| mrstickball said: No. The Playstation 3 is the Sega Saturn, not the Dreamcast. The Dreamcast was made as a brilliant swan song of a failing company. The Sega Saturn was made by a company that had the whole world ahead of it, and totally destroyed any credibility they had on their 3rd machine (going from the Master System, to Genesis, to Saturn). The parallels between the Saturn and PS3 are far closer. Both had great games, and very powerful architecture, but were horrible, costly choices for both Sega and Sony. Both will see major reductions in marketshare from their previous iterations. Both had the world ahead of them and lost most of, if not everything they made on previous systems. |
Yes, Sega had the whole world ahead of them. There are a lot of parallels you can draw between a company that got completely dominated sales wise for the past two generations to a company that completely dominated for two generations. Wait, there are no parallels. That's the exact opposite. Albeit Sega had a decent brand name, but they threw away their American and European success with the Saturn, having virtually no influence in those two territories (while holding a solid second in Japan). You could say that's like the PS3, and it is. But Sega never had a huge amount of credibility to begin with, whereas Sony was a giant. Again, I'd say it's more similar to the Nintendo 64. But I guess that would be a decent system to compare it to, and we wouldn't want to say something good about the PS3, now would we?
Both had great games? Look at the games on the Saturn, and compare them to those on the PS3. The similarities are almost non-existant. The Saturn didn't compare quality wise, sales wise, or even brand name wise. Its biggest games were Virtua Fighter games, which managed to sell a couple million. The PS3 had more million sellers in its first year than the Saturn had in its entire lifespan. The N64 was a horrible hardware choice for Nintendo, although I doubt it lost them any money. And I think we can both agree that the N64 lost Nintendo a lot of marketshare and respect. Sony still has a strong brand name, and like Nintendo, they can make a comeback. Sega never had a chance. Oh, and regarding your response to Steroid, unless Microsoft has managed to recoup the massive amounts they lost with the original Xbox and the early years of the 360, I'd still say they're not doing too well. Sony doing far worse, sure. But at least they had made money in the past gen.
