They released the Dreamcast to early. They could've used the extra time to market, add a DVD player and the XBox might not exist. Them doing this they could of fought the Gamecube and had more time to develop games.
Thoughts?
If the Dreamcast released in 2001 would Sega still be around with Hardware
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I completely agree. However, what killed the Dreamcast for me was the wierd controller. Sega's Dreamcast was just ahead of its time.
Also Xbox would have still existed.They released the Dreamcast to early. They could've used the extra time to market, add a DVD player and the XBox might not exist. Them doing this they could of fought the Gamecube and had more time to develop games.
Thoughts?
downnice95
Eh, I doubt Sega had the power to fight not one, but three competitors on the console front.
Even Nintendo had problems competing in the 6th gen so Sega going 3rd party was their saving grace.
I don't think it would, since Sega probably lost a lot of money with the Sega 32x crap and with Sega Saturn sales and programming difficulties. If they lauched the console in 1999 with a DVD player, now that could have been a lot of profit for Sega.
Also, they should have released a portable console without the battery drain of the Game Gear around 1994- 1996 (a 16-bit portable), with cheap games, that could have made them going on for some more years.
no , the problem with the Dreamcast wasn't the hardware, or even the timing , sure . releasing it in 2000 with slightly beefier hardware would have helped it a bit when it came to porting late 6th gen games , but it wouldn't have saved the company's hardware business.
the problem by that time was with Sega themselves, they lost alot of money over the Saturn , and had a big difficulty competing with Sony, the PS2 would have wiped the floor with it regardless.
it obviously also outsold the Gamecube and Xbox by alot , its just that Microsoft has the money to spare , as well as other very profitable ventures , while Nintendo did decently enough in the previous generation to survive (although I doubt the Gamecube made them alot of money).
Not only that but the suprise Saturn launch which was exclusive to certain retailers pissed off chains like Wal-Mart and KB who refused to carry Sega products. This helped Sony gain the upper hand because the brand lacked the retailer presence. If timing meant anything, the Xbox 360 should have bombed since that released a year early as well against a Sony powerhouse.no , the problem with the Dreamcast wasn't the hardware, or even the timing , sure . releasing it in 2000 with slightly beefier hardware would have helped it a bit when it came to porting late 6th gen games , but it wouldn't have saved the company's hardware business.
the problem by that time was with Sega themselves, they lost alot of money over the Saturn , and had a big difficulty competing with Sony, the PS2 would have wiped the floor with it regardless.
it obviously also outsold the Gamecube and Xbox by alot , its just that Microsoft has the money to spare , as well as other very profitable ventures , while Nintendo did decently enough in the previous generation to survive (although I doubt the Gamecube made them alot of money).
Darkman2007
No, because Sega developed a horrible reputation in the Saturn era, all thanks to Bernie Stolar and his BS. Plus Sega had multiple failed hardware releases. The Sega CD, Sega 32X, Sega Nomad, Sega Game Gear and Sega Saturn were all failures, and they cost Sega millions of dollars, forcing them to layoff over 1/4 of their workforce. Sega had no choice but to release the Dreamcast in '99. If they didn't they would have gone completely out of business.
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"]Not only that but the suprise Saturn launch which was exclusive to certain retailers pissed off chains like Wal-Mart and KB who refused to carry Sega products. This helped Sony gain the upper hand because the brand lacked the retailer presence. If timing meant anything, the Xbox 360 should have bombed since that released a year early as well against a Sony powerhouse.no , the problem with the Dreamcast wasn't the hardware, or even the timing , sure . releasing it in 2000 with slightly beefier hardware would have helped it a bit when it came to porting late 6th gen games , but it wouldn't have saved the company's hardware business.
the problem by that time was with Sega themselves, they lost alot of money over the Saturn , and had a big difficulty competing with Sony, the PS2 would have wiped the floor with it regardless.
it obviously also outsold the Gamecube and Xbox by alot , its just that Microsoft has the money to spare , as well as other very profitable ventures , while Nintendo did decently enough in the previous generation to survive (although I doubt the Gamecube made them alot of money).
Murderstyle75
the bad Saturn launch is overrated ,and given way more attention that it should be, not every successful console has a great launch , the PS3 likewise had a very rocky beginning but it recovered from that.
in fact , the Japanese Dreamcast launch was pretty meh in comparison with the western releases, and the PS2 had severe hardware shortages when it came out.
