SEGA hit by 73 people layoff, more focus on digital games

[MadeManG74]

TA,you are contradiction. . .

You are the guy wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt espousing the virtues of capitalism?!

Funny that you would call TA a contradiction, when you are the guy who complains about casual games all the time, and then buys Sonic and Sega All Stars Racing on day one. And complains about hollwood/movie styled games, but loves the Yakuza series.

[Sega Stylista]

TA,you are contradiction. . .

You are the guy wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt espousing the virtues of capitalism?!

Funny that you would call TA a contradiction, when you are the guy who complains about casual games all the time, and then buys Sonic and Sega All Stars Racing on day one. And complains about hollwood/movie styled games, but loves the Yakuza series.

SASR is just a casual title with a Sega tribute skin, but I don't think it is contradictory for a Sega fan to be suckered in by it?  Were you here when I referred to it as Korporate Kasual Kart?

Yakuza is cinematic but it is not hollywood.  It just feels Sega.  I had Daytona running on a monitor in the same room and you could see a lot of the same color gradients and hues being used in Yakuza, a Nagoshi trademark?  Maybe my imagination, but I just love that stuff.

[Team Andromeda]

hmm, I just read an article blaming the "PS2 generation" for the death of arcades. . . I'm going to try to find that article for you and link it here (eventually, I'm on vacation), it reads like one of my rants.

Just because someone written a article blaming the PS2 for everything doesn't mean much to me. Imo 3D killed the Arcades, the cost of those Arcade boards meant an end to 10 pence or 50 pence plays, which for me killed the Arcades . Also when machines like the Dreamcast could play Arcade Perfect or in most cases Arcade better ports , what was the point in most going to the Arcades .
I'm sorry to say , you can not blame SONY for that  .

They probably felt western casuals wanted to see more traditional platforming levels than the more 'arcadey' speed and rails Sonic.

I think Sonic Team are looking for ways to fix Sonic game length. The speed Sonic through levels is way shorter than a Mario level , its a Huge problem for the team . I remember a interview with Sonic Team Japan with Sonic Adventure, saying that one of the biggest problems for the Team , wasn't the New hardware, but  it was making 3D Maps big enough to accommodate SONIC speed. Saying that on average a Sonic Map needed to be at least 8 t0 16 times the size of the typical Mario level .

but I would rather see more SFIV like titles that are gameplay-centric, hardcore with mainstream appeal, don't cost $50 million and are profitable for the publishers

I agree, but sadly gamers demand Big productions and hours of gameplay . This was happing with SEGA own supporters , they were happy with Straight ST-V or NA@MI ports , but wanted extra content and levels .

Did you mean DC or Xbox? Halo was audience defining. Xbox became the fps machine.

X-Box was just a console that at last could handle a FPS every bit as good as a PC, Plus it was an amazing game to boot. You look over how hard SEGA it's self used FPS to push its machines. SEGA made a massive deal over Duke Nukem , Quake coming to the Saturn , a massive Play with Quake III on the DC , and who knows how much better the DC could have sold, if Half-Life had met its intended date for the DC .

No, dude. I'm talking Sega's launch line-up and key titles throughout its life, compare that to Tekken, Ridge Racer and other more mainstream stuff that PS2 launched with

Tekken and VF were both launch tiles, they're both VS Fighters . SEGA launched the DC with VF 3 (mainstream title in Japan) a licensed based Godzilla game (mainstream) . I guess Pen Pen Tri was way out there , but there again Fantavision wasn't your typical launch game

Those million and one new IP's weren't launch titles right? And If you make a Top 10 list of key PS2 title they wouldn't be in them, right? If you made a DC top 10 it would have Shenmue, Rez, Jet, Seaman etc a much higher proportion of risky IP's in its launch and key title list.

Seaman and the likes of REZ are were on on the PS2. If I was to make a list of my top PS2 titles, they would be a lot of risky , and not your typical games (or great sellers)  it would be made up of the likes of Gradius V, ICO, Shadow Of the Colossus, Yakuza I, Persona IV, Ibara.

Like I said there is load of Risky and Arty games for the PS2 .

