http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/tale-of-two-e3s-xbox-vs-sony-vs-sega/0118482 Read an interesting article comparing this years E3 (Sony Vs Microsoft with little show from Nintendo) to the very first E3 (Sony vs SEGA with little show from Nintendo). What caught my eye is something I'd never actually heard of before. - Tom Kalinske CEO of SEGA of America from 1990 - 1996 We've heard many times about the deal between Sony and Nintendo that fell apart when Nintendo decided to work with Phillips (and we all know what came of that...). I know they had some partnerships with making games, but this is the first I've ever heard though that Sony actually went to SEGA afterwards to try and create a CD system together. Basically Kalinske was all for the idea, but when they went to Japan it was turned down. I must say what was said about Sony not being able to make hardware or software was quite funny. I'm curious if the system would have ended up more like the Saturn or the PlayStation. The whole article is interesting though and talks about some of the competition between SEGA and Sony back in the day so I suggest reading it! “Sony played a lot of pranks on us. They deflated my inflatable Sonic character that was at the front of the show. In previous shows against Nintendo, I used to put flyers and leaflets under the doors of retailers’ rooms the night before the show, announcing our new products and pricing, so that Nintendo didn't have time to react to it." This is probably the best bit of the rest of the article. =P
Further proof that the disagreements between the two branches of Sega helped their eventual downfall. A house divided against itself cannot stand.
Honestly, I can only imagine the horror if SEGA wound up being Sony's pet. I probably would have grown to hate SEGA.
An interview about this has been on the wiki for some time, but I can't find it. I just remember seeing and reading it. EDIT: Here it is. From 2006.
Being a Playstation fan, I'd honestly say that I think I may have loved SEGA even more... which says a lot because I already do... Who knows, maybe we'd never have NINTENDO exclusive shit... Get your Mario away from my Sonic... (PS I DO like Nintendo... but I'm not a Nintendo System owner... no reason to become one either.)
I think it would have depended on the kind of deal too. With Nintendo Sony would have just taken over. But maybe with SEGA the Saturn would have just been a Playstation with the Saturn name (And PS2 the Dreamcast :p). Who knows.
I do think it's hilarious that both Nintendo and SEGA turned down Sony for reason Sony then went on to rub in their faces. If this was an alternate universe though, I do think I would much prefer SEGA/Sony than Nintendo/Sony, they oddly seem like a better fit.
This is honestly fascinating, and puts Hayao Nakayama in a pretty bad light... which seems to happen pretty often. The division between the Japanese and American arms of Sega at the time was causing nothing but problems, but in a sense it had been going on for years by that point. Didn't the Japanese side not bother to inform the US about Sega CD basically until it launched in Japan? I remember reading the SegaBase retrospectives a LONG time ago, about how the Saturn was basically EXACTLY what the market wanted when it was developed (a 2D powerhouse), but by the time it was released, it was obvious the PSX and especially N64 would be pushing 3D harder than anticipated, and Sega had nothing but trouble catching up. Remaking the console or partnering with Sony really could've changed things. Then again, the Saturn was a hit in its home country, but Sega couldn't afford to JUST be popular there.
Not entirely sure what to think about all this, but it sounds mildly interesting, and I might at some point decide to read this instead of skim over it. (that's a good sign in my case)
SOJ not informing SOA about the Mega CD might make a bit more sense when you look at the early game lineup and realize that Mega CD software development in Japan was mainly marketed to Japanese home computer developers (both launch titles, as well as many of the early titles, were X68000 ports). I'm not sure why they did it this way, but I'm sure there was very little interest in bringing these titles overseas back then.
Oh good, I remembered hearing this ages ago when Sega-16 was doing their interviews I think with Kalinske and I've never been able to find any more information about it since then.
Well, at least Nintendo had a valid reason to kill their agreement with Sony. This, on the other hand... The whole east/west split within SEGA really needs to stop. Actually, now that I think about it, Capcom has the same damn problem.
Does SEGA still have this problem? As much as I love the MegaDrive and Sonic and all the major SEGA Franchises, I am glad SEGA failed in the hardware business to how them that such stupid descisions weren't tolerable. They messed up with the end of the MegaDrive's life and with every other console thereafter.
The Dreamcast says hello. SEGA did a 180 and did a lot of things right with the DC. The only reason it failed was because of the hype of the PS2. I have a hard time swallowing the whole "it failed because it didn't have a DVD drive" because Nintendo lasted with their mini-DVDs which has almost the same storage capacity as the GD-ROM. (1.2 GB vs 1.4 GB). Ultimately, Sony made out like a bandit going solo. As much as I love SEGA I know they were shit at making decisions (that poor US Saturn library). I doubt Sony could have done as well if they partner up with SEGA.
Very interesting read! Can't help but echo the comments about how divided SEGA's main headquarters are... it's quite ridiculous really.
I've never cared about playing DVD's on any consoles I've ever owned, and in fact I stuck with the Gamecube and found both that and the Xbox superior to the PS2. I think the Dreamcast was a great console and I don't think it primarily failed because of what it was. No, it mostly failed for the fact that SEGA had lost prominence with the MegaDrive, then messed about with the Saturn which pretty much became non-existent in many regions, and then they pushed out their Dreamcast when they were already struggling on the market (the Saturn was released late 1994/early 1995 and the Dreamcast came out 4/5 years later and in this time SEGA hadn't made much of an impact in the market), and failed to think about the launch of other consoles around it (the PS2 nipping at their toes when the PS1 was already the biggest selling console of the previous generation meant they were swamped). What obviously didn't help either was the fact that the PS2 could play/use PS1 games and peripherals which meant that there was already a huge library of games to play. I do think another big factor for a lot of people was being able to play DVD's, as not only was it convenient, but a huge novelty at the time when DVD's were on the rise. Not everyone bought in to that shit (I didn't) but for a lot of people it helped solidify their decision. Do I think if the PS2 hadn't been released when it was that the Dreamcast would have been more of a success? Yes. The market was obviously hungry for that type of console, the reason the Xbox trailed behind the PS2 in second place. So many people were waiting for the PS2 which in America was announced before the Dreamcast even launched there. If the PS2 had been launched late in 2000 or early 2001, I think people wouldn't have wanted to wait for it, and would have spent their money on the Dreamcast instead. It's the same thing that's happening to the Wii U.
The ease you can pirate games on Dreamcast vs PS2 also needs to be stated. Sega fixed that hole far too late.