Saturn's problems had more to do with Sega's crappy developer support (especially early on) , difficult hardware, and lack of budget for maketing and securing exclusives, there is no way Sega could have given Squaresoft for instance, the benefits Sony did for having FF7 as an exclusive , same goes for Tomb Raider 2.
THe Sega CD and Gamegear were not failures.No, because Sega developed a horrible reputation in the Saturn era, all thanks to Bernie Stolar and his BS. Plus Sega had multiple failed hardware releases. The Sega CD, Sega 32X, Sega Nomad, Sega Game Gear and Sega Saturn were all failures, and they cost Sega millions of dollars, forcing them to layoff over 1/4 of their workforce. Sega had no choice but to release the Dreamcast in '99. If they didn't they would have gone completely out of business.
GSJones1994
They should have marketed the online capabilities of the system much more dramatically, aswell as creating more exclusives focused on the online aspect.
Maybe then the system would have lasted just a little bit longer, and maybe Microsoft would have had more faith in them, not releasing the OG Xbox, and releasing Halo on the Dreamcast bundled in with a dual analog controller (like how they bundled the 3D controller with Nights into Dreams).
There are a lot of 'what ifs..', but this would have ben the perfect scenario for the Dreamcast, in my opinion. Essentially being the go to system for online console gaming.
MS and the Xbox was a thing before the DC even came out. It was over 80% done by 1999, and was just sitting their waiting with a few tweaks before its 2001 launch. The only thing that MS was involved in with the DC was the Win CE.They should have marketed the online capabilities of the system much more dramatically, aswell as creating more exclusives focused on the online aspect.
Maybe then the system would have lasted just a little bit longer, and maybe Microsoft would have had more faith in them, not releasing the OG Xbox, and releasing Halo on the Dreamcast bundled in with a dual analog controller (like how they bundled the 3D controller with Nights into Dreams).
There are a lot of 'what ifs..', but this would have ben the perfect scenario for the Dreamcast, in my opinion. Essentially being the go to system for online console gaming.
Lucianu
Im not sure they could do more regarding online, people knew about it. remember this is the late 90s, alot of people didn't even have an internet connection (I certainly didn't , I had to use my dad's computer to get any internet access), and almost everyone who did used dial up , it isn't really a massive market. by the time the Xbox was out, more people had internet connections, and Broadband was catching on fast.They should have marketed the online capabilities of the system much more dramatically, aswell as creating more exclusives focused on the online aspect.
Maybe then the system would have lasted just a little bit longer, and maybe Microsoft would have had more faith in them, not releasing the OG Xbox, and releasing Halo on the Dreamcast bundled in with a dual analog controller (like how they bundled the 3D controller with Nights into Dreams).
There are a lot of 'what ifs..', but this would have ben the perfect scenario for the Dreamcast, in my opinion. Essentially being the go to system for online console gaming.
Lucianu
They released the Dreamcast to early. They could've used the extra time to market, add a DVD player and the XBox might not exist. Them doing this they could of fought the Gamecube and had more time to develop games.
Thoughts?
downnice95
I don't think it would have made much of a difference really. And the Xbox would have released regardelss.
There was always talk maybe we buy SEGA or something like that; that never materialised, but we were actually able to license them what they call Windows CE, the younger brother of Windows, to run on their system and make that their platform. But for Bill [Gates] this wasn't enough, he didn't think that SEGA had enough muscle to eventually stop Sony so we did our own Xbox thing.Joachim KempinRead more here: http://www.joystiq.com/2013/02/08/why-bill-gates-said-no-to-buying-sega-according-to-former-ms-ex/ Important wording: "so we did our own Xbox thing", emphasis on the "so", implying that internal discussions to channel their console gaming desires through Sega via a company purchase took place before they began development on the DirectX box. Had MS purchased even a small portion of Sega back in 1998 when the Dreamcast launched (which btw was 3 whole years before the Xbox was released) I'm sure Sega would still make consoles due to MS's big pockets.