Well, Sony was much larger than NCL back in 94 when it entered the show

And NCL were always much larger than SEGA, through the 8 bit, 16 bit & 32bit years. Never stopped SEGA from outclassing NCL through most of those years . And its one thing to have cash in the bank its quite another to know what it takes to make a console and lanuch one , ask Panasonic -and in money and size terms the Matsushita make SONY look small fry. Even MS will more money in the bank that most Counties, lost out with its 1st battle in the console market .

Team Andromeda was a casualty of modern mainstream gaming and the new audiences that festered to

Try TA  was a casualty of SEGA inpet handling of the 32bit Battle ,  A Battle which SEGA lost badly. Nothing more , its wasn't SONY that killed TA it was SEGA, after poor sales of Saga . Saga which was yet another Japanese RPG, no different from the endless FPS in the west . Only with with Half-Life , Saga was in another league

[ROJM_old]

hi TA, good to hear from you. . .thanks for the allstar bump.

What does the tie ratio have to do with the content? 360's audience is very different from the one that played Saturn and DC, a much wider mainstream demographic spread.

Only because its sold better . It doesn't get any more wider or mainstream than the PS and PS2 era ,  And SEGA was a part of that hardware battle  trying to chase the same gamers ,  just SEGA lost out.

hmm, I just read an article blaming the "PS2 generation" for the death of arcades. . . I'm going to try to find that article for you and link it here (eventually, I'm on vacation), it reads like one of my rants.

It was always meant to be a part of the game design, lets face it . You then make up a Questionnaire , with limited number of boxes to tick , and a set limit of questions . Like which  MD games would rather see on XBLA SONIC or Last Battle.
So you know more or less the answer most people will give , before a box is ticked . Its just basic good  PR.

I went back and read some Sonic Unleashed Sonic Team interviews on IGN and elsewhere at the time of the game's release.  They were targeting western audiences primarily and younger players. . .they talked about working very closely with the western marketing teams. . .they just designed the game with elements to appeal to those audiences.  They probably felt western casuals wanted to see more traditional platforming levels than the more 'arcadey' speed and rails Sonic.

The trouble is the cost of games development . Games now cost 10 to 20 million plus . Not many developers will risk that sort of money on a Arty Game or new IP , with out being pretty sure it will pay off.  Its not just down to a new breed of gamer , its more because games cost so much , and need so many people to make these days . That what's killing risk taking .

I don't disagree, but I would rather see more SFIV like titles that are gameplay-centric, hardcore with mainstream appeal, don't cost $50 million and are profitable for the publishers.

X-Box was the best console to buy if you were a SEGA fan. HALO was a launch time , it was a In-House title  MS was always going to push that game . Other non MS IP sold well on the X-Box . Splinter Cell plays noting like HALO or is a FPS , and came out after HALO. It sold well . SEGA core gaming audience wasn't there for the Dreamcast mate, nothing to do with MS .

Did you mean DC or Xbox?  Halo was audience defining.  Xbox became the fps machine. . . Splinter Cell-western gun game, close enough.  I don't disagree with a lot of your points but you just don't budge on the fact that there was an audience change or shift and it didn't exactly jibe with what Sega had been in the past.

The fact is that DC featured more unique, risky IP's as the system's key titles than any other system out there.

That is wrong mate , There's a million and one new and risky IP on systems like the PS or PS2 . I mean would couldn't get much more risk taking or Arty style of games than the likes of Vib ribbon or Ore No Ryori , or what about the like of ICO or SOC for the PS2 .

No, dude.  I'm talking Sega's launch line-up and key titles throughout its life, compare that to Tekken, Ridge Racer and other more mainstream stuff that PS2 launched with.  Don't make this a quantity argument because PS2 wins in every regard in terms of quantity over DC.

Those million and one new IP's weren't launch titles right?  And If you make a Top 10 list of key PS2 title they wouldn't be in them, right?  If you made a DC top 10 it would have Shenmue, Rez, Jet, Seaman etc a much higher proportion of risky IP's in its launch and key title list.

