why Atari and SEGA died off

Does anyone know why Atari and SEGA died off?

Sega had problems from the very beginning, especially with the Genesis, and Atari almost killled the gaming industry indefinitely.

Since both companies are still around I assume you're asking why they don't make hardware anymore?spazzx625

In name only, they're not the same companies as people once knew them.

[QUOTE="spazzx625"]Since both companies are still around I assume you're asking why they don't make hardware anymore?QuistisTrepe_

In name only, they're not the same companies as people once knew them.

In Atari's case, their computer, video game console, and arcade divisions were separate entities that didn't always cooperate. Combine this with the saturation of the games market (Intellevision, ColecoVision, etc., truckloads of unlicensed third party software, and just plain company mismanagement, and you have the video game crash of the 80s and the general end of Atari's console business. Never again would they even come close to being a factor in the game console market.

As for Sega, one bad move after another killed their console business. The 32x (poorly conceived and supported), Sega CD (just plain bad), and the Saturn (the 32-bit console which didn't really render 32-bit very well). The Saturn was a pain for developers as Sega provided next to no support in terms of development tools. As a result, the games turned out to be much less than what the could have been. Ultimately, the Saturn was just poorly designed to begin with. By the time the Dreamcast was released, no one took Sega seriously anymore as gamers in general were waiting for Sony and Nintendo to release their next consoles. Not ever a year's head start could save the Dreamcast.

In short, lack of standardization and direction, which confused and annoyed retailers and gamers alike led to old Sega's exit from the console business.

[QUOTE="QuistisTrepe_"]

[QUOTE="spazzx625"]Since both companies are still around I assume you're asking why they don't make hardware anymore?spazzx625

In name only, they're not the same companies as people once knew them.

Atari has been owned by many entities since it was founded and is currently owned by a French publisher. Sega is now owned by Sammy with many of its old divisions closed down or sold off.

the way they did things and because of ps2

I always thought of Sega as the poor underdog.

I think timing had a lot to do with their success and failure. I always looked at Sega as actually a little too cutting-edge for their own good.

Did you ever notice the the first best/new generation consoles were always Sega's? Genesis, I am very confident, came out before SNES. Sega CD came before Playstation 1 and was the frist widespread CD gaming console. I also know Dreamcast pre-dated PS2.

The Game Gear and Sega Nomad came out way before Sony and Nintendo had hi-end portables.

Truthfully, if Sega were around now, they might have something better than the current-gen stuff that pushes the others to put out new systems.

The problem is, I feel that Sega pushed so hard to get the absolute best out the absolute quickest -- that when it's time for the long haul (Gen vs. SNES; Dreamcast vs. PS2, X-Box, GameCube), they fell short. The other companies took their time and perfected their technology before they realeased it -- so they did better in the long run.

Sega was just a little ahead of themselves ... but it's what defined them.

I think the reason Sega threw in the towel right in the early days of the Dreamcast is they didn't see a huge reception when it first came out. Perhaps gamers got used to the idea that something better was always going to come out soon after a Sega product and held off. Sega felt that without a huge initial reception, they just couldn't make it.

Atari -- I am not sure they ever made a really serious effort like Sega did. The Jaguar was a potential player to be sure, but I think Sega really fought for their spot ... they really wanted it. I think Atari's success in the 80s came from being in the right place at the right time. No one else did what they did. The evil Nintendo corporation did not exist yet ..........

biggest SEGA mistake, making small new console advances while Nintendo was smart to spread out its consoles. Genesis, Saturn, Dreamcast, Game Gear, Sega CD, and different models of Genesis itself; compared to Nintendo- NES, SNES, Gameboy, GB Color, N64, Gamecube, GBA, Wii, DS, and now 3DS. Sega's time frame was much shorter and was too busy throwing new systems out instead of new faces for Sega. Atari had very simple tech and was very primitive, basically people got bored and went to the arcade. And when the NES came out, it looked so much better than any Atari, whether it was the 2600, 5200, or 7800. Atari made Very bad games like E.T. And believe me, if you played that game... you didn't want to even look at the Atari. Atari's best shot was the Arcade, making Pac-man, Galaga, Galaxian, Cantipede, Missile Command, and Asteroids. And look where they are now, 3rd party support, in which they shall stay. Atari had a large library, but the quality was Cheap, at best.

