By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - What made Microsoft succeed where Sega could not?

burninmylight said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Burn in my light, the arcade also cannibalized the sales of sega consoles post genesis. Why would Sega put out superior versions of the same games else where for twenty-five to fifty cents? They gave only die hards an incentive to buy the dreamcast. Most of the casuals who played Sega games enjoyed them in movie theaters, amusement parks, pool halls and arcades.


You think so? I believe the opposite: the Dreamcast and every console since killed the arcade scene (here in America, at least). What made the arcade scene so great here was that you had all these ultra powerful, state of the art machines either playing games you couldn't get at home or playing them on a level not possible on a console. The Dreamcast is when consoles really started to catch up to the arcadses, and suddenly Virtua Fighter 3tb, Soul Calibur, Crazy Taxi and the like suddenly weren't so special when you went out. Why waste 75 cents (I wish they were still only 25-50 cents in the late 90s!) on King of Fighters or House of the Dead when I got the game at home?

The arcade machines that survived were the ones that you couldn't replicate at home: the Dance Dance Revolutions, the Mo Cap Boxing, the ones that used some peripheral that wasn't available on a home console. Otherwise, the only reason to sink quarters into an arcade machine was to play some stranger in Soul Calibur who looked like he might be good.

By the way, be sure to quote me so I don't miss your response.


Nah, I believe the Playstation destroyed the arcade, because it overran the home console market with games that were already in the arcade and multitudes that werent and eventually it came full circle into the home. It also threatened the PC market when it expanded the marketshare of the console realm. PC devs started to jump ship to consoles after the first Playstation came, and so did Microsoft cause Sony kind of shocked the world as to what a console could do, being multimedia/gaming system. Sega's only sellers for the consoles were their hottest games in the arcade, thus cannibalizing every thing they had to offer at home. Sony even stated themselves as a threat to the PC market, which prompted Microsoft join. I found that out after watching the history of the Xbox. 

You're right, the arcade games that survived were the ones you couldn't replicate at home. Some games like Tekken became a household name after the Playstation came out though and shifted popularity from arcade to console. Nintendo themselves never put a dent in Arcade gaming, because the superior versions of the games were always in the arcade. 



Around the Network
CGI-Quality said:
burninmylight said:
CGI-Quality said:
burninmylight said:
CGI-Quality said:

For that long essay, you still didn't disprove what I said. ;)

You're right. Can't disprove something that was never really there.

You made a claim and then used your opinion (or rather, a long pointless essay) to downsize the company. The reason they aren't in hardware anymore is a simple one that most hit on the head. What you said about their sequels and such displays that you know less than you pat yourself on the back for.


I never said they left hardware because most of their games didn't sell well. I never made that claim. There are many reasons why Sega had to get out of the hardware biz, and that's hardly one of the bigger ones. But now I realize you never got my whole point to begin with; you just took offense to me "downsizing" (didn't realize I had the power to fire employees to reduce the company in size, I never got that memo) it.

You claim I know nothing about Sega and my opinion is rubbish, yet I used the exact same reasoning you did when it comes to sequels. Then you suddenly decided that reasoning isn't good for anything, even going so far as to chastise my response for its length because I gave plenty of examples that countered your few. Funny how that works.

If you care to take your head out of your ass, you would remember my whole point was that for all of the games Sega was pushing out during their time as a hardware maker, they really weren't selling well, yet we cry for them like the second coming of Christ. There are some exceptions, but go and look at a list of the games it published and see that the majority of those games didn't make an impact at retail. As a recent example, look at the way the Nights Into Dreams fanbase cryed for a sequel for years. You would have thought the Wii sequel would have flown off the shelves, yet it managed only a modest but respectable 380k units. For you to try to turn this whole thing into a "hurr durr but datz not y dey left da hardweyr bitnizz ur dum!" argument either means you missed the whole point and wasted both of our times, or you're really trying to find away out of this.

Oh gosh, I'm afraid I've typed too much for you to comprehend. TL:DR - way to miss the point, genius.

My advice: If you plan to last here, don't throw out insults. 

Now to your post - I read every single point you aimed to make. Problem is, outside of strictly covering the main issue, you typed an entire wealth of opinion that mostly overshadowed the bottom line. Sega's sequels (or in your view, their "inability" to fund them) had little to do with their demise. That's been my point from Jump St.

So, I don't think your opinion is rubbish, just mislead.


My turn to offer advice: it is considered both rude and insincere to edit a post without acknowledging so.

I must again make myself clear: I never said Sega was or is unable to fund sequels, as if it doesn't have the ability if it so chooses. It could announce a new Virtual On, Shenmue, Jet Set Radio and Skies of Arcadia tomorrow, but as much as I would love for any one of those, I'm not holding my breath because those games aren't nearly as popular or in demand as the Internet Community makes some of them out to be, and all would be commercial failures. This was my point. It has always been. Not the hardware. Not saying it is the reason for Sega's demise (though if Sega made a Shenmue with a modern budget and development time akin to the original more than a decade ago, it WOULD be it's demise). Not trying to say anything beyond that.