You'e having a laugh , For starters NCL and NEC are massive corps . In my view SONY and MS have done more for gaming the past 10 years , than any of the drivel that's come out of NCL .  Most of SEGA issues were/are of its own making . SEGA screwed up the 32bit battle, and it never recovered from that sadly

Well, Sony was much larger than NCL back in 94 when it entered the show. . .

Oh god, gag me. . ."SONY AND MS DONE MORE FOR GAMING!?"  Blah you are a corporate gaming fanboy!

TA,you are contradiction. . .

You are the guy wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt espousing the virtues of capitalism?!

Team Andromeda was a casualty of modern mainstream gaming and the new audiences that festered to it and you defend the Korporations that relegated her to a faded memory of more hardcore days!

I'll post that link to the article I'm talking about here eventually. . .

You're probably right on that front. Nintendo is doing the same thing with the Wii on what they did with the original NES system. They only went "hardcore" or more game driven during the SNES and N64 eras and that was really down to the intense competition they had in those respective eras. What they did with the Wii is simply not directly compete for the same audience that Ms and Sony were fighting over and that gamble worked. Probably more than they'd hoped. People are blinded by nostalgia if they actually think nintendo actually went for gamers from the beginning.

As for Sony and Ms, yes they did ruin gaming in a lot of ways but that 's really down to Sony more than MS. It always makes me laugh how certain people defend sony being a gaming machine when Sony went out of their way to market the PS2 and PS3 as being an entertainment system rather than a pure gaming system. Even MS did the same. That's the main reason the DC wins in that department because it was a pure gaming machine driven by games. Whatever you think of the Wii or nintendo, no one can't say it isn't a pure gaming system, IE it doesn't play DVD's CD's etc. It does what its supposed to do, play games. The debate is whether the audience it has garnered care enough about games enough and that's where the debate should actually lie in terms of that. And like the PS2 horde before it that IMHO is a resounding no.

[Team Andromeda]

As for Sony and Ms, yes they did ruin gaming in a lot of ways but that 's really down to Sony more than MS. It always makes me laugh how certain people defend sony being a gaming machine when Sony went out of their way to market the PS2 and PS3 as being an entertainment system rather than a pure gaming system. Even MS did the same. That's the main reason the DC wins in that department because it was a pure gaming machine driven by games

I think SEGA also played on the all in 1  entrainment system with its own systems , especially the Saturn, but I also remember SEGA playing on  how the Dreamcast was a cheap way to gain access to the Internet , rather than buying a PC. SEGA also had all these Huge plans for the DC , with plans for a MP3 VMU , right down to a deal with Swatch watches , and being able to order Cinema tickets through ones DC .

No doubt SONY made a big play with the PS2 being able to play DVD's , but then how can blame them , SEGA original Mega CD advertising made a play that after playing a game , one could always put in a Music CD, SOA even included CD&G discs with the SEGA. The fact that one can't look over is SONY In-House commitment is bigger than either MS or NCL, That to me is sure sign SONY is serious about games . I think people look over how many Games SONY In-House teams have pumped out over the years, most of which they'll never get any credit for, In-House wise SONY Studios produced more than most .

Whatever you think of the Wii or nintendo, no one can't say it isn't a pure gaming system, IE it doesn't play DVD's CD's etc.

Didn't people say the same with the Cube ? Is the Wii and Cube more of a Games machine than even the DC , because they don't play Music CD ? . Imo the Wii is the lamest gaming machine of this Generation, with the so called Multi Media machines that are the PS3 and 360 offering a far better gaming experience and line up, and MS and SONY pushing out more In-House or Published games, than NCL.

[George]

TA is the only one making sense. You can go ahead and pit 'Sony' into this whole 'IT ONLY PUBLISHES MAINSTREAM TITLES', but you are obviously not seeing the big picture. In the end of the day Sony does make mainstream titles to sell systems, all publishers do. SEGA does it with Sonic and Yakuza (Japanese mainstream), Sony does it with GT series and Uncharted.

Though Sony still publishes niche games like Pixel Junk series, ICO, Shadow of Colossus, Folklore (excellent game), Demon's Soul (Harder than hardcore), Patapon, The Last Guardian, and even LocoRoco.

