


The "widely known" (for example whatever is written in wikipedia) do not interest me much because most often than not it's sourced very poorly (that is the sources are sketchy) by people who have no idea what they are looking at.
What I'm interested in is shipment data directly sourced by the console manufacturer.

As an example, since we are talking about the subject, the total shipment of Lynx in USA by May 1992 given by Atari to Famitsu was: about 1 million units.
Obviously it's not a definitive figures but it gives an indication where it landed in the end.

The Jaguar shipped in total a paltry figure of 125K consoles.

If I had to guess Atari consoles total sales it would be between 30M and 35M.
As evidenced by the approximation symbol (~) the figures in the chart (with the exception of Nintendo) don't pinpoint the exact figures because it would be an exercise in futility without the actual sell-in data by the manufacturer.


Correct, as labelled only stand alone video game consoles with interchangeable software are considered in that chart.

That's slightly off but that's still 3 years misding off the Lynx either way and 92 is when sales were pickimg up ANF Atari was able to make consoles in higher quantity as they could produce as many Lungs as Gameboys even if they were the number one wanted item. Though we have 3 million Lynxes reported in compute and other mags.

Also leaked documents have over 200k for Jaguar, posted on Atariage and other places. Not that it's much higher

Still missing XEGS though.

Speaking of Atari they had the same problem as Sega, only difference was there was a point Atari games were the industry standard, but not in the 90s. On computers yeah but on consoles the 90s had like 3 new ip Atari ganes with any sort of significant appeal.

From Atari Corp anyway, Atari games is another discussion. Atari corp also had internal conflicts like Sega, even internationally, Sega Europe was thrown under.

If it wasn't for some key people funding Sega they may have died around the same time as Atari.

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

It outsold the N64 regardless. While the Saturn was seen as a colossal flop almost everywhere. 5.5-6 million Saturns is over half of its total WW sales. It was most succesful in Japan and also far more succesful than their previous systems and the DC over there. They actually were ahead of Sony by late 1996 still. Final Fantasy and onward releases on PSX pretty much crushed the Saturn. The console videogame market was still very Japan centric at the time. It was a big market. Consoles and games released in Japan first, they were treated first. Its in that era not a weird thought to hold on to that system, being a Japanese company (technically Sega was founded in the US but you know the drill). I could see them being at a crossroad.

The problem with Saturn overseas was that Sega US effectively killed it in the spring of 1997 with no successor available for about 2 years at all.

I kind of mixed it up with DVD. In Japan it was largely ignored until PS2 came out, Matrix film was actually the best selling piece of software.

But overseas DVD players cost like 1000 dollars before 2000. They were gaining traction but there wasn't a killer app for the format yet until Matrix came out. Then, when the PS2 came out the format absolutely skyrocketed. DVD would probably catch on anyway, but PS2 no doubt sped the process up. It was a reasonably affordable player at the time. So yeah it would probably help Dreamcast too, since the format actually started to sell well from 1999 onward. Problem ofcourse, how much would such a drive cost in late 1998 when DC was assembled. It would've been impossible to launch at a profit and/or a competitive price.

Consoles were only Japan centric for Nintendo consoles after NES (outside Japan), the Genesis and later 3DO and PS1 proved this. Western devs barely wanted to touch Nintendo back then, even now. Although they are in a much better place now then back then. It's usually a myth pushed by internet board one can look at Npd lists to see the change Or other sales reports. NES created a vacuum which is why the Genesis was able to take off how it did mostly on the back of Sonic and western ips. Even Sonic would have a hybrid Japan/US team for some games.

Look at how big people thought FF7 was for years, but outside japan it was outsold by games such as Tony Hawk and iirc Driver. Crash was also the first western IP to sell in significant numbers in Japan, on consoles anyway. For all 3 games. Was the most dominant game worldwide on Ps1 outside japan only beaten by Gran Turismo.


As for DVD I could get cheap DVDs for $50 to $150 by late 2001 PS2 launch. You didn't need the matriclx. Sure it helped the PS2 a bit but it wouldn't have helped Sega much in US.