There was always talk maybe we buy SEGA or something like that; that never materialised, but we were actually able to license them what they call Windows CE, the younger brother of Windows, to run on their system and make that their platform. But for Bill [Gates] this wasn't enough, he didn't think that SEGA had enough muscle to eventually stop Sony so we did our own Xbox thing.Joachim KempinRead more here: http://www.joystiq.com/2013/02/08/why-bill-gates-said-no-to-buying-sega-according-to-former-ms-ex/ Important wording: "so we did our own Xbox thing", emphasis on the "so", implying that internal discussions to channel their console gaming desires through Sega via a company purchase took place before they began development on the DirectX box. Had MS purchased even a small portion of Sega back in 1998 when the Dreamcast launched (which btw was 3 whole years before the Xbox was released) I'm sure Sega would still make consoles due to MS's big pockets. A moron. The very origin of the Xbox was PROPOSED, it was made by peopkle who came up to bill gates and he accepted. THis was in 1998, ao the DC had NOTHING to do with the DC's release. Nothing. That was before the talks of the DC windows CE. Need links? 1. http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/the-history-of-the-xbox/ 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_(console)#cite_note-seattletimes_20110525-9 3. http://illuminatedgamer.com/lets-take-a-look-at-the-history-of-xbox-part-one/ 4. http://technografy.blogspot.com/2012/04/history-of-xbox-infographic.html#.UgKkypLvsuc 5. http://www.webcitation.org/5yxFmYCBa Research is not hard. it was an idea that had started work in 1998. It coming out in 2001 had nothing to do with waiting for Sega. MS already started before they even tried doing anything with them for the NA launch, and it was already approved.
There was always talk maybe we buy SEGA or something like that; that never materialised, but we were actually able to license them what they call Windows CE, the younger brother of Windows, to run on their system and make that their platform. But for Bill [Gates] this wasn't enough, he didn't think that SEGA had enough muscle to eventually stop Sony so we did our own Xbox thing.Joachim KempinRead more here: http://www.joystiq.com/2013/02/08/why-bill-gates-said-no-to-buying-sega-according-to-former-ms-ex/ Important wording: "so we did our own Xbox thing", emphasis on the "so", implying that internal discussions to channel their console gaming desires through Sega via a company purchase took place before they began development on the DirectX box. Had MS purchased even a small portion of Sega back in 1998 when the Dreamcast launched (which btw was 3 whole years before the Xbox was released) I'm sure Sega would still make consoles due to MS's big pockets. A moron. The very origin of the Xbox was PROPOSED, it was made by peopkle who came up to bill gates and he accepted. THis was in 1998, ao the DC had NOTHING to do with the DC's release. Nothing. That was before the talks of the DC windows CE. Need links? 1. http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/the-history-of-the-xbox/ 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_(console)#cite_note-seattletimes_20110525-9 3. http://illuminatedgamer.com/lets-take-a-look-at-the-history-of-xbox-part-one/ 4. http://technografy.blogspot.com/2012/04/history-of-xbox-infographic.html#.UgKkypLvsuc 5. http://www.webcitation.org/5yxFmYCBa Research is not hard. it was an idea that had started work in 1998. It coming out in 2001 had nothing to do with waiting for Sega. MS already started before they even tried doing anything with them for the NA launch, and it was already approved. Dude, no reason to call names. I don't understand, you say the "Xbox idea" started in 1998. Yes, it did. But it was just an idea. Microsoft had another idea that ultimately got shot down as this former exec stated, and that was the "Sega idea" of investing into the Sega console brand instead. Microsoft and Sega announced their Windows CE collaboration in early 1998 but of course we all know WIndows CE didn't play much of a factor with the DC. If MS/Sega agreed to this deal in May 1998 it is easy to assume that talks went back at least for months, possibly as early as 1997. The idea here is that Microsoft spent parts of 1997 and early 1998 thinking about whether Sega would be a viable way to enter the console space and at some point in late 1998 or 1999 they decided against it and went full steam ahead with the DirectX box idea. Infact your very first link says this DirectX box idea came to be in 1998 (probably mid-to-late 1998) which took place after MS's flirtation with Sega in early 1998 and possibly 1997 since talks for licensing an OS for a game system isn't likely to be something that takes a few months You've got to wonder if those 'four engineers in 1998' who started the Xbox got their idea AFTER Microsoft's intense discussions with Sega since the Windows CE deal was made official in May 1998 and like I said, was probably discussed since 1997
Na.. The Dreamcast lived up to its name, its ambitions and ideas were all truly a dream. Regardless of when it occurred, it would have woken up eventually. What Sega could have done different, that would have altered the industry as we see it today, was everything it did after Sega Genesis and before Sega Dreamcast. The Sega Genesis was its only commercial/critical success in the hardware business, but it made so many devastating mistakes after. 32X, Sega CD, Sega Saturn, Game Gear. The problem with Sega was that it had too much untamed innovation. It lacked disciplined and consistency. They liked coming up with fun innovative ideas, but didn't commit to them, instead opting to dump them when the going got tough. What really would have turned its fortunes around was if the console that launched after Sega Genesis was a developer-friendly Sega Saturn that would have launched at the same time as the PSX with similar specs.They released the Dreamcast to early. They could've used the extra time to market, add a DVD player and the XBox might not exist. Them doing this they could of fought the Gamecube and had more time to develop games.