People also give Sony shit for 'doing bluray to help Sony pictures etc etc', so what? I wish SEGA would be more unified. I wish they would get SEGA toys to make pre-order items for their games, etc etc. Would be pretty cool.

WUTEVE.

[Team Andromeda]

TA is the only one making sense. You can go ahead and pit 'Sony' into this whole 'IT ONLY PUBLISHES MAINSTREAM TITLES', but you are obviously not seeing the big picture. In the end of the day Sony does make mainstream titles to sell systems, all publishers do. SEGA does it with Sonic and Yakuza (Japanese mainstream), Sony does it with GT series and Uncharted.

Though Sony still publishes niche games like Pixel Junk series, ICO, Shadow of Colossus, Folklore (excellent game), Demon's Soul (Harder than hardcore), Patapon, The Last Guardian, and even LocoRoco.

People also give Sony shit for 'doing bluray to help Sony pictures etc etc', so what? I wish SEGA would be more unified. I wish they would get SEGA toys to make pre-order items for their games, etc etc. Would be pretty cool.

WUTEVE.

Thank you , I would admit I was one of those that would slam SONY for anything back inthe PS2 days, but that started to change the day I got ICO and a PS2  . I started to wake up and respect some of the efforts SONY were putting into their In-House games, or ones Published by SONY, and started to play some of the PS games, that  I missed out on.

People go niche games it didn't get any more niche than the like of Vib ribbon or Ore No Ryori. Ore No Ryori is just sheer Japanese Madness, and one of the most fun games I have ever had the Pleasure to play . ICO/SOC are SONY's very own Panzer Dragoon games, right down to both games having their own spoken language, and being seen as ART games; Echochrome is a puzzle game quite unlike any other , and The Last Guardian the type of game I wish SEGA could make these days .

People seriously need to get over this SONY is only mainstream, and is to blame for everything wrong with SEGA. Its just not fair or right. SONY In-House commitment to game is right up there with SEGA at the height of the Saturn and DC era.

[George]

I agree, though Sony's talking heads during the PS2 era was bad. I just read a interview with  Rob Dyer. Its long, but he talks about how Sony has 'agents' to help small developers make "PS Mini" games and help them 'grow' to full PSN titles. Let them keep their IPs.

This is a big change for Sony:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4 ... s_rob_.php

[Sega Stylista]

Just because someone written a article blaming the PS2 for everything doesn't mean much to me. Imo 3D killed the Arcades, the cost of those Arcade boards meant an end to 10 pence or 50 pence plays, which for me killed the Arcades . Also when machines like the Dreamcast could play Arcade Perfect or in most cases Arcade better ports , what was the point in most going to the Arcades .
I'm sorry to say , you can not blame SONY for that  .

Well no doubt that was a factor. .3D.  On the other hand, Saturn was going to be a 2D powerhouse until PSX forced Sega's hand into console 3D.  That is something to consider. Playstation certainly upped the hardware arms race making it harder for arcades to stay ahead of consoles, you will agree. Going to find that article.

X-Box was just a console that at last could handle a FPS every bit as good as a PC, Plus it was an amazing game to boot. You look over how hard SEGA it's self used FPS to push its machines. SEGA made a massive deal over Duke Nukem , Quake coming to the Saturn , a massive Play with Quake III on the DC , and who knows how much better the DC could have sold, if Half-Life had met its intended date for the DC .

But why then didn't Saturn and DC become the FPS machines of their time?  Sega catered to a different audience primarily, MS/XBOX/FPS and the new Halo audiences, on the other hand, went hand and hand.

Try TA  was a casualty of SEGA inpet handling of the 32bit Battle ,  A Battle which SEGA lost badly. Nothing more , its wasn't SONY that killed TA it was SEGA, after poor sales of Saga . Saga which was yet another Japanese RPG, no different from the endless FPS in the west . Only with with Half-Life , Saga was in another league

Doesn't Sony get any credit for dooming Saturn? Saturn was more hardcore and less mainstream than PS1. Right there you can see the beginning of an audience shift.

