Why the Dream failed, Famitsu article

[ROJM]

Got this from another site which translated the original famitsu article concerning The Dreamcast..

Tadashi Takezaki, these days, works at Sega in the position of "head of project implementation department, president's office," which doesn't describe very well the things he's been involved with since joining up in 1993. A veteran of Sega's marketing and PR department in Japan, Takezaki was involved with the launch of both the Saturn and Dreamcast — Sega's final two home game consoles. He was also the man who wrote an emotional online message "to all Sega supporters" in January 31, 2001 to announce that Sega was halting Dreamcast production and becoming a third-party software company.

That certainly wasn't the plan back in 1998, when Sega launched a new system that did its best to learn from previous mistakes. "When we developed the hardware, we looked over the mistakes we made with the Saturn and completely reworked our approach," Takezaki recalled in an interview with Famitsu magazine published this week. "Developing for the Saturn and its two CPUs was difficult enough in itself, but the development environment was also chided for being too lacking. So we fully fleshed out our libraries to make development easier. Even today, the Dreamcast gets a lot of praise for its dev environment."

The Dreamcast was more than dev-friendly, though — it was also casual-friendly, going completely away from the hardcore gamer-oriented trend they established with the 16-bit Genesis and 32-bit Saturn. "We did our best to make the console approachable to a mass audience," Takezaki said, "from the system's design and coloring to the name itself. As a result, we went with a compact, simple design with a warm color scheme, something completely different in look from older Sega systems. I think it was the console that we took the most complete marketing approach with."

So why did the system fail? "In essence, it was a pure matter of cost," replied Takezaki. "It was because we were forced into a discount war when we were already losing money on system sales. Sony [whose PlayStation 2 came out March 2000 in Japan] was part of the team that developed the DVD standard, and they could develop a system around that completely internally with their own chips. Sega, meanwhile, was buying everything from outside companies, so it was at a distinct cost disadvantage. We couldn't easily cut costs on manufacturing, the software wasn't selling the numbers it used to, and then we were forced to discount the system."

It's hard enough to balance hardware costs with profits, but with everything Sega attempted in one go with the Dreamcast, the situation was even more dire than usual. "It's one of those things where the more consoles you sell, the more you lose, so we had to cover that with software sales," Takezaki explained. "But those sales weren't going up, and at the same time, we were busy trying to bring the idea of online gaming to users with the system. Our concept with the Dreamcast was to bring something new to gamers, to build an environment where they could connect with each other from around the world. Sega's whole business model was to build a userbase of cheap network devices, then provide services and products through the Internet; the Dreamcast was our ticket to making that dream come true."

A lot of people in the industry have commented that Sega perhaps pulled the trigger a few years too early with the Dreamcast and its online-centric design. Takezaki doesn't think so. "I think it was the right choice to aim for a net-centric strategy at that time," he said. "However, we went through with it even though our break-even was far too high for it to work. The idea of accessing the net for free at that time was simply fantastic, and we were the ones footing the bill, so in a weird way, Sega was the company paying out the most money for its users at the time."

Looking back, Takezaki sees the Dreamcast as an incredibly revolutionary system, but one that was probably destined to be Sega's last no matter how sales turned out. "I think the Dreamcast really symbolized the changing of the guard that took place around that time," he explained. "PCs really began to evolve and improve at a dizzying rate beginning then, and it made people begin to wonder if a console tuned exclusively for games had any chance of surviving any longer. Still, our experiments with network gaming led to things like Phantasy Star Online, and lots of people are still enjoying that series. The seeds we sowed with the Dreamcast are finally bearing fruit at this point in time. In some ways we were going by the seat of our pants, but it was part of the Sega credo at the time -- if it's fun, then go for it."

http://www.polygon.com/2013/8/7/4599588/why-did-the-dreamcast-fail-segas-marketing-veteran-looks-back

[fernandeath]

I don't like to remember this story 

[Randroid]

I don't like to remember this story 

Me neither. That is why, to this day, I don't feel comfortable playing a "Playstation". I remember people around me passing on Dreamcast to get a playstation 2 for the DVD player. I also remember Sony's bullshit marketing campaign on how much more powerful the system was (powering medical equipment, yeah right).

I could never understand why "gamers" would prefer a console made by a soulless electronics company over a Gaming First company like Sega.

[mylifewithsega]

I think "soulless" is a little extreme. Hey, don't get me wrong; I love Sega. I'm sure that's pretty obvious. My web series isn't called My Life on PlayStation, after all....