Thoughts?
downnice95
It would still have broad 3rd party support from developers of the Genesis, and probably would have gone toe-to-toe with PS1, without really losing much from N64 which was difficult to develop for. And had it launched at around the same time as PS1, it would have had more time for careful planning on how to deal with PS2. But even if it did have a successful Saturn with no Game Gear/32X/Sega CD, Dreamcast would have still lost to PS2, then Xbox would still come out.
So the best way to deal with that, which is even more improbable than the successful Saturn fantasy, would be not to compete with PS2 off the bat, benefit from cheaper games/bundles for awhile, then when the time is right, which would have been around the release of the Xbox 1, then release a Saturn sequel that also would be capable of playing DVDs. Dreamcast lineup, online innovation, DVD capability.
If only
SNES was the competitor of Sega Genesis, but went from SNES to N64. Sega Genesis should have done the same thing, but straight to Sega Saturn
[QUOTE="bonesawisready5"][QUOTE="Yo-SUP"] Dude, no reason to call names. I don't understand, you say the "Xbox idea" started in 1998. Yes, it did. But it was just an idea. Microsoft had another idea that ultimately got shot down as this former exec stated, and that was the "Sega idea" of investing into the Sega console brand instead. Microsoft and Sega announced their Windows CE collaboration in early 1998 but of course we all know WIndows CE didn't play much of a factor with the DC. If MS/Sega agreed to this deal in May 1998 it is easy to assume that talks went back at least for months, possibly as early as 1997. The idea here is that Microsoft spent parts of 1997 and early 1998 thinking about whether Sega would be a viable way to enter the console space and at some point in late 1998 or 1999 they decided against it and went full steam ahead with the DirectX box idea. Infact your very first link says this DirectX box idea came to be in 1998 (probably mid-to-late 1998) which took place after MS's flirtation with Sega in early 1998 and possibly 1997 since talks for licensing an OS for a game system isn't likely to be something that takes a few months You've got to wonder if those 'four engineers in 1998' who started the Xbox got their idea AFTER Microsoft's intense discussions with Sega since the Windows CE deal was made official in May 1998 and like I said, was probably discussed since 1997Yo-SUPIf you read anything I posted you would. The Idea was actually a "device" and the plan to fully optimize it was "approved" in 1998. They were already working on the device when the DC came out. I am not sure what you are not understanding. Again, what you aren't getting: Situation 1: 1.MS working with Sega on a console. 2.Support by only putting in Windows CE Situation 2 same year: 1.Guys go for approval on a console for the "upcoming" ps2. Idea is accepeted. 2.They work on a advance PC tech console that made it easier for PC devs and console devs. 3.Released a little less than 2 years later. I am not getting how you are confused.