Now in Japan where even the cheap bad quality DVD players were similar or more expensive with the 2000s ps2 launch the Dreamcast may have gotten help, but then you'd have to wonder about the costs of adding DVD functionality to a console designed in 1997. I can only see DVD helping Sega if they released close to the japan launch of the ps2.

Otherwise it's a wash.

 

[nerdface]

I dunno what counts as blockbuster, but the phantasy star series is tits mcghee.

...or it was before it got gaas

 

[Celine]

Though we have 3 million Lynxes reported in compute and other mags.

Can you show me?
Do these mags cite the source of their claim? Is it Atari sell-in data?

Also leaked documents have over 200k for Jaguar, posted on Atariage and other places. Not that it's much higher

The 225K number is the total Jaguar consoles manufactured by Atari by the end of 1995.
The total sell-in by the end of 1995 was 125K.

 

[Esppiral]

I'd take any Dreamcast exclusive over anything you've mentioned.

 

[sncvsrtoip]

they had many great titles but most arcade style short length games and times changed, players wanted more games with long story for many hours of playing and not repeating same game all over again to score better points

 

[RAIDEN1]

Sega: The one-hit wonders...

 

[SirTerry-T]

Gorby fella and Raiden chap???....
Yep, it's a let's shit on Sega thread.

 

[SportsFan581]

Such disrespect for Sega's software. I don't think the software was the issue, tbh.

In order to judge software sales fairly you really need to look at the uptake %, rather than the total sales. Obviously, the company with a player base of 10m is not going to sell as much software as the one with 100m customers. Sega and Nintendo were both quickly in the same position when Sony and MS entered the picture, that being that they could not afford to offer competitive hardware. Sega and Nintendo handled that situation differently and obviously one did better than the other.

 

[BlackTron]

I disagree that Sega's issue was lack of games.

Wii U was loaded with good exclusive games but still failed due their total ineptitude at everything else.

Sega of America was really smart but Sega of Japan fought them and ruined everything. After a little taste of success they got full of themselves. And because they couldn't agree on a unified vision or direction they spammed out too much hardware.

If not for Sony, I think Sega could have reestablished itself after all the harsh lessons. But Playstation was such a beast that Nintendo had to go back to the drawing board to expand the gaming market instead of getting back the customers that they (and Sega) lost, PSX was utterly entrenched and unshakable.

 

[lame gag1990]

Sega: The one-hit wonders...

I'm not sure why I waste my time with people like yourself but I will.

One hit wonders...
Sonic series
Streets of Rage series
Virtua Fighter series
House of the Dead series
Shining series
Yakuza series
Hatsune Miku series
Football Manager series
Total War series
Shin Megami series
Persona Series
Etrian Odyssey series
Puyo Puyo series
Sakura Wars series
etc etc etc.

The list goes on and on. Multiple games in each series. Not 1 hit then 1 flop. Many games. If they weren't a hit, they wouldn't make more of the cunting things. Stop typing bollocks. Better yet, stop typing. Stop typing and get educated. This is a company we, as gamers, should all celebrate for being pioneers and entertainers in this hobby of ours. If there was a hall of fame, Sega would be in there straight away. Trying to shit on one of the greatest of all time with such a lazy and dogshit claim you disrespectful trash.

 

[ManaByte]

I'm not sure why I waste my time with people like yourself but I will.

One hit wonders...
Sonic series
Streets of Rage series
Virtua Fighter series
House of the Dead series
Shining series
Yakuza series
Hatsune Miku series
Football Manager series
Total War series
Shin Megami series
Persona Series
Etrian Odyssey series
Puyo Puyo series
Sakura Wars series
etc etc etc.

The list goes on and on. Multiple games in each series. Not 1 hit then 1 flop. Many games. If they weren't a hit, they wouldn't make more of the cunting things. Stop typing bollocks. Better yet, stop typing. Stop typing and get educated. This is a company we, as gamers, should all celebrate for being pioneers and entertainers in this hobby of ours. If there was a hall of fame, Sega would be in there straight away. Trying to shit on one of the greatest of all time with such a lazy and dogshit claim you disrespectful trash.

