Sega to become platform-exclusive...

[GameHED]

I like both sega and nintendo. But for different things. It's like apreciating 2 styles of things but not hating one or the other just for being different.

Nintendo have made slightly quirky, innovative games that can prove to be addictive and fresh or just refined for replay and long term challenge. However they are not catering to the hardcore gamer who frequently plays games a lot, so thier spread apart release leave a massive gap.

Sega focus on the technology (arcades - graphics, 'feeling of play', a quality 'experience'), gameplay, depth (in some titles not all arcade games. Some games are just shallow but fun) and lately a bit innovation (DC era and also GC and Xbox era: SMB, JSR, SeaMan, Crazi Taxi, Gun Valkyie etc).

Sega have got a lot under thier belt and to say they aren't important or don't release some of the best stuff is silly.
These:

PSO (actually online playable now, not just a place to upload scores)
JSR (cool cel shading plus it's a fun game)
VF4 (arcade gamers who hate tekken rejoice)
PD (will the sequel live up to the hype? Some ppl bought xbox just to find out)
VOOT (I love this)
SOA (a great rpg in an era of wallpaper)
MSR (fresh take on tired racing themes, emphasis on street racing and earning points for skill and style)
etc

..are just a few qaulity games I personally consider A titles all cramped in the space of the DCs and xbox's life. The quality is there in graphics, gameplay depth, sound, and innovation or original ideas.
To me and especially during the DCs life, all thier games had a polished A quality feel in all areas of the game.
When I first got my dc I knew the risks I was taking (that sega may abandon the machine early) but I didn't care so long as they would deliver in the quaity and sheer number of games. The DC could have died early (and it did inevitably due to lack of funds for marketing agressively and winning over the sony crowd) and I still would be happy with the titles out on that so far.

See that's what some people just don't get. It's all about the quality of the games, not security or how long a system lasts them, or even company history, or an emotion you feel from past bad treatment or abandonment, but the games. I think with all the quality games they released on dc alone there was something for everyone. Puzzle, rpg, Shooter, Beat em up, even FPS and fighters and experimental genres.

A friend of mine told me, "The xbox could die in a year or two and I'd still not regret my purchase of one, what with the all titles I am playing with right now and the qaulity of the games. I'm dead serious if it dies I'm still happy with the games I have now."

It seems hard to believe but people do buy a system based on a handful of quality stuff and not how popular it gets or how secure the company is from being around forever. I evaluate purchases on an individual basis, and if they deliver in the areas that matter, my $ are there. PSO alone would have been worth getting a dc personally. I stopped caring about what sony was doing with thier promised 'toy-story quality' experience (never happened) or thier future online plans because sega was already delivering it with the dc while sony was in the 'experimental' stages. Simialrly, I didn't care what cube had to offer in the future because I knew how long it takes nintendo to make games what with thier history of sliding release dates and scrapping projects and spread-apart releases. (I need more than 1 sequel every 4-6 years, I probably play far more games in a week than the average joe in a year, so I don't care how much X nintendo title sells, just that that quality was there and they release on regular basis. I see alot of this highlighted in forums as a positive thing: "oh SMS is selling fast, JOY!" To me it's enough that the game is good, and that it has finally arrived, not that everybody around likes it.)

It's ok to admit you won't support a company because you may not have enough money to support the other consoles, but to say sega are bad because of abandonment, and that nintendo are a perfect company who never let anyone down is a bit hypocritical. I'm as much a nintendo fan as sega but even I can see when nintendo have let down thier fans in the way of consistant releases to the hardcore gamefans. Sega have sort of catered to all the genres nintendo leave gaps in. As much as I like games like SSBM, I would rather spend my time on VOOT, Power Stone (thanks capcom) or a vf3 or 4. It's not that SSBM is bad, it's just that sega are there (and maybe capcom, I originally intended to get a dc just for 2d fighters ike SF3) to fill in gaps that the proud nintendo seem to neglect a bit or take ages to finally serve. (it's all about total profit for them contained into a singular succesful title that appeals to a very wide audience on a long-term timeline which might also include hardcore as well as mainstream gamers, whereas sega cater to all the individual hardcore 'niches' seperately and regularly, and yet still deliver with really good quality too. I guess you could say sega are "compartmentalised" in thier approach to each taste or genre, and catered to each compartment, whereas nintendo tried to put everything in one product and tried to get everyone to like that one thing at once.)

When someone says to me how can you like "sega or x company for their poor treatment" I just laugh at them and tell them it has nothing to do with how much love you are getting. Your not an employee of the company, you consume the goods these companies churn out. You can consume quality and be happy or you can worry about the future of that thing being around to keep churning the things out, but ultimately it comes down to specific games you like from that company.
Who cares if sega don't follow nintendo's or sony's model for "success"? The games they make are awesome and should be appreciated regardless. Don't let the future dictate the actions you make now, instead follow your own taste and if enough people just do that, the future gets shaped based on that influence, instead of the forces from the external environment. (such and such has big market share) It's the indifference people have to the quality of specific games that makes them mindless drones (following a label or whether they were treated nice) that overlook and ultimately miss out on the diversity and quality, not the people who are buying stuff they like, regardless of the risk ("oh gee final fantasy isn't on my fave system, better just ignore Skies Of arcadia or the online playabel and addictive PSO on DC and pretend they aren't good") or future support. It's ok to like both things and still appreciate them each for different things.

That's why I never bag nintendo or sega, because they tend to do what they want and are stronger and more recognised for it by the fans of thier games. Not people who just want them to become mainstream and just rake in the $ regardless of if what they are making is anything good or not.

[Glass Joe]

Originally posted by NeoZeedeater
The best Sega games are as good as the best Nintendo games. Sega releases more crap games than Nintendo but they also release more good games. They just release many more games period.

I agree that they release more overall games. There is no disputing that. I won't even say that they release crap games, they just always have a very arcadey feel to them. It leaves a shallow feeling(not a bad feeling just shallow) to the gameplay for me. I don't think any company makes games like Nintendo. If you can think of any other company that makes games with that depth, that are also just fun to run around in and acomplish nothing just for the hell of it, then let me know. I do think Sega makes some kick ass arcade games. Probably the best in the world at it. I just don't see anyone in Nintendo's league. There is just a magic to their games that no one else seems to be able to do(although that seems to be waining a bit lately). And as for system bias Sleeveboy, I agree with you. There is no place for it. Great systems are great systems and I own them all. I do have a problem with a company that continues to shaft its loyal fan base. The same fans that put them at the top of the industry. I don't see what's wrong with my stance on that.

[sleeve]

Nintendo certainly has the market cornered in "run around and do nothing" games, I'll give you that.

[GameHED]

If only Shenmue became more popular.

Forklift, crates, reminds me of Vagrant Story. Whoops better shut up now.

If you can think of any other company that makes games with that depth, that are also just fun to run around in and acomplish nothing just for the hell of it, then let me know. I do think Sega makes some kick ass arcade games. Probably the best in the world at it. I just don\'t see anyone in Nintendo\'s league.

I agree with this. Nintendo own the home when it comes to epic adventures and platformers and in general all games have great control and balance etc, but what about genres like beat em ups, (Strets Of Rage, Spikeout) shooting games (REZ, PDO), RPGs (SOA, Landstalker, PSO) Sports, (NFL2k,NBA2k, Virtua Tennis - lots of depth! and in multiplayer, almost infinate replayability) and racers? (MSR, PGR, Daytona)

Sega are just as good as nintendo but the companies just have different focuses. Nintendo leave big gaps that the hardcore are into, so those 6 year sequels to old games are not enough alone for the hardcore frequent gamer who plays many more games and in many more genres that nintendo can't or won't provide in.

Nintendo are great but they just take too long or ignore the fans too much. They deliver the quality, but they leave us starving. In the 8 bit cart days, the home games were important, but I think arcade games are just as important now since in a good deep arcade game you can find lots of depth and replayability. It\'s how you choose to look at it. It\'s all about good game design. PSO is really repetitive but somehow I spent almost 200 hours playing the game leveling up. I have to ask myself why am I so addicted to this simplistic thing? It's a pastel-coloured diablo.
Answer:It\'s clever game design and appealing levels and cool weapons and player customisation. It's shallow but replayable enough and fun enough to keep coming back and logging in more hours than it seems to deserve.

You could probably compare paper mario or zelda to PSO and Skies but they should still be appreciated for thier different reasons. They both offer entertainment for hours and it shouldn\'t be fair to generalise and say all thier games are arcadey and shallow. It\'s just that lots of arcade games that get ported are arcadey and shallow, not these individual specific games, which just happen to be worth getting a whole system to play them. What matters are those particular games not the overall image or impression you get for the company which shouldn't matter.

