• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

25th Anniversary of the Saturn in Japan and the 32X in the US

My first console and introduction to the video game world! Daytona USA, Astal, Clockwork Knight and Rayman were all given to me in my bday.. then as I grew a older, bought goodies like HotD and Panzer Dragoon and yes I also own Saga locked in away in a crystal case.
 

pramod

Banned
What stands out to me about the Saturn was the fact that it was the most Japanese-oriented of all the Sega consoles, mainly catering to real hardcore or "otaku" fans. I guess that makes sense considering it was way more popular in Japan compared to the west. I'm sure till this day in Japan, the Saturn is probably remembered more for its dating sims (Sakura Wars), RPGs, girlie mahjong games, 2D shmups, etc than its more "mainstream" games like Daytona/VF/Sega Rally etc.
 
Last edited:
What stands out to me about the Saturn was the fact that it was the most Japanese-oriented of all the Sega consoles, mainly catering to real hardcore or "otaku" fans. I guess that makes sense considering it was way more popular in Japan compared to the west. I'm sure till this day in Japan, the Saturn is probably remembered more for its dating sims (Sakura Wars), RPGs, girlie mahjong games, 2D shmups, etc than its more "mainstream" games like Daytona/VF/Sega Rally etc.

Saturn took the torch for PC Engine games regarding the Otaku crowd, and likely expanded on it!

That gen really was the "Mainstream" vs the "Hardcore" in Japan. Even the Mega Drive's Otaku appeal back then was niche but thankfully there are many hidden Gems on that system too.
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Although it sounds a little unbelievable now, the day before Sega of Japan was poised to launch the Saturn, Sega of America decided to launch the 32X in the US, at a much cheaper price of $159.99, giving Genesis owners a 32-bit upgrade on a budget. Just like the Saturn launch in Japan, the launch of the 32X in America was a big success, with over a million pre-orders and all 600,000 available units sold out before Christmas of 1994. The launch line-up, although small, was stronger than that of the Japanese Saturn, and offered Genesis owners true next-gen experiences not possible on the base console:

250px-32X_Doom_Box_Art.jpg
15687-virtua-racing-deluxe-sega-32x-front-cover.jpg
s-l300.jpg

Although their advertising for the 1995 launch of the Saturn would prove lacklustre, Sega of America (and Europe, for that matter) proved they still had the magic touch, with these great ads:

sega32x_ad.jpg
yh61jygjh0qx.jpg


K7Cbve6.jpg
PUqEmBBLwRXvh86FZP5JmcTQa6nhXcesioawbgMThWU.jpg


The video ads used the same "angry black guy" as the Sega CD ones:




This infomercial is just bizarre though:




Sega of America CEO of the time, Tom Kalinske, was in buoyant mood when interviewed by Edge magazine in March 1995, saying "Now, I can sit here and tell you today that no matter how great Saturn is, or PlayStation is, or Ultra 64 is, we will outsell them by an enormous amount with 32X - simply because of the price." Alas, just like the initial success of the Saturn in Japan, it wasn't to last, and the 32X would be pretty much dead within a year of launch.

I'm going to finish the 32X section as I did the Saturn one, with another Sega Lord X video, with what I think is a very fair assessment of the console:



I got one day 1, along with Star Wars and DOOM.

The FMV upgrade in clarity was good too.
 
Love my Saturn. It's a wonderful time-capsule slice of the arcade scene from that era. The Saturn is still plugged in and gets used regularly on one of the CRTs downstairs.

I never played one as a kid, though. That aspect of the console is missing for me.
I skipped school the day my best bud got his with his first paycheck. We lived off of Daytona USA, Mortal KOmbat and World Series Baseball.

Little did we know that you could import games until it was too late. Also We rented Tomb Raider over half a dozen times from BLockbusters before both of us got PlayStations.
 

pramod

Banned
I got one day 1, along with Star Wars and DOOM.

