Archived from groups: rec.games.video.classic (
More info?)
> > Starting with the 32x Sega started making blunders.
>
> Interesting. I've always thought that it was the SegaCD that marked
> the beginning of Sega's chain of blunders. However, I could see why
> you might want to start with the 32X... it was an even bigger
screwup.
Many people consider the SegaCD to have been a failure, but I have to
disagree. It's the most succesful 'add-on' ever. Now, that may -not- be
saying much, but think of another add-on that managed to last several
years and over 100 titles. Plus if nothing else the SegaCD managed to
single handedly spawn and then just about bury the FMV console genre,
saving future systems a lot of time and worry. Anyway, the SegaCD has
some good titles and I wouldn't call it a total loss.. the 32x, eh.. I
mean there were worse systems sure, but overall it wasn't a good idea
and really showed the Sega was out of touch at the time.
> > Sony hit hard with a much better launch lineup and was able to
secure
> > better third party support. Once they took out Sega, they were
easily
> > able to keep a solid lead over Nintendo
>
> Sony had damn good timing. They released their system at a time when
> they could crush Sega, and Nintendo was determined to compete with
the
> SNES until the N64 was finished. They really were the only game in
town
> for several years. I really don't think the Playstation would have
done
> nearly as well if Nintendo had a viable system to compete with it at
> launch- carts or no carts.
Well, Nintendo had at least recieved a bloody nose from Sega. And now
their blunder which spawned the PSX in the first place is legendary. I
don't think they were necessarily counting on the SNES lasting, that
was their NES mistake -- it just took them too long to get the N64 to
market. They also shot themselves in the foot with the cartridge format
(although I'm sure Bung et al was OK with it). The expense of producing
a cartridge just about ensured third parties would go elsewhere and it
didn't exactly make companies like Square happy who were making 3 and 4
disc RPGs at the time. If Nintendo had brought its 'A' game and if Sega
had even brought its 'B' game.. things maybe different. But since they
both just fumbled as much as they could Sony was smart enough to take
advantage.. and I don't think Sony is going to make the same mistakes.
> > who has been in the middle of
> > its own 'bad idea' freefall for the better part of a decade.
>
> I think some of Nintendo's best stuff came out between 1992-1998, but
> even I'm not going to deny they made some bad calls around then.
Most
> of it happened early on, and we only saw the ramifications later...
kind
> of like how we're only now seeing Nintendo correct the mistakes they
> made with the N64.
Don't mistake N's corporate hardware mistakes with its software
divisions. First Party Nintendo stuff remains one of the best out
there. It's all that has kept the company afloat for awhile now.
Nintendo has and continues to make great games.. but its not going to
rise out of 3rd place by itself.
> >Unlike
> > other companies Sony managed to retain that lead into the PS2
mostly
> by
> > not making any major mistakes. Right now they're so far ahead I
can't
> > imagine the PS3 not dominating the next generation.
>
> Oh, I can. They've got nowhere to go but down, and both Nintendo and
> Microsoft are ready to challenge them. My personal hypothesis (which
> admittedly means nothing) is that you'll see the systems more evenly
> spread out.
Microsoft can't compete in Japan, but it has a chance here. Nintendo
hasn't had its act together in a decade. I'm hoping this may change,
but for Sony to get unseated something amazing needs to happen, or sony
would need to make a huge mistake.. I realistically don't expect
either, but i'm always open to a surprise.
We shall see..
= numsix
=
http
/www.villagebbs.com
(Not much competition)
Facebook
Twitter