SEGA to re-enter console race?

[RoleTroll]

I wonder how it would have turned out if Sega didn't release the 32X, but instead released the cartridge version of the Saturn for $200.

[Gutsman]

Making the 32X a scapegoat doesn't make much sense. How many 32X's were sold? Less than 300K? Even if everyone of those people felt "betrayed" by Sega, that's a very small portion of the overall gaming market. And if you didn't buy a 32X, why would you care either way? I never bought a Virtual Boy or Sony MiniDisc, so why should I let the failure of those formats influence my opinion of the overall company?

[warnpro]

Originally posted by Johnny Undaunted
Well the Sega CD was alright since it brought us Snatcher and Lunar, but the 32X was totally unneeded and ruined any chance of Sega coming out 1st-place in the console wars. Even if you avoided the 32X, you still had to pay overprice for regular Genesis games such as Phantasy Star IV.

Then there's the whole Shining Force III and Shenmue II fiasco with the Saturn and Dreamcast respectively.

For a time, Sega was in first place in the 16 bit console wars, in late 1991 (SNES was new to the scene in Sept. 1991, so Sega had nearly a 2 year head start and used that to their advantage) and 1992, and even into 1993 when Sega was still capitalizing on the popularity of Sonic, and the success of their other franchises. It was not until the later years of the 16 bit war when the SNES surpassed the Genesis with the likes of DKCI,II, and III.
All cartridge games were high prices back then, that was the nature of the industry. I believe SNES games were more expensive on average than Genesis games back then.
In America, Sega saw its best success during the 16 bit wars, and certainly didn't stab gamers in the back, quite the contrary.

[Zerodash]

Just to make something clear:

Nintendo's current situation is NOTHING like that of Sega. The N64, while not selling nearly as much hardware or software than the PSX, still managed to be very profitable for Nintendo.

The same holds true for the GCN, #3 in the US and #2 in Japan, it still is turning a profit.

Sega has seen very little in terms of profit since the early 80's (when it ruled the arcades). Sure, there have been a few good years with the Genny, but nothing sustained...


Sega console = no chance in hell

Nintendo going 3rd = not anytime soon

[burgundy]

I sure wish there was yet another console for me to piss $300 away on.

[Scourge]

Originally posted by Scourge
I can't see them doing this. 3rd party support would be the real stinger. A handheld Dreamcast would be cool tho, maybe they could make it interactive with the Xbox since MS hasn't mentioned anything and the PSP is on its way to compete with the GBA. *That* would be interesting.

--Scourge .

Good point Scourge! A handheld based on the Dreamcast-on-a-chip technology and that is interactive with the Xbox to compete with the PSP and GBA is a good idea! Maybe that's where MS's interest in SEGA lies?

--Scourge .

[NeoZeedeater]

Johnny, singling out Phantasy Star IV isn't fair. The entire RPG genre was overpriced back then.

[Saint of Killers]

Originally posted by Gutsman
I don't see how a new Sega console that is sold at a profit instead of a loss, would hurt Sega or kill them off.

You can only sell hardware at a profit if people have a reason to buy it. A few thousand rabid fans are not enough to support a huge videogame company.

[xS]

Nintendo's current situation is NOTHING like that of Sega. The N64, while not selling nearly as much hardware or software than the PSX, still managed to be very profitable for Nintendo.

Nintendo saved alot by not spending as much as Sony back then. I bet they saved quite alot by not spending on R & D relating to the CD Drive.

[Delta]

well nintendo spent a lot of money on r&d back in the snes days looking into a cd drive. so i don't think sony would of had to invest as much since they were working for nintendo on that project.