How would the console market be if SEGA was still in competition with the Xbox360, PS3, and the Wii? What would that console look like, what would it's name be and how would it fair?
What if SEGA continued making consoles today?
I think it would have more of a focus on arcade style games like the Saturn, and would also have a lot of first party games. They would also probably try to sell it at a pretty low price, similar to the way they did the Dreamcast. Something like that would of come out somewhere around 2005.
In this fantasy universe Sega would have bought every 3rd and 1st party developer long ago, and their resources would be so abundant that they'd pay YOU to receive your free Ultragamestation 9000.
Sega and Nintendo were great to stack up against each other for a lot of reasons, but it was reassuring most for me when I thought of these two businesses as fervent video game developers and publishers, excited by their work and their fanbase. At this point, expos like E3 and the slew of press releases and corporate advertisement show these companies as a little more concerned with their position amongst their peers, peers that share their size and numerous interests. I'm not suggesting we ask for candy makers and toy builders, but I would like to note that a little of that appreciation of independent developers our Floating Head Overlords in this place express recalls the similar appreciation of vivacious venture capitlists and aimless Kojimas that threw us curve balls and treasure troves that we gleefully enjoyed so much.
If the Dreamcast hadn't gone under then Sega wouldn't be the laughingstock it is today. Of course, a world where that happens is also a strange and bizarre one where John Kerry is in his second presidential term and Dinosaurs still roam the earth. It is better off not knowing.
The next SEGA console would be exactly like Microsoft's. It would use disks, have a browser, have a large first-party game collection, have online support that rivals its competitors, and it would have Sonic on everything. It would also have thousands of crazy peripherals and would be white.
I figure they'd have a system named after a planet that would essentially be a half-step up from the Wii. Basically, a console built around what Move is bringing to PS3, but it would have come out two years ago.
I know I definitely would not have one. Most of their first party has been terrible and I never was too big a fan of the dreamcast nor any other sega system. Sure they got their good games but I've always preferred Nintendo then Sony once they entered the realm when it comes to retro consoles.
I had a Dreamcast,and i loved it,but SEGA would never succeed in todays market,because their plan always was,and probably always will (or,would!) be,to simply release the console before it's competitors,despite the fact that will cause a major loss in that generation,SEGA (for some reason),always had that additude,and that was partially what led them to failure!
As much as it's fun to think that the PS2 killed the Dreamcast and Sega dug their own grave with bad hardware decisions like SegaCD & 32x, the real reason many gamers don't want to admit is that consumers thought Sega games simply couldn't stand on their own to warrant a separate console anymore. That's why they went third party.
" @ajamafalous said:But by the beginning of 2001, it was common knowledge that Dreamcast was going downhill. Why not take advantage of that if you are Microsoft?" Microsoft probably never would have entered if SEGA hadn't left. "The Xbox came out in 2001. The Dreamcast discontinued in 2002. "
If Sega were still making consoles, there would be two others out by now.
- There'd be another laser-disc based console with slightly better graphics than the PS2. Sega would have so many additional peripherals for it, it would put the Wii to shame today. One of the peripheral ideas would be copied by Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft in some way or another with varying degrees of success.
- The next console would actually beat the 360 to launch, though the game library would lag behind in numbers for a year or so. Online multiplayer would be an afterthought that required an additional network adapter. Sega would direct its dev community to produce good quality games as opposed to a shell of a game that was a glorified chat client with pretty pictures. This decision would result in shining examples of gaming development never seen since Playstation 1. This would be especially evident in the critically acclaimed turn-based war/strategy games, turn-based rpgs, "super-platformers", and it would whomp Wii's rump at party games without requiring players to jump around and do the "Wiiggle"/tennis elbow/carpal tunnel syndrome. The controllers would be wired, which would take a lot of heat at launch, but allowed players to play whenever they wanted without charging a controller. Sega's response in one of their interviews concerning the controller decision would be: "You don't plug a baseball in the wall for 4 hours. You play catch. You. Just. Play."
Sega would be two steps ahead of the competition on every front, which is one step ahead of where it needs to be.
I think Sega spread themselves too thin, releasing too many consoles too quickly. The products were fair, but not excellent. We actually ended up with a Dreamcast at some point, I think after it was almost dead and became affordable.
