| Jon-Erich said: Have you played their games over the last decade? Most of them suck. Also, do you know why Sega is profitable again? It's because they were bought out by Sammy. That's the moment they returned to profitability. The problem is they weren't Sega anymore. They refuse to exploit most of their classic franchises except when they're re-releasing old games. They refuse to create anything refreshingly new. A lot of their talent has left including Yu Suzuki and both of Sonic the Hedgehog's creators. As much as I loved Sega as a kid and as much as I would hate to say it. Sega isn't Sega anymore. They're just another wannabe Western publisher who occassionally reminds people who they once were. They're just a name. Again, I understand why Sega left the console market. They had to. It wasn't a choice anymore. With Nintendo, they don't have to leave. They still have a choice and unlike Sega, Nintendo knows how to moke money from their hardware. |
Okay, I hate to go off topic and make lists but this myth that Sega makes games that suck ever since they went third party is so far from the truth.
Jet Set Radio Future, Skies of Arcadia Legends, Sonic Adventure 2: Battle, Sonic Advance 3, Nights: Journey of Dreams, Sonic Colours/Generation/Secret Rings, Valkyrie Chronicles series, Yakuza series, Super Monkey Ball series, Rhythm Thief, Football Manager series, Hatsune Miku series, PSO 2, Total War series, Resonance of Fate, Mario and Sonic, Bayonetta, Madworld, Vanquish, Sonic and All Stars and Company of Heroes 2.
Oh and I'm very much looking forward to all the Persona goodness Sega has waiting for us in 2014.
Sega currently have more software devs with more ability than they ever had during their console making days. Sega has changed for the better.
On topic, Sega's financial performance shows that it is possible to be more profitable going software only. It in no way provides any evidence that going third party makes a company less profitable.