1- You're taking this a bit too seriously. Calm down, whether I'm right/wrong or you are doesn't matter
2- You see, you keep saying your links prove that. Yes, in 1998 they started making a device to compete with the PS2. But in 1997 and early 1998 it is clear that they expressed at least some interest in working more with Sega before deciding, at some point in 1998, to create their own console. The former MS exec said it in the link I provided. Like I keep saying, it is easy to figure out that when he says there was talks about buying Sega he means before they went ahead with their "project to compete with PS2" in 1998. Therefore, they expressed some interest in buying Sega and using their DC console as a means of entry into the industry in 97/early 98 but at some point in 98 decided it wasn't good enough, pulled back on doing anything Windows CE related on the DC and went full fledged with the "PS2 competitor"
I'll add the MS exec's quote again
There were three companies at that point in time, I think this was [Sony], Sega and Nintendo. There was always talk maybe we buy Sega or something like that. That never materialised, but we were actually able to license them what they call Windows CE, the younger brother of Windows, to run on their system [Dreamcast] and make that their platform.
For Bill [Gates] this wasn't enough, he didn't think that Sega had enough muscle to eventually stop Sony so we did our own Xbox thing. There were some talks but it never materialised because Sega was a very different bird. It was always Sony and Nintendo, right? And Nintendo had some financial trouble at that point in time, so Sony came out with the PlayStation and bang! They took off, and everyone else was left behind. Joakim
When he says "there was always talk" "we buy Sega" he notes that it never came to be and they ended up just making CE for the DC. But he admits and confirms that there was discussions about buying Sega to enter the console space. Clearly the discussions about buying Sega happened before 1998, possibly as far back as 96 or 97. This is clear when he says they thought about buying Sega "but we were actually able to license them Windows CE" which indicates that those "buying Sega" talks happened before the CE deal in May 1998 and once again presumably before they decided to make the Xbox
So basically you're right, they did start Xbox work when the DC shipped in 1998, but in the months and year before the DC shipped they thought about not making a console and simply investing in Sega, at least a bit.
[QUOTE="Yo-SUP"][QUOTE="bonesawisready5"] If you read anything I posted you would. The Idea was actually a "device" and the plan to fully optimize it was "approved" in 1998. They were already working on the device when the DC came out. I am not sure what you are not understanding. Again, what you aren't getting: Situation 1: 1.MS working with Sega on a console. 2.Support by only putting in Windows CE Situation 2 same year: 1.Guys go for approval on a console for the "upcoming" ps2. Idea is accepeted. 2.They work on a advance PC tech console that made it easier for PC devs and console devs. 3.Released a little less than 2 years later. I am not getting how you are confused.bonesawisready5
1- You're taking this a bit too seriously. Calm down, whether I'm right/wrong or you are doesn't matter
2- You see, you keep saying your links prove that. Yes, in 1998 they started making a device to compete with the PS2. But in 1997 and early 1998 it is clear that they expressed at least some interest in working more with Sega before deciding, at some point in 1998, to create their own console. The former MS exec said it in the link I provided. Like I keep saying, it is easy to figure out that when he says there was talks about buying Sega he means before they went ahead with their "project to compete with PS2" in 1998. Therefore, they expressed some interest in buying Sega and using their DC console as a means of entry into the industry in 97/early 98 but at some point in 98 decided it wasn't good enough, pulled back on doing anything Windows CE related on the DC and went full fledged with the "PS2 competitor"
I'll add the MS exec's quote again
No they didn't. how do you manage to ignorwe what is right in your face staring at you with a freaking gun? "Took apart old ell Laptops and made a consoles out old Dell Laptops and went an Proposed" this was going to happen regardless. By the time the idea came, it was already a thing the higher ups were watching. What you seem to be missing is that it was proposed. if it was proposed, them even if they bought Sega or at least the DC hardware rights would not have changed that because it had no connection. It would have still been approved. it would have either come out later, or would have came out the same time the DC started dying off (because the DC as it was, was already designed as it was, and there is no way you could have gotten even gimped PC games to run on that thing.) I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to prove. That the future would be different? it would not have. in fact, MSstudios, for consoles did not even exist as a though back then until that was proposed during Xbox development as well. Not to mention, again, the DC would have been as is. The design was final hardware wise. There would have been no way to get all those exclusive PC devs and PC to console port devs to jump on the DC as it was. Which was pretty weak. It most likely would have cost Sega and MS more than what they lost that gen if they did.There were three companies at that point in time, I think this was [Sony], Sega and Nintendo. There was always talk maybe we buy Sega or something like that. That never materialised, but we were actually able to license them what they call Windows CE, the younger brother of Windows, to run on their system [Dreamcast] and make that their platform.
For Bill [Gates] this wasn't enough, he didn't think that Sega had enough muscle to eventually stop Sony so we did our own Xbox thing. There were some talks but it never materialised because Sega was a very different bird. It was always Sony and Nintendo, right? And Nintendo had some financial trouble at that point in time, so Sony came out with the PlayStation and bang! They took off, and everyone else was left behind. Joakim
When he says "there was always talk" "we buy Sega" he notes that it never came to be and they ended up just making CE for the DC. But he admits and confirms that there was discussions about buying Sega to enter the console space. Clearly the discussions about buying Sega happened before 1998, possibly as far back as 96 or 97. This is clear when he says they thought about buying Sega "but we were actually able to license them Windows CE" which indicates that those "buying Sega" talks happened before the CE deal in May 1998 and once again presumably before they decided to make the Xbox
So basically you're right, they did start Xbox work when the DC shipped in 1998, but in the months and year before the DC shipped they thought about not making a console and simply investing in Sega, at least a bit.
[QUOTE="bonesawisready5"]No they didn't. how do you manage to ignorwe what is right in your face staring at you with a freaking gun? "Took apart old ell Laptops and made a consoles out old Dell Laptops and went an Proposed" this was going to happen regardless. By the time the idea came, it was already a thing the higher ups were watching. What you seem to be missing is that it was proposed. if it was proposed, them even if they bought Sega or at least the DC hardware rights would not have changed that because it had no connection. It would have still been approved. it would have either come out later, or would have came out the same time the DC started dying off (because the DC as it was, was already designed as it was, and there is no way you could have gotten even gimped PC games to run on that thing.) I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to prove. That the future would be different? it would not have. in fact, MSstudios, for consoles did not even exist as a though back then until that was proposed during Xbox development as well. Not to mention, again, the DC would have been as is. The design was final hardware wise. There would have been no way to get all those exclusive PC devs and PC to console port devs to jump on the DC as it was. Which was pretty weak. It most likely would have cost Sega and MS more than what they lost that gen if they did.[QUOTE="Yo-SUP"]
1- You're taking this a bit too seriously. Calm down, whether I'm right/wrong or you are doesn't matter
2- You see, you keep saying your links prove that. Yes, in 1998 they started making a device to compete with the PS2. But in 1997 and early 1998 it is clear that they expressed at least some interest in working more with Sega before deciding, at some point in 1998, to create their own console. The former MS exec said it in the link I provided. Like I keep saying, it is easy to figure out that when he says there was talks about buying Sega he means before they went ahead with their "project to compete with PS2" in 1998. Therefore, they expressed some interest in buying Sega and using their DC console as a means of entry into the industry in 97/early 98 but at some point in 98 decided it wasn't good enough, pulled back on doing anything Windows CE related on the DC and went full fledged with the "PS2 competitor"
I'll add the MS exec's quote again
[QUOTE="Joakim"]
There were three companies at that point in time, I think this was [Sony], Sega and Nintendo. There was always talk maybe we buy Sega or something like that. That never materialised, but we were actually able to license them what they call Windows CE, the younger brother of Windows, to run on their system [Dreamcast] and make that their platform.
For Bill [Gates] this wasn't enough, he didn't think that Sega had enough muscle to eventually stop Sony so we did our own Xbox thing. There were some talks but it never materialised because Sega was a very different bird. It was always Sony and Nintendo, right? And Nintendo had some financial trouble at that point in time, so Sony came out with the PlayStation and bang! They took off, and everyone else was left behind. Yo-SUP
When he says "there was always talk" "we buy Sega" he notes that it never came to be and they ended up just making CE for the DC. But he admits and confirms that there was discussions about buying Sega to enter the console space. Clearly the discussions about buying Sega happened before 1998, possibly as far back as 96 or 97. This is clear when he says they thought about buying Sega "but we were actually able to license them Windows CE" which indicates that those "buying Sega" talks happened before the CE deal in May 1998 and once again presumably before they decided to make the Xbox
So basically you're right, they did start Xbox work when the DC shipped in 1998, but in the months and year before the DC shipped they thought about not making a console and simply investing in Sega, at least a bit.
Ok. Sorry to be confusing or obvious but just to be clear: What are you trying to convince me of? That the Xbox would have still existed if they bought Sega in 1997?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment