Pristine20 said:
1. Dc sealed it's fate because? If even the saturn was losing money even after outperforming nintendo in JP. I think it's safe to say that sega didn't know what it was doing/ wanted to do.. 2. What makes you think so? Word goes around that a moneyhat from sony sealed the deal not the CD format. If ninty was the best option, ffvii would have been forced to fit a cartridge like it's previous iterations. You seem really sure that square would have moved to sega when it's possible that ninty let go of the title because they didn't want a bidding war with sony. 3. I'm not praising sony for having deeper pockets. Their corporation is bigger and thats just the way it is. You play a game the way you can win. I really have nothing against M$. As far as I'm concerned, they entered the market the best way they saw fit and tried to win the best way they could but if you ask me, it wasn't the cash that helped them usurp sony this gen. Sony overthrew itself with mismanagement just like sega. Sony is still around because they are bigger...life isn't fair. Let me use a dating analogy. One guy is really rich and using his money to woo the girls. Another guy isn't as rich. Is it better for the second guy to take the money route to win the girls over or to try a different approach style? If the money-less guy loses the competition, should he sit and cry or find another way to compete? If the poor guy loses out, who should b blamed? Note that the girls in this scenario are analogous to gamers in real life. If you're the type who blames the girls then that means gamers are to be blamed for sega's downfall since they went with the company that bought all the support. Sega was the relatively broke guy who tried to compete with money while nintendo was the relatively broke guy who took a whole different route. Thats why nintendo is stronger than ever despite the "big bad corporations" looming over it and sega is nowhere to be found.
|
lol...if sega didn't know what they were doing for losing around 1 billion dollars form 1997 to 2001 then sony and microsoft really don't have a clue how to run a business as they each lost much more in much less time.
In any case, sega wasn't trying to compete with money. Sega had amazing firrst party titles that at its prime (late saturn early dreamcast) not even nintendo could match without outside second party help from Rare. Its sony that went around buying 3rd party titles and companies in building its gaming empire. Psygnosis, naughty dog, Guerilla games...I don't know of a single great gaming studio that sony didn't buy with $$$ other than Polyphony digital which was internaly developed. Add the whole idea of selling hardware at a loss that sony introduced...and there you have it. You can't compete unless its with money. They only reason why nintendo stayed afload in late n64 and gamecube days is because of GBA.
Sega never played the money game...but they couldn't compete since the market has shown it can not support 3 major players at the same time and this gen is no different.
Hence why sonic is laughing right now... He gets to put in half assed efforts and sell a lot of games while Sony is throwing everything they got in to their wonder machine and can't compete with a wannabie PC and the waggle. And this time they can't sell hardware at a loss...hahaha...that pretty funny to me too.