Of the consoles, I do prefer the Saturn and Dreamcast. They simply have more games that I enjoy playing. That being said, Sony made consoles that were very user-friendly for both consumers and developers. Certainly cost effective. On top of that, PlayStation introduced me to Twisted Metal, Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid. Yes, Resident Evil eventually went multi-platform and was even ported to the Saturn (my favorite version, mind you). However, PlayStation gave it to me first. Twisted Metal and its sequels are exclusives, as is the original Metal Gear Solid. As for the PS2, it still had Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3, and it got GTAIII first. The DVD player wasn't that important. We already had two of them when the PS2 came out. Though I knew games would be much larger now, thanks to the added gig' space. Also, it was backward-compatible with PSone games, controllers and memory cards.

That being said, I still bought a Dreamcast first because I'm a Sega fan, I didn't want to wait for PS2, and I really wanted Crazy Taxi, House of the Dead 2 and Code Veronica. 

Blasting Sony's marketing is a tad hypocritical, considering Sega did the very same thing when Nintendo released the SNES. "It has BLAST-processing!" Yeah, it's a crock of shit. Technically, the SNES was superior in almost every way with the exception of RAM.

[OriginalName]

Hey A.J., love your show, but I've gotta say, I think it's completely fair to consider Sony "soulless" as a video game company. Not as much as Microsoft perhaps, but in comparison to a company which built themselves around video games before there was even such a thing as video games and apparently made their motto literally "if it's fun, then go for it," yes, "soulless electronics company" is a perfectly acceptable description.

Frankly, Sony didn't give consumers much of anything in their early days -- they took. Resident Evil would have been the game it was without Sony in the market. They bought timed exclusivity from Capcom because they had the dollars, not because they had the passion. Konami's Metal Gear Solid was exclusive because of dollars and dominance, not because of anything you could call benevolence or inspiration from Sony. I'm not certain about Twisted Metal to be fair -- developed by a third party, produced by 989, could go either way. Still, I find it extremely frustrating that purchased exclusives (timed or otherwise) such as Resident Evil, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy VII, Silent Hill, PaRappa the Rapper, Castlevania: SOTN, Tekken, Ridge Racer, and Xenogears are to this day considered by many gamers as Sony products, and/or that Sony should be thanked for giving them to gamers.

The reality is that they bought their way into an industry that they weren't personally skilled enough to succeed in (Gran Turismo and Intelligent Qube, while good games, do not put a company even remotely in the ranks of Sega, Nintendo, SNK, or Hudson by their own merits) -- gaming would have lost nearly none of its great classics of that era without Sony, they simply would have been created for available Sega, Nintendo, and PC platforms instead. They bought this position, and maintained it almost entirely through economic rather than creative dominance.

Pessimistically, I have to note that this was probably inevitable -- when incredible companies like Sega, Nintendo, Konami, Square, and Capcom build a creative industry out of the dirt, it's only a matter of time before dumb money comes along and claims it for their own. Personally, I still can't bring myself to support Sony or Microsoft, but that doesn't mean I think people shouldn't enjoy their video games -- but I don't think that gamers should thank Sony and Microsoft for doing anybody but Sony and Microsoft any favors. Outside of Sony's recent support for smaller, "art-house" developers perhaps, but this is a very recent phenomenon -- still mulling over my thoughts on that development.

Just as a side-note, the advertising thing is sort of different when you're a company like Sega scraping your nails to the bone just to get by in the aftermath of the illegal, competition-eliminating policies of then-behemoth Nintendo, as compared to being the hyper-wealthy, vertically-integrated, uber-conglomeration Sony with a gargantuan lead in the market, greedily snuffing out one of the industry's most influential companies just because you can and that's what "soulless electronics companies" do. To say nothing about the fact that, testosterone-marketing aside, the Mega Drive's CPU was, in reality a good deal faster than the Super Nintendo's.

Anyway, fantastic article -- I can never learn enough about Sega during this time. Always a big inspiration to me how they just powered through and found the drive to be their most creative in the face of certain failure. Which isn't really failure at all, is it? We get so caught up with sales figures and business jargon in video games, but this should be a creative medium foremost -- forget the business garbage and focus on the art. When you fall with that much style, who's to say you're a failure? The folks standing on mountains of money never had the guts to jump.

[Randroid]

OriginalName, Excellent Post! I really could not have said it better myself.