"This is exactly how it would be. Sega always was an innovator(and not the "waggle this remote control style innovation, proper real innovation) but they never managed to get the timing right. What happened was that every time Sega said "hey check this shit out" the competition would turn around and do it better 6 months later. I will go as far as saying that the Sega Saturn is the blueprint for this currant generation of hardware.Sega would be two steps ahead of the competition on every front, which is one step ahead of where it needs to be.
I think Sega spread themselves too thin, releasing too many consoles too quickly. The products were fair, but not excellent. We actually ended up with a Dreamcast at some point, I think after it was almost dead and became affordable.
"
" @Meteora said:Don't consoles take years to develop?" @ajamafalous said:But by the beginning of 2001, it was common knowledge that Dreamcast was going downhill. Why not take advantage of that if you are Microsoft? "" Microsoft probably never would have entered if SEGA hadn't left. "The Xbox came out in 2001. The Dreamcast discontinued in 2002. "
" @Costmaker said:The original idea for Xbox was born out of prototype work Microsoft did with Sega for the Dreamcast." @Meteora said:Don't consoles take years to develop? "" @ajamafalous said:But by the beginning of 2001, it was common knowledge that Dreamcast was going downhill. Why not take advantage of that if you are Microsoft? "" Microsoft probably never would have entered if SEGA hadn't left. "The Xbox came out in 2001. The Dreamcast discontinued in 2002. "
" @Dr_VonBoogie said:" @Costmaker said:The original idea for Xbox was born out of prototype work Microsoft did with Sega for the Dreamcast. "" @Meteora said:Don't consoles take years to develop? "" @ajamafalous said:But by the beginning of 2001, it was common knowledge that Dreamcast was going downhill. Why not take advantage of that if you are Microsoft? "" Microsoft probably never would have entered if SEGA hadn't left. "The Xbox came out in 2001. The Dreamcast discontinued in 2002. "
Ah, another Nintendo, Sony deal. Still, it seems like regardless of whether or not SEGA had left the console market, Microsoft still would have entered.
" @Atramentous said:Certainly true but I think it would have been a completely different ball game. Remember most of the Dreamcast exclusive franchises and developers went to Xbox rather than Ps2 as did the fan base." @Dr_VonBoogie said:Ah, another Nintendo, Sony deal. Still, it seems like regardless of whether or not SEGA had left the console market, Microsoft still would have entered. "" @Costmaker said:The original idea for Xbox was born out of prototype work Microsoft did with Sega for the Dreamcast. "" @Meteora said:Don't consoles take years to develop? "" @ajamafalous said:But by the beginning of 2001, it was common knowledge that Dreamcast was going downhill. Why not take advantage of that if you are Microsoft? "" Microsoft probably never would have entered if SEGA hadn't left. "The Xbox came out in 2001. The Dreamcast discontinued in 2002. "
If Microsoft still would have wanted to enter they would probably have bought Sega. I also think 4 machines is a few to many... Something would have had to give.
My biggest problem with Sega right now is the lack of keeping there characters alive. I just picked up Sonic and Sega Allstar racing and really thought it would have been a better selling game if Sega knew how to support the games that a lot of the characters in that game came from. Look at Nintendo they support all of there big name characters and prevent them from becoming forgotten, Sega does not. IMO Sega still till this day needs to fit a new Crazy Taxi in to there crappy line up of games!!! Give us less Sonic games every year and more of everything else.
Sega eroded all of their consumer confidence with their poor handling of the Sega CD, Sega 32X, and Saturn. Consumers had enough and chose to stop wasting their money on Sega consoles that were poorly supported, and killed off early.
Now today's gamers who were too young for all of this, don't realize that it was Sega who royally screwed themselves. They don't realize that Sega's past sins are the reason the Dreamcast was ignored dspite being a great piece of hardware. After all, why take a chance on a piece of Sega hardware when you could buy one from Nintendo or Sony and know it's going to do well?
A Sega console in 2010 would be a joke. EA would most likely not be on board, and that right there would be the death knell for it. Most third parties would probably take a wait and see attitude before jumping in which would also hurt. The arcade business, which helped pad Sega console libraries is dead. On top of that the old Sega is long gone. They probably develop more stinkers than they do solid games. They're better off being a third party like they are, and hopefully see success in the few hits they manage to make these days.
It would probably have to compete with features of the PlayStation 2 and Xbox, especially as they began to rise. What they actually should've done, is counter-attack by using all those ideas, such as DVDs, Music, and a similar dual-shock joystick design. They could've revamped the Dreamcast by calling it the Dreamcast X, a new and improved version of the original Dreamcast. But they instead chickened out, and now they've sold out to their worst enemy, Nintendo!
I know this is old but... I think we would have another unique system to compete with the switch. I think the dreamcast was great but they really dropped the ball on the saturn and could never recover. I think a market for another unique type of mainstream system would be nice, especially one that was better with third parties than nintendo. For better or worst(usually worst) sega was willing to take chances on hardware.
Sure SEGA made some dumb decisions in the past but if they were still making consoles then they could have learned from their mistakes by now. Don't you think?
The Dreamcast WAS Sega learning from its mistakes. It's just that when you inflict so many wounds that you're hemorrhaging money like Sega was in the late '90s, no amount of "moments of realization" can save you.
Saturn is still my favourite console. Street Fighter Alpha 2, Sega Rally, Fighters Megamix, Daytona.
Good Times
It fun to "though experiment" out what could happen; but you have to make some logical leaps with this one. But, here is my take as to how teh last few years would have gone.
Let's assume that after Saturn were released, Saga woke up to some facts and worked to fix them rapidly as possible. First, they secured more fincianal liquidity by selling off some divisions and securing loans for the future. Basically put themselves on solid footing for Dreamcast. With a more secure financial footing when Dreamcast launches they likely could have been a sold 2nd place in the PS2 era. They likely also would have given Xbox so little space to breath in Japan, that Xbox would have been an even larger flop in Japan...Microsoft might not even have attempted a Japanese division. Second, Sega should have kept Bernie Stolar for the whole time Dreamcast was out and taken some of his advice would giving Sega American more autonomy. I don't think log term, after Dreamcast #1 he woudl have been needed, but they needed to have his dynamism in teh US for Sega to suck all teh potential out of Dreamcast in North America.
I think if Dreamcast had been around for ist full 5 years Sega arcade division woudl have made more games based on teh hardware. Arcades in North American and Europe still woudl have been in decline, but Sega could have had a few more arcade to console conversions and that woudl have boosted their game library. My guess if a strong Sega woudl not have really made PS2 less or a success, but it woudl have crippled Xbox even more because Sega would have wooed more 3rd parties and take more oxygen from Microsoft's fire. I think GameCube might have also taken a hit, but not as much as Xbox...heck Sega, Sony and Nintendo might have actually made the Japanese market stronger making Sega being around a net gain for them all. For sure, all the games Xbox had from Konami, Capcom, Koie, Atlus, Namco, Bandai, Kemco, Tecmo, Sammy and Sega would not have existed or Xbox might have gotten the 4rd best port. A stronger Sega might have meant the EA would not have withheld games, and that whole issue woudl never have existed.
Going forward after that I easily see Dreamcast having been profitable, if not wildly so, for Sega. They would likely have had a few more arcades machines based on Dreamcast hardware and a have sold enough Dreamcast to make a Dreamcast 2 certain. With that said I think Microsoft still would have put out a Xbox 360 but once again even the anemic support MS was getting for Japan would have been non-existent in teh 360 era. Make no mistake despite how anemic teh sales were of 360 in Asia just they fact it existed mattered to fanboys in North America and Europe. I think pundits and game critics would have had a major fear for 360 that no Japanese support was a huge problem.... how well ANY console can do without support for Japan was a big question in the early 2000s - psychologically it was key.
@Meteora said:
" @ajamafalous said:" Microsoft probably never would have entered if SEGA hadn't left. "The Xbox came out in 2001. The Dreamcast discontinued in 2002. "
But by the beginning of 2001, it was common knowledge that Dreamcast was going downhill. Why not take advantage of that if you are Microsoft?
But, the OG Xbox would have been in development well before the DC went downhill.
It's a great question, as weird as it sounds, it's hard to imagine them competing with the others with the gift of hindsight, perhaps if they taken the 'Nintendo like solution' of innovating as opposed to trying to keep up in the horse power arms race.
I was never really a major fan of any Sega console, but the Dreamcast was definitely making Wii-like overtures into the peripheral space.
People were so obsessed with the PS2 that they didn't have Dreamcast a chance. It was a great system and many games look better than early PS2 titles. I personally were a PS fanboy at the time like most people but I got a Dreamcast when I heard that the PS2 would cost twice as much when it was launched. I am happy I did because I still have a fondess for it and Sega because of it.
I don't know if them still making consoles would make much difference. I guess I'd have to own one to play Yakuza bit otherwise I don't care much about their games anymore.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment