What if SEGA had taken the risk to compete with PS2?

[max_cady]

Yep, SEGA could've had a little help from Electronic Arts. The 2K Games were great I'm sure, but even back then EA Sports was a powerful brand.

[Grant360]

I partially agree with the above. Although I don't think SEGA got a huge amount wrong. It just wasn't a battle they could win. The console was well designed. The support amazing and the marketing wasn't bad. They came to market with their biggest name (Sonic Adventure). It could have been better but it was a million times better than the PS2 launch.

Piracy didn't help, the fact you could get games without modding the console can never be good. But there were other factors:

1) DVD Playback - At the time of launch the PS2 was the cheapest DVD player. Even though it had no games in Japan it sat lovingly next to the DVD section in shops.
2) No support from EA - Despite SEGA developing a stellar sports lineup arguably stronger than EA's (NBA, NFL, NHL & Virtua Tennis) the lack of support from the biggest 3rd party company was a severe blow. Especially in Europe where SWWS 2000 was no match for FIFA 2000!
3) Awareness - The amount of people who visited my house and had never heard of Shenmue, Soul Calibur, Crazy Taxi and left and immediatly purchased a Dreamcast. The other common misconception was that the Dreamcast was aligned to the N64/PSX generation and people 'assumed' the PS2 would have mroe power.
4) Branding - I used to get so frustrated when people would say they were getting a PS2 because it was better. In an argument they had nothing. They just knew the brand.
5) A lack of a true KILLER app - Despite 2000 being one of the greatest holiday periods ever and an incredible games lineup. There were no true killer apps. For the DS it was Nintendogs, the Wii had Wii Sports and the PS2 had GTA3. The SNES only truly boomed when DKC hit the market.
6) Loss leading approach - SEGA lost mountains of cash with the Saturn and pinned their hopes on selling a LOT of DC's. SEGA would have been better to find a scaled down niche approach to the console so it could be profitable with 20 million sales (The Gamecube and Xbox both sold 25 million but the Xbox lost BILLIONS. The Gamecube made a small profit).

[Team Andromeda]

I partially agree with the above. Although I don't think SEGA got a huge amount wrong. It just wasn't a battle they could win. The console was well designed. The support amazing and the marketing wasn't bad. They came to market with their biggest name (Sonic Adventure). It could have been better but it was a million times better than the PS2 launch.

Piracy didn't help, the fact you could get games without modding the console can never be good. But there were other factors:

1) DVD Playback - At the time of launch the PS2 was the cheapest DVD player. Even though it had no games in Japan it sat lovingly next to the DVD section in shops.
2) No support from EA - Despite SEGA developing a stellar sports lineup arguably stronger than EA's (NBA, NFL, NHL & Virtua Tennis) the lack of support from the biggest 3rd party company was a severe blow. Especially in Europe where SWWS 2000 was no match for FIFA 2000!
3) Awareness - The amount of people who visited my house and had never heard of Shenmue, Soul Calibur, Crazy Taxi and left and immediatly purchased a Dreamcast. The other common misconception was that the Dreamcast was aligned to the N64/PSX generation and people 'assumed' the PS2 would have mroe power.
4) Branding - I used to get so frustrated when people would say they were getting a PS2 because it was better. In an argument they had nothing. They just knew the brand.
5) A lack of a true KILLER app - Despite 2000 being one of the greatest holiday periods ever and an incredible games lineup. There were no true killer apps. For the DS it was Nintendogs, the Wii had Wii Sports and the PS2 had GTA3. The SNES only truly boomed when DKC hit the market.
6) Loss leading approach - SEGA lost mountains of cash with the Saturn and pinned their hopes on selling a LOT of DC's. SEGA would have been better to find a scaled down niche approach to the console so it could be profitable with 20 million sales (The Gamecube and Xbox both sold 25 million but the Xbox lost BILLIONS. The Gamecube made a small profit).

All great points bar 6). People need to relasie that SEGA never sold the Saturn at a loss (nor the Mega CD) and that was reflected in their High price and debloping the Saturn never made SEGA loss money . SEGA with the 32X and Saturn lost massive ammouts of Market share and that what cost SEGA dear along with Model 3 making its AM# Team post a lost too

[crackdude]

I can understand the Saturn wasn't damaging in terms of money, but what did the addons do that was so bad as people go around saying?


Some say Sega lost tons of money on R&D, others that Sega lost publisher partnerships like EA (though there were EA games on the Saturn). I never fully understood the story.

[Centrale]

I can understand the Saturn wasn't damaging in terms of money, but what did the addons do that was so bad as people go around saying?

I think they just spread themselves too thin and couldn't come up with enough software for them.  So the people who shelled out the money to buy them new eventually felt like they weren't getting enough bang for the buck.

[crackdude]

I think they just spread themselves too thin and couldn't come up with enough software for them.  So the people who shelled out the money to buy them new eventually felt like they weren't getting enough bang for the buck.

But they didn't sell that well to begin with..wasn't this the main issue?

[mylifewithsega]

But they didn't sell that well to begin with..wasn't this the main issue?

That's not entirely true; at least, it wasn't here in the states. Both the SEGA CD and 32X sold well their first month or two of release. They just didn't have lasting appeal due to several factors. From what I've read, as well as experienced, there weren't enough games released for SEGA CD that really demanded purchase. Many titles were FMV-based, or expanded cartridge games, with very few titles that really took advantage of the CD format or SEGA's hardware.

The 32X was sort of a cluster-fuck. I mean, the Saturn was right around the corner. With SEGA jumping it's North American launch, not to mention the PSX and N64 following soon after, how could the 32X compete? On top of that, not having a steady stream of new titles to support it didn't help matters. It just shouldn't have been made. I love the thing, but SEGA really should've focused their efforts on Genesis, Game Gear and Saturn. 

At one point, that were supporting 6 pieces of hardware; Genesis, SEGA CD, 32X, Saturn, Game Gear and Pico. That's a lot of mouths to feed.

[Team Andromeda]

I can understand the Saturn wasn't damaging in terms of money, but what did the addons do that was so bad as people go around saying?


Some say Sega lost tons of money on R&D, others that Sega lost publisher partnerships like EA (though there were EA games on the Saturn). I never fully understood the story

In the years the Saturn 32x and Mega CD were developed SEGA was posting profits of over $100 million . So in R&D terms the 32X, Saturn and Mega CD never lost SEGA any money at all and it must be said for a add-on the Mega CD sold in very good numbers . All those machines were sold at near enough cost price so  SEGA never lost money there either. What those machines did was to make SEGA lose market share and support and that's what hit its bottom line , with trying to pay some 3000 staff on a small market share and high developer software costs .

[mylifewithsega]

In the years the Saturn 32x and Mega CD were developed SEGA was posting profits of over $100 million . So in R&D terms the 32X, Saturn and Mega CD never lost SEGA any money at all and it must be said for a add-on the Mega CD sold in very good numbers . All those machines were sold at near enough cost price so  SEGA never lost money there either. What those machines did was to make SEGA lose market share and support and that's what hit its bottom line , with trying to pay some 3000 staff on a small market share and high developer software costs .

Yeah, what Team Andromeda said. Hehe.

[crackdude]

Thanks guys. It's a part of Sega history that I never understood fully.