People also forget that in the 16-bit era, Sega was THE sports system in the US. Up until the 360/PS3 era, sports games were MAJOR drivers of systems in the US. I theorize it was the rise of yearly Call of Duty that ended that, but that's for a different discussion.

EA did put their sports games on the SNES, but it was games like Madden and NHL on the Genesis that really made that system a true threat to Nintendo in the US. Sega's sports were also excellent. Back in the day their World Series Baseball was the best baseball game on a console, and they even competed strongly with Madden by creating console sports commentary with their Sports Talk games (Montana Football) and then eventually Visual Concepts' 2K series.

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

Can you show me?
Do these mags cite the source of their claim? Is it Atari sell-in data?


The 225K number is the total Jaguar consoles manufactured by Atari by the end of 1995.
The total sell-in by the end of 1995 was 125K.

I'll see if I can find it, I think they specify Atari put it out, and later other mags combined it with GG numbers to show how big the gameboy is, having them put together only being about 7 million or so at the time, so more than one mag got the same numbers from somewhere.

As for the Jaguar, yes you are right, in that last report, however they did sent those out to retailers and tell them to do whatever with them, the warehouse shipments, so i'm assuming at least most of them sold at fire sale prices. I'm Sure there are some that didn't sell at all especially since there were barely any games out at that point unless a store had a surplus in the back. I remember there was a store in 1997 that had new Jaguars for $15, man I should have gotten like 4 of them back then.

 

[The Gorby Congressmanz]

Such disrespect for Sega's software.

There is no disrespect, this is a sales thread, quality is nowhere in the OP. (granted they also had several flops but we don't usually talk about those.)

I disagree that Sega's issue was lack of games.

Never said it was about quantity of games released, it's about the number of games sold.

If not for Sony, I think Sega could have reestablished itself after all the harsh lessons.

Without Sony the 3Do would have sold a bit more on the tail end and would have likely decided to go for it with the M2 as a result since they wouldn't have lost so much money trying to stay relevant with game pack-ins and fire sales.

Considering the amount of games that were in development for the 3DO before they ended up moving to the 3DO, AFTER the Saturn came out in the US (and even a year before in JAPAN) including things like MGS, Sega was always going to be in an uphill battle with the Saturn, especially since most of their first year line-up didn't interest Genesis fans to switch outside a handful of titles. It doesn't help that Daytona port was bad, but it was much better than the Ridge Racer port on the PS1 I'll tell you that. But that's another small aspect people rarely discuss.

Basically without Sony the 3Do would have eaten the head and the M2 would have likely ate the body and tail. Also before the change of mind 3Do was going to refocus and not do the multi company licenses thing and just have a one core console manufactured by Panasonic, and Panasonic was going to eat the losses this time anticipating high software.

Even then, you can exclude all that and have to consider that without Sony or the 3DO, things would change radically, NEC may have gotten more steam with there lie machine PC-FX and may have brought it over to America with a larger marketing campaign, the N64 may not have taken as long to release and even if it did it may have ended up being worth the wait and may have ended up taking much more mindshare. There's much more.

Sony was basically the killer of a lot of plans so without them you have to consider that with them gone in any scenario it radically changes the picture. The only time that may not always be the case is that first 2 years of the PS1 before it took off like fireworks,

If they weren't a hit, they wouldn't make more of the cunting things.

Listing games from outside Sega making consoles aside, which this thread is about, he's not actually wrong in terms of sales. Streets of Rage 2 wasn't a "hit" it did do well, and was better than most better selling Beat up games before and after, but not one was going to warm the Genesis to buy Streets of Rage 2, a nice amount did but it wasn't going to sell 1-2 million.

The problem with Sega's games in terms of sales is 4 fold:

1. The game is niche and doesn't have universal appeal.

2. The game may have come out too late or at the wrong time to be as successful as it could of been.

3. Critical reception of the game or sequels to a game may have hurt the opportunity to be bigger than it was.

4. The game was good and could have been big but a competitor or competitors had similar types of games that had something that attracted more buyers or had the perception of being better or having attracting content the Sega game is missing.

Number 4 is pretty important in this way.

Daytona, Streets of Rage, Virtua cop, House of the dead and so on are examples of this on Sega consoles. Even Virtua Fighter which was a hit early on with Sega consoles was still hampered by number 4. Many of Sega's console games also had the issue with 1. and 2 and 3 are in between.

Considering that some franchises were made to try and fix these problems (panzer being an example), or changes to attempt to fix these problems I don't think Sega was not aware of these problems but lack of focus and paying attention to the market, combined with less money to allocate toward projects gradually over the years and internal bickering probably didn't help in finding a suitable solution to these problems.

EA did put their sports games on the SNES, but it was games like Madden and NHL on the Genesis.

Had nothing to do with Sega's first party but yes sports were an advantage for the Genesis, with that being said Sega's football games actually did BETTER than Madden on the Genesis. Two of which sold over 1 million copies. Of course it's not their IP but just something I thought may be interesting to know.

 

[RAIDEN1]

I'm not sure why I waste my time with people like yourself but I will.

One hit wonders...
Sonic series
Streets of Rage series
Virtua Fighter series
House of the Dead series
Shining series
Yakuza series
Hatsune Miku series
Football Manager series
Total War series
Shin Megami series
Persona Series
Etrian Odyssey series
Puyo Puyo series
Sakura Wars series
etc etc etc.

The list goes on and on. Multiple games in each series. Not 1 hit then 1 flop. Many games. If they weren't a hit, they wouldn't make more of the cunting things. Stop typing bollocks. Better yet, stop typing. Stop typing and get educated. This is a company we, as gamers, should all celebrate for being pioneers and entertainers in this hobby of ours. If there was a hall of fame, Sega would be in there straight away. Trying to shit on one of the greatest of all time with such a lazy and dogshit claim you disrespectful trash

If anyone is typing bollocks then it is you, you chump... one hit wonder I meant from the HARDWARE perspective, none of their consoles preceding or following the Genesis gave the competition a run for their money, so before blabbering on think about what context I am saying it in, the Saturn couldn't even touch the PSX as history shows, the Dreamcast threw in the towel soon as it got wind of the PS2 coming to town...with the Genesis they ran the Super Nintendo close compared to the competition, the likes of the PC Engine and Atari could only dream of performing as well as the Genesis did, that's why you see Sega bringing out a Genesis collection as if its going out of fashion yet you never see such thing for the Dreamcast or Saturn library...thats why they went for the 32x to prolong the life of the base genesis that bit longer....each to their own opinion....

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

FP?

 

[Genx3]

Sega had multiple blockbusters.

Sega's console business died because Sega of Japan was clueless when it came to designing console HW.

 

[lame gag1990]

If anyone is typing bollocks then it is you, you chump... one hit wonder I meant from the HARDWARE perspective, none of their consoles preceding or following the Genesis gave the competition a run for their money, so before blabbering on think about what context I am saying it in, the Saturn couldn't even touch the PSX as history shows, the Dreamcast threw in the towel soon as it got wind of the PS2 coming to town...with the Genesis they ran the Super Nintendo close compared to the competition, the likes of the PC Engine and Atari could only dream of performing as well as the Genesis did, that's why you see Sega bringing out a Genesis collection as if its going out of fashion yet you never see such thing for the Dreamcast or Saturn library...thats why they went for the 32x to prolong the life of the base genesis that bit longer....each to their own opinion....

The Master System was a hit in Europe and Brazil. Again, not one hit wonder. "the Dreamcast threw in the towel soon as it got wind of the PS2 coming to town". Sega were on the verge of bankruptcy regardless of whether the PS2 was around the corner. They were selling at a loss for years. Continuous years of bad management lead to Sega throwing in the towel with the Dreamcast. So yeah, stop typing bollocks chump.

 

[Vestal]

Dreamcast had some of the best games during that generation.

NFL 2K series: Arguably the best football games made
Soulcalibur: Arguably the best fighting game in that Generation
Grandia 2 and Skies of Arcadia where amazing JRPGs
Almost forgot. READY 2 RUMBLE. Such a fun boxing game.

Sega failed because they spent a lot of money on the 32x and half assed the Saturn launch. Had they not done those two and simply went straight to Dreamcast they may have survived.