Too bad the Toshiba/Sega Merger rumours have no traction. That really would be supreme poetic justice if they were to take the Sony brand on together.

Sorry Aj, I still hold a grudge on Sony for the Dreamcast days, but even back at the first playstation's release, to me, buying it would have been akin to buying a 3DO. Trusting my sole source of next-gen gaming to the company that made my tape player seemed silly at the time and back then I felt all gamers should have felt the same way. Maybe it was naive to think people would see it like that.

And Blast Processing, sure I fell for it, but only because the Genesis was visibly faster than Snes. Snes games looked prettier (kinda, in a weird way) and technically sounded better (although I prefer the Genesis soundboard), but christ did they ever move slowly. It truly was an RPG box through and through, and back then I had little to no interest in RPG titles. 

Right now, I'm hoping that every next gen game I want to play comes out on PC so that I can skip the PS4 and Xbox1 altogether. Nintendo's lucky they're getting Sega titles that will get me to buy their Wii U.

[mylifewithsega]

@Randroid -

Thank you very much, good sir. Always appreciated.

However, I fail to see the legitimacy of your arguement. SEGA built their company around gaming in almost every way, shape and form. No question there. However, this working-class hero crap doesn't fly when you apply it to a thriving company, desperate to maintain the considerable market share it had managed to amass during the fourth generation, that made purely financial decisions that ultimately led its failure.

Neither the SEGA CD or 32X were made with intention of unleashing games that were only capable on their respective peripherals, but because the Genesis was starting to look obsolete next to the SNES and its expanding library of technically impressive games. Those were financial decisions; not "oh, isn't this fun" decisions. Anyone that says different is selling you something, in my opinion. The SEGA CD was overpriced upon release and offered little when compared to the Genesis, or even the SNES. The 32X was beyond moronic, especially when you take into account the inevitable release of Saturn. Those are two sterling examples of greed, I feel.

I have several old issues of EGM and SEGA Visions magazine where SEGA fans were either confused or outright upset. Here they invested in both SEGA CD ($299) and 32X ($159), only for a whole new system - SEGA Saturn - to be released shortly thereafter with a $399 asking price. Early adopters were righteously fucked, thanks in large part to SEGA's greed. It formed a river of bad blood that only grew larger over time with every mistake, such as rushing the Saturn to store shelves with half-assed arcade ports (Virtua Fighter and Daytona USA) and a price tag that came off like highway robbery....

"If it sounds fun, do it!" More like, "So long as we're numero uno, we don't care."

Sony on the other hand gave us an affordable 32-bit gaming console with games that weren't available on any other system at the time of its release. PlayStation was very accessible to developers when compared to Saturn that made use of quadrilaterals to render three-dimensional shapes and a dual-CPU archetucture. While the Saturn was a powerful machine, few developers really knew how to utilize its hardware to the fullest. Mind you, I absolutely love the SEGA Saturn. It's my favorite console of the fifth generation. Shit, it's my favorite gaming console of all-time, really. That doesn't change the fact that SEGA - not Sony - fucked it over from minute one.

On top of that, Sony showed incredible support to indie game developers/hobbyists when they released the Net Yaroze in '97. It was a tad pricey, but it gave up-and-coming artists whose interests lied with video gaming an opportunity to work with a development kit. As for the timed exclusivity you claim was purchased with money and dominance, money always helps (SEGA would agree, I'm sure.) and Sony was dominant because they gave gamers what they wanted; next-gen gaming at an affordable price, providing us with games we clearly wanted to play. If Sony sold such an inferior product, without even the faintest hint of a soul, it would have gone the way of CD-i and 3DO. See what I mean?

I love SEGA's gaming consoles and 90% of their arcade games. They've had some incredible artists under their employ. They still do, I feel. If I could somehow roll them all up into a big beautiful woman, I'd most certainly marry the bitch. Then I'd say, "I love you with all my heart, but your parents are assholes."

P.S. SingleTrac developed Twisted Metal for the PlayStation, along with Warhawk. 989 Studios didn't assume command of the Twisted Metal series until Twisted Metal 3. Sadly, the series went downhill from there, in my opinion. Also, Sony had a partnership with SEGA in 1995, publishing titles under the Sony Imagesoft banner. Admittedly, a lot of the games were movie tie-ins (Bram Stoker's Dracula, Cliffhanger, Hook, etc.) and sucked tremendous ass, but they've had their hands in the gaming scene for awhile. Hell, the PlayStation was first developed as an add-on for the SNES. That has to count for something.