[Sega Stylista]

You're probably right on that front. Nintendo is doing the same thing with the Wii on what they did with the original NES system. They only went "hardcore" or more game driven during the SNES and N64 eras and that was really down to the intense competition they had in those respective eras. What they did with the Wii is simply not directly compete for the same audience that Ms and Sony were fighting over and that gamble worked. Probably more than they'd hoped. People are blinded by nostalgia if they actually think nintendo actually went for gamers from the beginning.

As for Sony and Ms, yes they did ruin gaming in a lot of ways but that 's really down to Sony more than MS. It always makes me laugh how certain people defend sony being a gaming machine when Sony went out of their way to market the PS2 and PS3 as being an entertainment system rather than a pure gaming system. Even MS did the same. That's the main reason the DC wins in that department because it was a pure gaming machine driven by games. Whatever you think of the Wii or nintendo, no one can't say it isn't a pure gaming system, IE it doesn't play DVD's CD's etc. It does what its supposed to do, play games. The debate is whether the audience it has garnered care enough about games enough and that's where the debate should actually lie in terms of that. And like the PS2 horde before it that IMHO is a resounding no.

Thanks. You're absolutely right.  I saw that Kaz Hirai  PS2 lauch quote recently saying that PS2 was "the future of entertainment" referring to not just gaming. But don't tell TA that cuz it doesn't jibe with his theory of a gaming market that never evolved and let's not kid ourselves that the PS2 launch hype was as much or more about DVD than games.  Or that PS2 sold as a DVD player first when the launch titles were too few in number and quality against DC's awesome line-up. But none of that matters to, TA.

DC was a pure game machine despite what other secondary functions Sega tacked onto the packaging of the console.  That's why DC is often referred to, correctly, as the last hardcore game machine.

Wii is a fucking piece of shit not even worth mentioning in a discussion like this, but don't forget that it is an exercise machine with no gaming functions for a lot of overweight women.

[George]

Sony is not to blame for another consoles failure,that is called denial my friend. Sony's console was not that mainstream till 1998, a few years after, after Saturn was pronounced dead.

SEGA America not believing in  the Saturn, launching their own add-ons for Genesis and not releasing Japanese software because they did not believe it would sell in the west and if they did it was in limited quantity.

SEGA also saying the Saturn was dead did not help, including the hard to develop architect. High price etc.

[Sega Stylista]

I think SEGA also played on the all in 1  entrainment system with its own systems , especially the Saturn, but I also remember SEGA playing on  how the Dreamcast was a cheap way to gain access to the Internet , rather than buying a PC. SEGA also had all these Huge plans for the DC , with plans for a MP3 VMU , right down to a deal with Swatch watches , and being able to order Cinema tickets through ones DC .

Your correct in recollecting that but it was all gimmicky bullshit.  There was absolutely no allusion by Sega that DC was a game machine first and only marketed to gamers first and only. Totally different story with PS2 and DVD.

No doubt SONY made a big play with the PS2 being able to play DVD's , but then how can blame them , SEGA original Mega CD advertising made a play that after playing a game , one could always put in a Music CD, SOA even included CD&G discs with the SEGA. The fact that one can't look over is SONY In-House commitment is bigger than either MS or NCL, That to me is sure sign SONY is serious about games . I think people look over how many Games SONY In-House teams have pumped out over the years, most of which they'll never get any credit for, In-House wise SONY Studios produced more than most .

I don't care how serious you think Sony is about games, it is all about money in the end and they want games that will fill DVD and blu-ray discs and justify HD tv's.  They are not a game company first and they don't give a shit about a game design philosophy that evolves games in a manner that isn't consistent with the goals of selling their consumer electronic equipment.  Sony isn't really a game maker.. Sony in-house games primary function is to bring in the sale for the tv and disc divisions. Lol, at the way MGS4 just cinema spammed itself to hell to justify it being bluray only.

[Sega Stylista]

Sony is not to blame for another consoles failure,that is called denial my friend. Sony's console was not that mainstream till 1998, a few years after, after Saturn was pronounced dead.

No, I'm not a Sega loyalist or fanboy that is trying to conceal Sega's fuck-ups away.  I knew Sega and eventually Nintendo were fucked the day Sony entered into the market. . .much larger more powerful, more sophisticated marketing and better brand.  Sony picked up the torch from MD being the hip and cool machine (that Sega dropped by its own fuck-ups) and redefined what was cool in gaming at the same time taking it into a new direction beginning to cater to a new audience.