You sound like you're ready to attempt to level with me now, so maybe now we can find mutual ground. If not, then we can at least agree that it's time to put this silly argument to an end.



So what I learned from this thread is that... M$ is good at making money, and SEGA wasn't.

Yup, sounds about right.

Oh... and M$ never released expensive add-ons for its existing consoles as stop-gaps between generations, nor did it decide it was a good idea to release a console months ahead of its officially announced release date with no games.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

NightDragon83 said:
So what I learned from this thread is that... M$ is good at making money, and SEGA wasn't.

Yup, sounds about right.

Oh... and M$ never released expensive add-ons for its existing consoles as stop-gaps between generations, nor did it decide it was a good idea to release a console months ahead of its officially announced release date with no games.


You could argue that Kinect was an in between generation add on. In 2009 sales of 360 slightly declined from 2008, if not for Kinect its very likely it would have continued to do so in 2010 and 2011 instead of those being its peak years.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

zorg1000 said:
NightDragon83 said:
So what I learned from this thread is that... M$ is good at making money, and SEGA wasn't.

Yup, sounds about right.

Oh... and M$ never released expensive add-ons for its existing consoles as stop-gaps between generations, nor did it decide it was a good idea to release a console months ahead of its officially announced release date with no games.


You could argue that Kinect was an in between generation add on. In 2009 sales of 360 slightly declined from 2008, if not for Kinect its very likely it would have continued to do so in 2010 and 2011 instead of those being its peak years.


True.



Around the Network

slowmo said:


Microsoft haven't had it easy entering the business like Sony and Sega. Sega entered at a time when the industry was just recovering. The fact Nintendo had licensing policies that pushed third parties towards the Sega platform helped enormously, let's not forget that the arcade division of Sega pretty much made their brand too with the promise of the arcade experience in your home.

 


Uh.....sorry, but bullshit. Nintendo's licensing policies didn't "drive third parties to Sega". As in ever, at any time during the two company's history. Why do you think NES had so many games, while Master System didn't get a LOT of those games? And even when they quit that during the SNES days, most third parties CHOSE to remain developing for SNES, not Genesis.

 

And even in the following generation, most third parties that left Nintendo, went to the Playstation, not the Saturn. So.........what are you talking about again?



Angelus said:
Money, and innovation.

Yes, that's right innovation. XBL might not be the gold standard anymore, but MS revolutionized online gaming on consoles. Just sayin......


LOL? You do realise that SEGA was the one to deliver us stable online gaming first? Microsoft literally copied what SEGA made. The only "innovation" they ever made were achievements.



Nem said:
Angelus said:
Money, and innovation.

Yes, that's right innovation. XBL might not be the gold standard anymore, but MS revolutionized online gaming on consoles. Just sayin......


LOL? You do realise that SEGA was the one to deliver us stable online gaming first? Microsoft literally copied what SEGA made. The only "innovation" they ever made were achievements.


Yep, Sega has been setting up online infrastructure in gaming since the genesis days. They were the true innovators, but they needed Microsofts help to set it up and by the time the Dreamcast came around it was too late. They called microsoft into the gaming circle, much like Nintendo called to Sony.



zorg1000 said:
NightDragon83 said:
So what I learned from this thread is that... M$ is good at making money, and SEGA wasn't.

Yup, sounds about right.

Oh... and M$ never released expensive add-ons for its existing consoles as stop-gaps between generations, nor did it decide it was a good idea to release a console months ahead of its officially announced release date with no games.


You could argue that Kinect was an in between generation add on. In 2009 sales of 360 slightly declined from 2008, if not for Kinect its very likely it would have continued to do so in 2010 and 2011 instead of those being its peak years.

 

 

All Kinect did was introduce a "different" way to play. It did not add extra power like the 32X did. Adding extra power via a peripheral shortly before their next gen console is what did Sega in with massive confusion. Not to mention that they competed against each other.



MaulerX said:
zorg1000 said:
NightDragon83 said:
So what I learned from this thread is that... M$ is good at making money, and SEGA wasn't.

Yup, sounds about right.

Oh... and M$ never released expensive add-ons for its existing consoles as stop-gaps between generations, nor did it decide it was a good idea to release a console months ahead of its officially announced release date with no games.


You could argue that Kinect was an in between generation add on. In 2009 sales of 360 slightly declined from 2008, if not for Kinect its very likely it would have continued to do so in 2010 and 2011 instead of those being its peak years.

 

 

All Kinect did was introduce a "different" way to play. It did not add extra power like the 32X did. Adding extra power via a peripheral shortly before their next gen console is what did Sega in with massive confusion. Not to mention that they competed against each other.

I agree but regardless it was still a mid gen upgrade, the only thing is they made a successful one where as Sega did not



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.