Where do you think gaming would be today if Sega were still part of the "big three"?

​

 

Sonic's absence not intentional. Bug! was meant to be Sonic's big 3D debut, Adventure began development on the Saturn, and of course, X-treme tried to become a thing.

 

Now that my joke is over

There were 10 Mario games on the N64
There were 5 Crash games on the Playstation
There were 3 Sonic games on the Saturn

The intention or plan is irrelevant. The results speak. The output for a popular mascot character was abysmal. Only 3 released titles, 2 outsourced and 1 a compilation title. This dude was pretty much casted aside.

You're also ignoring my point. SEGA's legacy portfolio was not some advantage they had over Sony. Being long running generational franchises also doesn't really matter in this scenario. Sony is rotating the IPs out with newer ones that capture modern audiences. The PS2 had 3 new popular platformer IPs along with Ape Escape and they invested even more into more genres with new studios. They're constantly pushing out new IPs and a good chunk of them are hits. SEGA was pulling their weight too with games like Monkey Ball, Crazy Taxi, PSO, Skies of Arcadia, etc. They were both investing in projects, neither were really depending on legacy IPs, but Sony was way better at it by gen 2 than SEGA. Their library for the PS2 is some of the best in the business.

That's why I said it's hard to pin point a future with SEGA. Where exactly did they go wrong? How far back do I have to go to assassinate the man responsible? The woman? The secret cult within the company? Do I have to kill the janitor too?

 

I think there's only two routes the Dreamcast could've survived in:

1) Sega didn't screw the pooch so hard on the Saturn, or
2) Sega took their collab with Microsoft a little more seriously

The first one is maybe the obvious answer, but I find the second idea more interesting to explore.

Both Sega and MS were interested in defeating Sony, and both of them were invested in bringing the personal computer and living room experiences together. It really felt like a mistake in hindsight for their collaboration to just be "can boot games in a Windows CE SDK" and left at that. Sega was really starving for money at the time, actively dodging features that would raise the cost of the system and insisting to cut under PS2 at $199. Meanwhile, Microsoft has notoriously spent 20 years struggling to find an identity, and is now an IP graveyard from all the short sighted acquisitions made in a vain attempt to remedy the problem. Again, hindsight is 20/20, but it feels obvious, right? One had the identity but no money, the other had the money but no identity.

As for what this would've changed... well, I think the perception of a few things would be different. Sega in the 90s was edgy, Microsoft in the early 00s was edgy, but Sega in the early 00s wasn't really edgy. It had it's moments for sure, but it was moreso leaning to the quirky vibe we know Nintendo for, with it's colorful interfaces and wacky peripherals. Xbox wanted really badly to have a family-friendly side (see: Blinx, Sneakers, Voodoo Vince) but it largely fell on it's face straight into the edge with their presentation. Their partnership could've maybe gave them a more balanced image that would've attracted a larger crowd of teenagers/adults, but pulled kids (and the less insecure types) on board too. Like the PS2, but weirder.

One thing I think about a lot is how stuff MS included on Xbox (ie a hard drive and more involved Windows-based kernel) placed into a system that actively wanted you to use a keyboard and mouse and browse the internet / check email on your TV would've changed the way we perceived online connectivity in the home. I definitely think it would've given Sega an opportunity to go "blue ocean" much like Nintendo did with the Wii. It kinda was already headed that way, but again, it just wasn't taken far enough. And I assume DC's failure is the reason Xbox decided against exploring it, too.

The main thing I think about with DC surviving is things going different for their software. It should be no surprise that Sega's well started running dry only two or so years after the DC dropped out, with most of their IPs falling into dormancy while what remained (coughSONICcough) saw a stark drop in quality. Yakuza might be the only thing of note Sega did for a while afterward. With proper funding and time all the way through the DC's life, I think we could've seen not only more games from them, but better ones. A timeline where we got a complete library for DC would in itself have been a major positive change.

Now, would've Halo even happened the way it did? Or Fable? A little hard to say, but I think it still would've been possible. If Sega and Microsoft shared the billing of the system, but Sega was getting all the notoriety for their games, I could see Billy Gates and co getting a bit jealous and opening up their own studios anyways. The OG Xbox team's history is a story about ego tripping, so I'm sure Microsoft would've been trying to get some heavy hitters under their name on the platform too. If not, then we might've seen another game series take the mantle for standardizing console FPS controls, and it might not even be close to what we got. Fable would've probably still come out though, just not under MS.