Nintendo can still be considered great and all, and thier image of consistant quality can still be noted, but that doesn\'t change the fact they leave huge gaps in game genres that they do not cater to, that other companies like sega, capcom, konami etc are there to provide. These devlopers can make great games too, in genres that nintendo have not even attempted. No company is perfect, not even nintendo. So it\'s hypocritical to say sega aren't supporting thier fans and that somehow sega fans are being more abused with neglect than fans of nintendo are. Nintendo could learn a bit from sega imo.

[lithium]

Originally posted by Nigel-The-Landstalker
More games? yeah, I'll give that to Sega. Better games? no way.

A Sega game has a higher likelyhood of being flawed or even bad; but when Sega nails it they nail it just as well as Nintendo (or anyone for that matter) does.

Sega's also quite possibly the most diverse game company in existence.

Overall I prefer Nintendo, but Sega's anything but subpar.

[Glass Joe]

Originally posted by sleeveboy
Nintendo certainly has the market cornered in "run around and do nothing" games, I'll give you that.

HAHHAHAHAAHHAH!!!!!!!!!!! This from the guy that is defending the company that makes Shenmue. HAHHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey GameHed, I never said Sega fans were abused because the games are weak. They are more abused because of the practices of the company, not the games they make. And Sega didn't make Landstalker. That's like blaming/giving Nintendo credit for Eternal Darkness. I don't give a shit about sports games anymore. They have become way too cookie cutter. I don't care for racing games unless they are like Ridge Racer or Excitebike and fighting games have sucked ass since Street fighter II turbo. I don't like RPGs either. If I want to watch a movie then I'll rent one. I do love the Action/RPG and Adventure genre though. I would just like to state for the record that I don't hate Sega for their games. I used to dig alot of Sega stuff. I just can't support a company that shits on it's customers as often as they do. No company can touch Sega in the shaft their consumer category. So in a nutshell we have Sega games=great and Sega as a company=shit. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

[gamevet]

Originally posted by neoalphazero



Exactly, beside Sega has garnered a HUGE amount of attention since becoming a third party, they've broadened their consumer base far beyond their last console without being constrained by a single identity. And someone mentioned Virtua Fighter 2 selling 2 million units. Correct, but it was the last time Sega had a game hit a million units.

And though a rumor, you can never take a Sega rumor too lightly... *-neo

I mentioned it, and you can add Crazy Taxi to Sega's million seller list(750,000+ in the US, 250,000+ Japan).


Sega seems to do better, on a console with their concentrated userbase. Even NFL2k1 managed to sell 901,000 units in the US alone, on the Dreamcast. I feel that Sega won't be able to sell close to that amount of 2k3 with it's faithful users spread out between 3 consoles. Something that Sega has to be looking at, with consideration of the possible offer from Nintendo.

[Low]

Originally posted by gamevet



I mentioned it, and you can add Crazy Taxi to Sega's million seller list(750,000+ in the US, 250,000+ Japan).


Sega seems to do better, on a console with their concentrated userbase. Even NFL2k1 managed to sell 901,000 units in the US alone, on the Dreamcast. I feel that Sega won't be able to sell close to that amount of 2k3 with it's faithful users spread out between 3 consoles. Something that Sega has to be looking at, with consideration of the possible offer from Nintendo.

If you combine them...

The last game to hit a million in Japan though was Virtua Fighter 2 though. *-neo

[AaronChance]

Originally posted by Gongos

a thenth? we are treading on highly subjective grounds there, in my mind as well as the minds of many on the boards, nintendo puts out TEN TIMES as many quality titles as sega, so lets chill, i would defend sega a lot more if i played half-life, a domestic evil twin, a domestic guilty gear x, propeller arena, chakan, a playable ecco,and a pso that didnt have more security holes than...i dont know... metaphores fail me, but sega is a great company, but comparing them to nintendo, the company that put out the zelda series... you have just compared oscar de la hoya to mohammed Ali great, but far from the greatest.

Sega did not make Half-life
Sega did not make Evil Twin
Sega did not make GGX

What the heck are you talking about?

I'd also add that the Zelda series is _way_ overrated and just average in my book, but that's entirely a matter of opinion.

Sega made the Sakura Taisen series. Also in my opinion, that puts them head and shoulders above anything Nintendo has produced.

Now not in my opinion, this thread is _way_ off topic.

[Stibbons]

Nintendo and Sega make games that progress a lot like this thread: just a lot of running around and doing nothing.

Sega AND Nintendo fanboys are annoying, and because of that I hope Sega joins Nintendo so that I'll know which console-specific forums to avoid.