So here's a thing: TV Asahi recently held a viewer poll for Japan's top 100 video games. If we don't count a few Persona titles and Puyo Puyo, both of which originate outside of the company, Sega do not have any representation in the final list whatsoever. To an extent, this is not much of a surprise. Sega were never anywhere near the top in the console race there, close calls in the early days of the Saturn aside. Yet not even one showing for Virtua Fighter, or Space Harrier, or any of the other huge arcade hits that made their name in the first place? Arcade games have certainly declined even in the strongholds of Japan, something that is now reflected in the list's heavy bias towards newer console titles, but something else must be wrong when Sega are also no longer notching any mentions in similar overseas lists. This opinion piece from IGN Japan attempts to grasp why. It makes several good points: for starters, Sega are not good with consistency. Over the last 30+ years, Sonic is the only work of theirs which has received constant attention, and even then it sat out the Saturn era. Others which they managed to turn into a series, like Virtua Fighter, have only just been revived after years of sudden dormancy. And many more - Burning Rangers, Skies of Arcadia, Jet Set Radio - never got the chance to become a long-running, well-remembered franchise to begin with. It also could be argued that Sega, at times, focused more on providing gameplay and graphics than characters or stories to connect with audiences across decades/generations; perhaps a result of a prevailing arcade mindset in design. At the same time though, they made the likes of Shenmue and Panzer Dragoon Saga, just to be met with huge losses. I do personally think there's some truth to the theory of their original expertise in arcades not always translating well into everything else, and that it has been the root cause of many of their woes. Now it is fair to say that a few "Top ___" lists, limited in scope by their number count, polling sample size, or the arbitrary whims and opinions of their sole author, are not entirely valid barometers of how well an obvious gaming giant is truly remembered among the public. It's also true that in some respects, Sega have been doing slightly better during recent years. However, discussion of this kind of thing is healthy in the long run for our understanding of companies like Sega and their place in history - I'd be interested to hear others' thoughts and theories on this.