IDK guys, I've just thought about this one a lot. My point is that a stronger partnership between these two could've been a game changer.. granted Microsoft in that timeline doesn't acquire the whole company and eat the insides while wearing it's face as a mask. But you never know!!!!!!!!!!

 

Realizing now that I don't actually understand the origin of Xbox's success at all. How much of that was Microsoft having infinite money, and how much of that was Halo? Would Bungie exclusivity have changed anything for the Dreamcast? I know Xbox Live was a huge part of that, and there's no timeline where a Japanese company could've delivered a service that convenient. Still, it feels like Xbox was just a box for playing Halo. Just taking their killer app off the table might've starved them out of the industry. Maybe the online revolution just gets pushed back another decade. If the only question is software, Sega still competes.

 

Xbox succeeded for a few reasons:

1. Hype surrounding Microsoft due to the PC market boom and most people actually liking Windows (crazy to think of now lol)
2. The online service, hard drive and audio CD ripping combined to give it a strong niche
3. The presentation, Halo and their other IPs making teens/young adults interested in a more "mature" alternative to the other consoles (a bit flimsy)
And the big one,
4. Microsoft having so much money it couldn't have possibly sunk

It's worth saying the OG Xbox's "success" was only a few million more than the GameCube, at 24 million vs GCN's 21.7 million. So in comparison to the 100+ million more PS2 sold that gen it's clear to say it wasn't really THAT much of a success. But it was seen as enough to keep investing in the industry, and the brand made a much bigger and better splash with the next gen.

I guess all this ties into my point that Sega would've been smart to double down their collab with Microsoft. Dreamcast died due to a deficit in budget, Xbox stayed alive simply because Windows gave MS infinite money. We could've seen a system selling better than either of them (ESPECIALLY since Sega would've given MS a platform in Japan), and maybe could've seen a SEGA360 instead of an XBOX360 by 2005.

But that's all under best case scenario. Both companies had severe ego issues and were prone to walking into rakes, so I imagine a fallout of some sort could've happened any time before the finish line. But it's nice to dream... cast.

 

Let's put some numbers on the table here

The 3 best selling PS2 games

1. 17.33m - Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas
2. 14.89m - Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec
3. 11.76m - Gran Turismo 4

The 3 best selling Gamecube games

1. 7.41m - Super Smash Bros. Melee
2. 6.88m - Mario Kart Double Dash
3. 5.91m - Super Mario Sunshine

The 3 best selling Xbox games

1. 8.6m - Halo 2
2. 5.0m - Halo: Combat Evolved
3. 3.2m - Sneak King

A game given away in a value menu at the end of its lifespan is one of the best selling Xbox games.

Xbox was pretty much carried by Halo and North America. 60% of the Xbox install base was in NA. For Halo 2, the game sold at least 6.4m units in NA. That's 74 God damn percent of its sales. In July of 2004, Xbox Live had 1 million subscribers. By July of 2005, Xbox Live had 2 million subscribers. It's not hard to imagine that Halo 2 was the reason for the jump in subs. It was the most popular game on the service for over 2 years.

Getting rid of Halo would have had a pretty big effect. No killer title for the console. No killer title to push the Xbox Live Service. Aside from Fable, nothing else from Microsoft made a big splash to carry them.

 

I feel like this is an outlier since everyone just got a copy by simply setting foot in a Burger King in 2006. What's the actual 3rd best selling Xbox game?

 

If you don't want to count Sneak King (I would), it's Fable at 3m. It comes tumbling down after that.

 

So at the very least, Halo would've needed to still exist.

Which again, it still could've if we went down this route. Sega of Japan was always going to make games for both Japanese and international crowds, but their ability to market to Americans specifically was spotty, especially after (justifiably!) gutting Sega of America. Microsoft could've easily taken that responsibility and made their own games for that purpose. And I imagine they would've taken any excuse to steal an IP from Steve Jobs, lmao. Just as long as they didn't get in the way of what Visual Concepts was up to (or if they acquired them instead).