Sega made a lot of mistakes, indeed. However, they were closer to winning the 16 bit war than most people on the Internet think. There WAS a point when the Genesis/Mega Drive had a much larger marketshare than the SNES worldwide, and it wasn't just the 2 year head start. The Genesis/Mega Drive outsold the SNES for quite a few years. Hell, there was a moment, maybe brief, but it still existed, when Sonic was actually a more recognizable mascot for children than Mario.

Then, of course, came the Sega CD, the 32X and Donkey Kong Country, among other things, that changed everything.

Sega had problems from the very beginning, especially with the Genesis, and Atari almost killled the gaming industry indefinitely.

thattotally

What I find so amusing is that in the end, Bushnell ended upon on French-owned Atari's board of directors. Full circle achieved.:D

both Atari and Sega made mistakes, and in some cases were affected by things outside their control

Atari failed to release a real successor to the 2600 in time (5200 games look like 2600 with more colour for the most part), meaning the market stagnated and programmers had difficulty keeping up the quality of the games on the aging system. There was also no standardisation , anyone could make a game for the 2600 , which meant that while you got some very creative games, the majority were awful , it created a bad image for atari and support for Atari was lost quickly.

by the time Atari came back with the 7800 (which is actually a good system, and a proper upgrade to the 2600), the NES wsa massively popular, with Sega following behined, Atari was left behined because they failed to take the initiative.

Sega failed due to a combination of bad hardware decisions (32X comes to mind) and having to face Sony (which had much, much, much more money for marketing and securing exclusives), in fact, if Sony had not entered the console market, you may well have seen a Sega system right now.

both companies seem to share a bit of a chaotic nature as far as where the companies were, Atari was founded by game programmers, and run by people who knew little about games, while the people over at Sega seemed to know much more about making games then making money.

well they aint totally dead software wise but

hardware

here we go again

atari kept pumping the same ol types of games over and over and over nothing fresh , nothing innovative

as a result people got bored of gaming and stopped playing completely which almost killed the industry

in 1983 in japan only for a period of 2 yrs because of the dead market,

they then experiemented by releasing the nes in very few cities they found out it sold well and then continued with what we now have up to today -to sum it up nintendo save the industry from ataris mistake

fast forward to 1997 the saturn and the add-ons for genesis that failed ----- this was the final nail for those platforms sega had to pull the switch early on the saturn and focus on the now dead dreamcast because dreamcast sold well they figured it would continue to

but once ps2 came all of dreamcast momentum stopped to a halt , then nintedo-who i already had explained how they save the industry who at the time had trouble it self with the nintendo 64 sega felt game cube as a threat but in the end ps2 was the threat cause gc and xbox failed hard ! only selling 20 somthingm units each a piece but there yougo the reason dc is or was no more -gc ps2 and xbox along with help from n64 and ps1

the support was veryslim

now it wasnt just sega that was on life support

gamecube/nintendo ran into problems throught that entire gen

-and microsoft barely made it it was halo that saved xbox

had ms not launched 360 early i dont think theyd be the developers choice this day and age

and had nintendo not chosen to go motion and leave the graphics business side of things, things would have gotten very ugly but thats not the whole story

sony made one mistake -- - 5 hundred ninty nine us dollars this is what i think helped ms ,

we already knew nintendo was runin a dodge day one

-so theres the story on the video game market and where it sits today why sega and atari are done and why nintnendo and ms had to step up their game this gen

any morequestions

Sega had problems from the very beginning, especially with the Genesis, and Atari almost killled the gaming industry indefinitely.

thattotally

I was under the impression that the Genesis was by far their most successful console. I've even heard that the Genesis surpassed sales of the SNES at one point (though I wouldn't swear upon it). Do you mean they started having trouble with addons like Sega CD and 32X during that gen?