Let's just pretend SEGA never had a lot of success in Arcades.

Let's just pretend arcades haven't been niche (or borderline dead) for over two decades.

Edit 

Last comment because Sega fans are funny.  MS is the third biggest publisher in gaming...  Sega is 19th.  Just saying.  One is a major player today, the other just isn't and hasn't been since the early 90s...  30+ years ago.  

Arcades are still big in Japan. The US isn't the world. Also ignoring arcades is moving the goalpost. You said one hit wonder. They had many hits in arcades. Arcades are hardware. How about that Brazil to this very day buys brand new SEGA Master Systems? Will any MS console be sold 35 years later?

I don't know about the lines because at the time, I hadn't come back to gaming yet. But I do know that the Dreamcast broke the all-time launch record for home consoles so, there was definitely some early momentum there.

Just going to say this. Xbox doesn't exist without Dreamcast. Controllers were modeled after the DCs. OG Xbox was almost BC with DC. It almost used VMUs. When MS developed the Xbox they used focus groups playing Dreamcast. Online was thanks to SEGANET/Dreamarena. Not to say Xbox didn't make some improvements. Not saying you can't prefer Xbox. It was a fun system. It did give the HDD. XBL was a huge improvement over what SEGA did. Just saying to dismiss DC entirely then praise Xbox should maybe look into the history of it. In many ways, even 360 builds on what Dreamcast did.

And Playstation lowest, PS3, still beat Xbox best, 360...

Of course Xbox is more succesful than Sega, Microsoft is one of if not the most riches company in the world for decades, they can keep taking the L on Xbox, Sega could not. Microsoft will go one and acquire huge developers and publishers when their own games and strong third party support is still not reason enough to make people buy it.

About Sega being an one hit wonder, being more seriously, Xbox sold a lot better than Sega, just wanted to point how ridiculous it sounds trying to justify it, as if sales are everything that matters, because if it were Xbox is always the one taking the beating too... it may be your point, but it's still pretty nonsensical to say "one hit wonder" based on sales when the thread is about prefferences.

Anyway, Sega had a lot of personality, history and relevancy in many ways, the Sega Master System is still the best selling home console here in Brazil, yet people in the US barely knows it existed. Saturn was very succesful in Japan, yet the US doesn't care. The Mega Drive was loved worldwide. And Dreamcast was the fastest selling console when it released, but again, Sega could not financially take it anymore, but most importantly, Sega games, IMO, and that is what matters considering the OP, are way, WAY more relevant than Microsoft games.

Sega had an actual identity, Sonic was done so much dirty for so many years and the character still survived strong because a lot of people love it. The Mega Drive was filled with unique games, made playing arcade games at home a thing, and when Sega was competing with Nintendo, and losing, yeah, Sega was still doing its own thing and providing an unique experience. But it was not only the Mega Drive. Sega always gave you a good reason to get their systems. Meanwhile every single generation the Xbox, also filled with great games, has always tried to be the Playstation, but with less good unique games.

I would not trade the Mega Drive for every single Xbox combined, neither the Master System or the Dreamcast (as I don't speak japanese the Saturn suffers more to appeal to me) sure, from the 360 ownards every Xbox had more and better games than Sega systems ever had, inclusing Sega games, but that was also everywhere, I've never needed a Xbox in my entire life, meanwhile I own multiple Sega, Nintendo and Sony systems.

So the Dreamcast is more relevant to me than the Xbox, as people pointed, some of the best games on the Xbox are Dreamcast games, the Xbox exists because of the Dreamcast, mind you Microsoft actually tried to buy Nintendo to compete with Sony instead, before releasing the Xbox... to me every sega system is relevant and has multiple reasons to be loved, it's definitely not an one hit wonder, far from it. I think many people would also agree with that for the Xbox.

If you think Sega games are bad and don't appeal to you, yeah, maybe its a one hit or even a no hit wonder for you... definitely not for me and many other people.

You keep bringing up PlayStation, as though I believe MS has had more impact than Sony.  I don't.  Sony is head-to-head with Nintendo for the most impactful company in gaming.  You are fighting an argument nobody made. 

And yes, MS has had way more impact than Sega in the gaming industry, that was one of my main points.

Sorry, I find Sega to be a one hit wonder.  I am entitled to my opinion.  Outside the Genesis, Sega has little legacy except for their core fans, who (IMHO) grossly overstate their importance in gaming.  Their living legacy is meh at best.  Even Sonic is second rate 3D platforming compared to Mario, Sackboy and Astrobot.  Sega hasn't been a major player in the industry for almost 30 years....  I wasn't even a teenager last time Sega was a power player.  

And you were welcome to find Sega games to be more important than MS.  I don't agree.  MS games, like Forza and Halo, are relevant today.  The vast majority of Sega franchises have no major impact today.  They aren't a major player and have not been a major player for a very long time.

Sega "had" personality.  Yeah, agreed.  30 years ago, they had something.  They haven't had much in decades.

So you prefer Sega over MS.  Congrats?  I just gave my opinion as someone who has owned every Sega, Nintendo, Sony and MS console to date (except the series X).  I'm not trying to change your mind.  You, however, are trying to change mine.  Sega is overrated, that is my opinion.  As someone who gamed on the CD, 32x, Saturn and DC...  bunch of dumpster fires.   

I mean, I don't get your point.  You love Sega.  I don't.  They are very much a one hit wonder.  The Genesis was amazing.  Their other systems, meh.  No lasting impact to gaming.  MS has brought a lot to the table that remains today.    

Sega is the epitome of a creative company that had zero execution and implementation.  Sega is arguably one of the poorest run organizations in gaming history.  Sega is lucky to hold Atlus and have Platinum developing Bayo games.  

MS is one of the biggest publishers in gaming history.  Sony is one of the biggest publishers in gaming history.  Nintendo is one of the biggest publishers in gaming history.  Sega is, at best, middle of the road with impact.  They are nobody. 

Having a good team 30 years ago isn't going to impress me.  The fact that Sega fans need to bring up consoles and games from the 90s says it all.

edit

fun fact.  Sega was in the hardware business from 1985 to 2001 (DC was discontinued), which is 16 years.  MS will be in the hardware business for 23 years and counting.       

another fun fact.  Sega is closer to Atari (66 million to 31 million) in hardware sales than they are to MS (150 million).  

I'm using Playstation to show you how your point stands no ground when Xbox is compared to something bigger.

If Sega is close to Atari than Xbox, then Xbox is also closer to Sega than to Playstation... do you see the point?

The same things you can say about Sega, using Xbox, I can say about Xbox, using Playstation, so if Sega is an one hit wonder because of this reasoning, what is different about the Xbox?

I'm not trying to chance your opinion, and I'm not trying to be rude either right, because I simply don't care.

The thread askes if you preffer the Xbox or the Dreamcast, after choosing the Xbox you decided to kick Sega down to futher validate your point, which needed no validation to begin with, it's your opinion, and I'm just pointing the same can be done to Xbox, because if that's your reason to pick the Xbox... it doesn't sound like a good reason at all.

I feel like we both said what we should, don't want to derail the thread anymore.

I just find it weird to call Sega overrated because of... unit sales? Sales are not an indicative of quality of anything. You can say they're not a big player among the publishers anymore, and that's fine I agree! But... this has nothing to do with quality...? Even if you stop look at the software and look at how well their consoles sold, that still has nothing to do with quality? Even poorly selling consoles have some great games.

Yeah, it's fine to dislike Sega games or question their legacy or relevancy today, but sales of their hardware/software has nothing with it.

All you had to do is admit you didn’t know, instead of pretending owning a Sega Genesis in the 90s made you a Sega history buff.🤦🏻‍♂️