Speaking of, that was a big deal huh? The 2K Sports games are still wildly successful, and that was Sega's initiative. I guess we'd still be seeing those as a Sega IP if things didn't go south. Maybe Sony or Nintendo would've thought to acquire their own dedicated sports-game deals if it kept going? I could imagine EA doing a "pick me" and going full exclusive to PS2. Nintendo would've either been going even harder on the Mario sports titles, or striking up exclusivity deals with Midway. Would've hurt to see SSX become PS2 exclusive, but MLB Slugfest or NBA Jam feel pretty "right" on GameCube. Just as long as Activision stayed tripartisan; I can't live in a world where Tony Hawk wasn't on every system imaginable.

 

Yeah! Sure, the NA pre-launch ads for the Dreamcast had a techno-horror vibe, but every tv commercial made after the launch was about the wacky day-to-day lives of the brightly-colored characters that lived in every Dreamcast.

Remember, those two outsourced games were made to fill in the hole left by X-treme's absence.

 

I don't see how that information changes anything.

 

X-treme was poised to be SEGA's big holiday title. SEGA banked HARD on it. Sonic Christmas Blast was even meant to be a tie-in to X-treme. However, X-treme was not ready. Those games were quickly whipped up to take its place.

 

Speaking of Sonic Christmas Blast I distinctly remember my VHS copy having an ad for X-Treme at the end of it. But it's been 16-17 years since I last saw it. Can anyone verify that? ... Maybe not the thread for it but it's been driving me crazy whether that actually happened, and what the audio associated with it was because I only remember it showing gameplay...

 

I'm not buying whatever you're selling chili so I'm just going to move on.

I can't find any references to an ad. It sounds like the special was supposed to be the ad for the game to begin with, but with no game to promote they shifted gears. I only did a quick search though.

But hey, for only $20, you can verify!

 

But here you are outlining why SEGA would never double down. The very approach towards videogames was at odds with Microsoft, and what made the Xbox and especially the 360 thrive, that is, integration (before Alexa, the 360 was actually the closest to a smart home hub device you could have (EDIT: I AM exaggerating lol but it was an all in one device for televisions in a way the Dreamcast wasn't and a Dreamcast 2 couldn't possibly be)) was something SEGA was not capable ot willing to do, and would have to give up on its own strengths to provide. Sure, SEGA had always been forward-thinking when it came to being gadgety, but it could never provide the breadth of services Microsoft could, which to be developed would then sacrifice SEGA's priorities in the process and dismantle the hardware -> software pipeline. The collab would have MS basically phagocytizing SEGA. It's not a question of ego but of corporate structure and legacy.

A SEGA360 would just be an Xbox 360 with a SEGA front providing exclusive titles that would be a bad deal to SEGA as a software developer anyway.

 

The special definitely was a tie-in for X-treme. There's a premise document and a promo in Archie Sonic #41 to support this.

 

Apologies if this counts as off-topic, but what source do you have for that claim about 'Bug!'? I did a quick search and checked Sega Retro as well. I can't seem to find anything that suggests 'Bug!' was initially pitched as a Sonic title. It's the first I've heard of this claim.

...Unless you're stating his race cameo is technically meant to be his debut.

Ignore all of that and read what was posted below this post I'm a fucking idiot.

But yeah even then the narrative painted seems to be that the American side was the one trying to give us a next major Sonic title and it wasn't until X-Treme crashed and burned Adventure began development. It's still a pretty major example of poor internal communication and conflicting ideas being sort of what sunk the company later on down the line.

Again I think Sega's 'niche' and burning bridges with other developers during the 32x/Saturn era means they probably would've gone third party anyways after the Dreamcast's shelf life was up. The backwards compatibility stuff Sega originally wanted to do with Microsoft came up in this thread and thinking about it more yeah I think they would've just said 'yeah here's this new Dreamcast thing'. They might have kept their ports Xbox exclusive for a bit longer perhaps?

That does make me wonder if the Xbox might have done better in Japan had Microsoft just gave Sega the keys to design/market the system there. Food for thought.

 

This fact was also written in a book. I think it's listed on the game's wikipedia page.