[Randroid]

Neither the SEGA CD or 32X were made with intention of unleashing games that were only capable on their respective peripherals, but because the Genesis was starting to look obsolete next to the SNES and its expanding library of technically impressive games. Those were financial decisions; not "oh, isn't this fun" decisions. Anyone that says different is selling you something, in my opinion. The SEGA CD was overpriced upon release and offered little when compared to the Genesis, or even the SNES. The 32X was beyond moronic, especially when you take into account the inevitable release of Saturn. Those are two sterling examples of greed, I feel.

If Sony sold such an inferior product, without even the faintest hint of a soul, it would have gone the way of CD-i and 3DO. See what I mean?

Good points. I can only disagree with the bolded.

I believe the Sega CD was built with the intention of unleashing games that were only capable on it and it was released way before the Saturn. It was the only peripheral capable of FMV games, were they any good? Possibly not (I enjoyed Sewer Shark at the time). Yet even with all the FMV crap, the Sega CD still had some excellent exclusives that could only be accomplished with the Sega CD: Sonic CD, Popful Mail, Eternal Champions CD, Lunar Series. Even the multiplat games shared with Snes were definitive on Sega CD: Final Fight CD, Mortal Kombat.  That being said, the 32x was a blunder. I'll even allow you the greed factor on that one, but not for the Sega CD.

And it's funny to see the bashing of Sega's attempts at overpriced, unwanted peripherals in the wake of modern Sony and MS' Move and Kinect. They can do cool stuff, but are there any games worth it?

I also, never thought of Sega as the working man underdog during the PS1 release. If anything, I thought they were the cocky assholes that had to point out how shitty their comp was, but undeniably, they did gaming right, by themselves and on their own terms as they always had. That to me is what I meant by "soul" which Sega has and by extension does Nintendo, Atari and SNK. It essentially boils down to "Did you start as a gaming company?"

I do have to still agree with OriginalName's position that Sony purchased their place. Did they provide what the consumer wanted? Apparently yes. Is it a gaming company? I still have to say no, even to this day. Its name preceding the playstation brand to me can be replaced by any other. If PS4 was all of a sudden branded as Samsung PS4, I can see little change to what can be expected of the console, its image, demographic, etc. Whereas a Sony Genesis, or an Apple Dreamcast, is a souless console without the Sega before it.

I grant that this is probably a generational sentiment, if even that. I'm sure gamers initiated in the PS2 era could never agree with me and I'm not a Sony hater. I use a Sony Xperia U as my phone and have always bought Sony audio products as I respect them as an electronics manufacturer.

[mylifewithsega]

Good points. I can only disagree with the bolded.

I believe the Sega CD was built with the intention of unleashing games that were only capable on it and it was released way before the Saturn. It was the only peripheral capable of FMV games, were they any good? Possibly not (I enjoyed Sewer Shark at the time). Yet even with all the FMV crap, the Sega CD still had some excellent exclusives that could only be accomplished with the Sega CD: Sonic CD, Popful Mail, Eternal Champions CD, Lunar Series. Even the multiplat games shared with Snes were definitive on Sega CD: Final Fight CD, Mortal Kombat.  That being said, the 32x was a blunder. I'll even allow you the greed factor on that one, but not for the Sega CD.

And it's funny to see the bashing of Sega's attempts at overpriced, unwanted peripherals in the wake of modern Sony and MS' Move and Kinect. They can do cool stuff, but are there any games worth it?

I also, never thought of Sega as the working man underdog during the PS1 release. If anything, I thought they were the cocky assholes that had to point out how shitty their comp was, but undeniably, they did gaming right, by themselves and on their own terms as they always had. That to me is what I meant by "soul" which Sega has and by extension does Nintendo, Atari and SNK. It essentially boils down to "Did you start as a gaming company?"

I do have to still agree with OriginalName's position that Sony purchased their place. Did they provide what the consumer wanted? Apparently yes. Is it a gaming company? I still have to say no, even to this day. Its name preceding the playstation brand to me can be replaced by any other. If PS4 was all of a sudden branded as Samsung PS4, I can see little change to what can be expected of the console, its image, demographic, etc. Whereas a Sony Genesis, or an Apple Dreamcast, is a souless console without the Sega before it.

I grant that this is probably a generational sentiment, if even that. I'm sure gamers initiated in the PS2 era could never agree with me and I'm not a Sony hater. I use a Sony Xperia U as my phone and have always bought Sony audio products as I respect them as an electronics manufacturer.

SEGA CD wasn't the only system capable of FMV games. They were present on both CD-i and 3DO. In fact, 3DO had both Wing Commander IV and Night Trap. In addition, the video and audio quality was greater. The SEGA CD was overpriced. Consumers made that abundantly, which is why SEGA - rather than dropping the price - decided to include a whole slew of pack-in games. For example, the one my brother bought came with SEGA Arcade Classics, Sherlock Holmes, Sol-Feace and two CD+G discs. For an add-on that requires a core unit in order to function, that's absolutely absurd. I'm not saying it's a bad console, becuase it does have games that I love (Sonic CD, Rise of the Dragon, Soulstar, The Adventures of Willy Beamish, Sol-Feace and a few Genesis ports). SEGA CD has it's placed, but I would've prefered it had SEGA focused their efforts on Genesis while developing its true successor. Instead, they spread themselves far too thin, all so they could maintain their lead....

Hence why I feel these add-ons were motivated by money more than innovation.

I'm not defending the Move or Kinect, nor did I even mention it. Point of fact, I'm not a fan of motion controls in any way. As far as I'm concerned, you play video games with a controller. Call me old fashioned. LOL! Sony and Microsoft are just as guilty as Sega in that respect, though they've yet to hurt console sales for either manufacturer really. Although, that may change with Xbox One if they insist on bundling the unit with Skynet piece of shit.

Okay, I misunderstood you there. I do apologize. As for your definition of "soul", I respect it and understand where you're coming from, though I don't entirely agree. Yes, SEGA's been in the game much longer than Sony and, as I said, I ultimately prefer SEGA consoles and games. SEGA helped shape my gaming sensibilites, beginning in the arcades. Admittedly, Sony isn't a true gaming company. I am compelled to agree with you there. That doesn't make them "soulless" though. Not for me, at least. I'm a Sony supporter because I feel they want to put out products that are innovative and functional. I don't feel they do what they do soley to screw over consumers while taking they're money. I would consider that soulless, personally. Sony may have bought their way into this industry, but I don't feel that makes them soulless, or heartless, or whatever....

And Samsung's PS4?! What the fuck, man?! LOL! I'm sorry, but PlayStation would cease to exist for me if it wasn't Sony. Sony made the PlayStation. I can't associate that with any other company. For me, that's like INXS without Michael Hutchence. Just weird.

I'm not sure if it's a generational sentiment, considering I was raised with Atari 2600, ColecoVision and SMS, and I don't fully agree with you. Hahaha! That's a little joke. I just try to be fair whenever I can. While I may not succeed every single moment of every single day, I do try. Very hard.

[Randroid]

SEGA CD wasn't the only system capable of FMV games. They were present on both CD-i and 3DO.

That's why I was careful with my words and said "only peripheral".

Hence why I feel these add-ons were motivated by money more than innovation.

I'm not defending the Move or Kinect, nor did I even mention it. 

As for the Move and Kinect, I mentioned them because they are comparable to the Sega CD and 32x in that they are a console peripheral that has it own branded games that do not work without said peripheral.

It's funny that if you think about it, the Kinect is really the only true, full innovation in gaming since the wii as far as there being nothing at all like it before it, and in any industry, if Microsoft is the one innovating, you know you're in trouble.

Okay, I misunderstood you there. I do apologize. As for your definition of "soul", I respect it and understand where you're coming from, though I don't entirely agree.

And Samsung's PS4?! What the fuck, man?! LOL! I'm sorry, but PlayStation would cease to exist for me if it wasn't Sony. Sony made the PlayStation.

Ok, based on this reaction, I can see that you believe Sony does have an "identity" as a gaming company. I apologize for singling out Sony this way. I wouldn't want to personally attack a console someone likes, no matter who makes it. In which case I take back my "souless" comment .... kinda. Well no ... How about I take it back for today? 
 



 

[mylifewithsega]

LOL! Bro, it doesn't matter whether or not if said piece of hardware is a peripheral or not. Bottom line, SEGA CD wasn't the only piece of hardware capable of delivering such an experience. Although, I will say this, if you we were to exclude the Genesis in final pricing, SEGA CD was certainly the cheapest. The CD-i was a horrendous $699, with the 3DO hitting the scene at $599. Like, what the fuck?! Really?!

God, I still remember how some friends of mine reacted when 360 and PS3 were first announced. "Why are these systems so fucking expensive?" All I could say was, "Dude, don't you remember the Neo-Geo, or the 3DO, or the CD-I?" Their response, "What are those?"

*smh*

In regards to the Kinect, that's completely false. Seriously, have we forgotten the Activator? Yeah, SEGA did it first way back in 1993, with a 16-bit console no less. A quote comes to mind, "What has happened before will happen again." So, seeing as how it isn't all that innovative, I guess we're in good shape.

I'm not looking to change your mind. Honestly, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I just didn't understand where you were coming from with the whole "soulless" comment. I get where you're coming from now that we've mulled it over and that's fine. We simply have different definitions when it comes to that particular word is all. Besides, I feel a healthy debate is necessary. At it's best, it can inspire thought and creativity. If it weren't for people challenging me every now and then, I wouldn't know or think half the shit I do now.

[ROJM]

The problem with that statement is that you are talking about a five year period, the 3DO came out much later when the MCD was already established and it was meant to be competing against the upcoming game systems from what was the big two at that time, Sega and nintendo, while the CDI came out around the same time as the MCD was released in the west.
And the MCD wasn't a cash in either since the Megadrive system was built with the MCD in mind. The 32x you can debate about whether that was or not but it was clear by the original MD's design that the MCD was obviously a part of the inception when sega was designing the megadrive.

As for Sony, they used many tactics against Sega and the irony is many of that was tactics that Sega themselves pioneered. The 3D craze that the PSX latched onto was down to Sega and their model 1 and 2 arcade games that Sega failed to exploit properly on the consumer market, their advertising campaign was inspired by Sega's approach, they even tried to use a sonic esque mascot that many forget now was actually the most succesful out of the Sonic clone games from the nineties.

The soulless comment really comes down to the fact that many of their games that appeared on the PSX and its successor are throwaway titles. Could anyone on the street at the top of their head remember a PSX game that isn't Resident Evil, Devil may cry metal gear and tomb raider? And most of those games were originally multiplatform games and weren't originated by Sony.

its easy to lament about the DC for many reasons but it does worry me that whether anyone CAN move on from it at this point. You get the idea that no one at Sega even believes they can make a game on the level as a Sega DC title anymore.

[Randroid]

Crash Bandicoot, LOL. I totally forgot.

[mylifewithsega]

@ROJM

The 3DO was released a few days shy of one year after the SEGA CD in North America. Taking into consideration that SEGA CD wasn't exactly flying off store shelves here, I question just how well it had established itself. I realize the 3DO was meant to compete with next generation hardware, but the Saturn was little more than a year away from it's Japanese launch, making its direct competition the Super Nintendo and SEGA Genesis/SEGA CD. Their TV adverts strengthens that point, I feel....

Still, that's not really the point of my original statement. The point was that SEGA CD wasn't the only piece of hardware capable of providing FMV.

So, because SEGA acted with premeditation, that somehow makes it less of a financial decision? By my estimation, it doesn't. Especially since the SEGA CD fell short in some respects. Sure, the audio is CD quality and it can produce scaling and rotation effects, yet they didn't even bother to expand its color palette beyond 64 colors? Here it's capable of full-motion video, though it looks muddy and dithered? Many games in North America were FMV/QTE games, or Genesis ports, with few titles that truly utilized the format. 

Okay, my point was that, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." Sony may have taken a page or two out of SEGA's playbook, but didn't SEGA do the same thing when they developed Alex Kidd? He wasn't meant to be the SEGA equivalent of Mario?

Throwaway titles? You mean games that sold millions and spawned long lasting franchises that gamers continue to support to this day? Also, Tomb Raider was first released on Saturn, yet the PlayStation version outsold it. Did Sony buy that result too? Regardless, I don't see how Sony buying its way into the industry makes it heartless. They gave us some hardware that was easily accessible to programmers and affordable for consumers. If they made worthless crap, gamers wouldn't have bought it....

Sony may not be a true gaming company in the strictest sense. They're a hardware manufacturer more than anything. I won't deny that. However, I don't feel that makes them soulless. That's all I'm saying.

[mylifewithsega]

Crash Bandicoot, LOL. I totally forgot.

LOL! God, I wish I could forget Bandicoot. He was never a mascot for me. Didn't even care for the game. It reminded me too much of Donky Kong Country, and I didn't like those games very much at all. I always felt Sweet Tooth should've been Sony's mascot.