We just might have had a generation that was SNES-CD and Saturn as 2D powerhouses but Sony's arrival meant that would not happen.

SEGA America not believing in  the Saturn, launching their own add-ons for Genesis and not releasing Japanese software because they did not believe it would sell in the west and if they did it was in limited quantity.

SEGA also saying the Saturn was dead did not help, including the hard to develop architect. High price etc.

Of course those were all factors, but if Sony wasn't there it would have done a hell of a lot better than it did and Sega would have been in better financial health.  Sony entering gaming was just a natural consequence of industry growth. It's not like I'm saying things could have been otherwise.  Sony was there to take the niche industry into the mainstream and it totally succeeded but at a cost to those who favored the values of the earlier days. Sega could have done everything right going back to 32X and Sega CD, not fucking up Saturn, etc and it would still be out of the business today because it would have been the little guy kicked to the curb by the giants.  That's been my point all along.

Are you saying Sega would have a console today had it not screwed everything up?  No way!

Would Sega being making FPS's or would a fantasy mainstream audience emerge that would give a fart about its quirky style and niche properties?

lol.

[George]

You are saying "If there was no competition..." they still would have not sold consoles. SEGA America killed Saturn. Playstation's 'momentum' started after its death. SEGA America dropped the ball and let Sony drive itself into the gaming market.

SEGA had brand name and they ruined it. Not Sony. You can't hate on Sony for trying to make its own product. Saturn didn't have enough software released here to sell well.

SEGA Saturn was a hardcore gaming platform.....

IN Japan. Not America.

[Sega Stylista]

You are saying "If there was no competition..." they still would have not sold consoles. SEGA America killed Saturn. Playstation's 'momentum' started after its death. SEGA America dropped the ball and let Sony drive itself into the gaming market.

Not sure where you are getting this, Sony and Playstation outclassed Sega and Saturn from day one.  Playstation owned the market before Saturn's death.

SEGA had brand name and they ruined it. Not Sony. You can't hate on Sony for trying to make its own product. Saturn didn't have enough software released here to sell well.

I'm gonna give up on this cuz I'm tired...Sony took what was niche to the masses to the mainstream and forever changed gaming for the worse.  There is a reason the golden era of gaming refers to the NES/SNES/Genesis years and not any generation after.  Gaming was diluted after Playstation and made to a new standard of marketability.

I don't hate Sony.  I like their products.  I resent the death of the old hardcore and how the new generation embraces today's core mainstream crap as 'hardcore' when somebody like me who has been gaming since 2600 and Odyssey doesn't even consider that stuff games but interactive shit for no life mainstream-tards.

SEGA Saturn was a hardcore gaming platform.....

IN Japan. Not America.

Not agreeing with you there...Saturn was easily the most hardcore of the 3 consoles in America. Why wasn't it?  Because it had a few crappy sports titles?

Sega would not be a console maker today even if it had never fucked up 32X, Sega CD, Saturn processor, surprise launch and death, pissed off EA, etc, etc and all the other bullshit we all know.  And the reason why not has to do with the gaming audiences today.  Remember the Naka/Moore "F you" story about the focus group saying Sega was the old grandpa or whatever the fuck that was no longer cool and couldn't remember why or whatever shit? Don't side-step this key point.  Sega would not be a console maker today under any condition unless they were bought by one of the giants and altered to suite the new audiences.

Sony=new gaming audiences more mainstream than in the 8bit and 16bit era.  If you and TA love today gaming, I don't care but please accept the truth of this.  Stop going around like there are no connections between modern gaming audiences and the state of Sega today.  I know all the internal fuck-ups but that is only half the story.

My point in all my rambling, which I will soon retire from, is to try to inject an old-school hardcore vibe into the mainstream, corporate game-marketing control-grid matrix hoping to reignite a demand for hardcore. I'm not a hater, that's pointless. I have an agenda, but I can see it is a totally hopeless cause because today's gamers are sheep.

Mainstream gaming is a waste of life.