The FMV upgrade in clarity was good too.

I knew the guy who programmed Star Wars 32X. He said he did it in 3 months or something insane like that. It was like a last minute decision by Sega, when they realized they didn't have a "system seller" for the 32x.
 
Last edited:

RAIDEN1

Member
Had they gone the SVP chip route, and made the Saturn with modest 2d capabilities and a beast of a 3d machine then the story may have been different, yet the irony is the newcomer (Sony) captured the pulse of what technology was needed in the 32-bit arena, and yet the relative "veteran" Sega, f!"$ked up....BIG time...they are lucky to be "alive" otherwise Sega could have quite easily ended up like 3DO, Atari, and Commodore...makes me wonder the money they invested in the 32x "project" would have been better spent in making the Saturn a siginificantly better machine, instead they bring out a console that might of cut the mustard in 1992....but in 1995...it wasn't good enough.
 
Last edited:

Kazza

Member
An article about the Saturn launch, with a brief review of all the launch games:

 
My guess is probably a really shitty game..maybe Jupiter Strike?



Isn't that a remake (of sorts) of a 3DO rail shooter? Looks kinda like it, anyway.

Had they gone the SVP chip route, and made the Saturn with modest 2d capabilities and a beast of a 3d machine then the story may have been different, yet the irony is the newcomer (Sony) captured the pulse of what technology was needed in the 32-bit arena, and yet the relative "veteran" Sega, f!"$ked up....BIG time...they are lucky to be "alive" otherwise Sega could have quite easily ended up like 3DO, Atari, and Commodore...makes me wonder the money they invested in the 32x "project" would have been better spent in making the Saturn a siginificantly better machine, instead they bring out a console that might of cut the mustard in 1992....but in 1995...it wasn't good enough.

There's a video Jenovi did somewhat recently that featured a quote from Ken Kutaragi as he was (more or less) criticizing and making light of SEGA's situation with the Saturn. It's interesting not just because it shows how brazen Ken was at the time (I hardly think most Japanese tech or business guys would speak to Hayao Nakayama the way Kutaragi did xD), but also kind of shows why SEGA COULDN'T have made a "beastly 3D Saturn" (at least the way Sony made the PS1), if we're being honest.

The thing is, at that time Sony had their own production lines, their own fabs, their own tech departments to pick and pull R&D for the PS1 from (as well as source components from internally, massively helping with keeping the prices down), etc. SEGA (and Nintendo) were relegated to sourcing all of their components from other companies like Hitachi, NEC, etc., meaning they would always be dependent on what their partners could produce and manufacture in time. It also meant that no matter how much in bulk they purchased components, they were still paying a bit of a premium for them since their partners still needed to make SOME type of profit through those deals. The situation with the SH4 shortage for Dreamcast illustrates the unfortunate side of that dynamic perfectly (also ironic is how Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo now all basically have a similar relationship with AMD/Nvidia today, rather than building their own custom silicon in-house and manufacturing it themselves).

Sony simply had the tech resources, financial muscle and R&D experience to pull from to make a 3D console in that era the way no other competitor, including SEGA, was ever going to be able to do at that price point and global distribution level. I also think people sometimes forget how damn popular Sony was in the mid '90s; to many, they were THE consumer electronics manufacturer for anything related to televisions, CD players, cassette players, cameras, video recorders, etc. In a lot of ways that rubbed off on giving the PS1 a reputable boost as they essentially positioned it as a product within that lineage, rather than having the name of "just" a video game machine the way SEGA and Nintendo's systems were seen in the public eye.

That was a perfect storm for Sony when they came out with the PS1, both internally and externally. I don't think we'll see another "perfect storm" open up like that in the industry until probably 2025, and some company like Apple (or God forbid, Tencent) perfects the game streaming model.
 
Last edited:

RAIDEN1

Member
Isn't that a remake (of sorts) of a 3DO rail shooter? Looks kinda like it, anyway.



There's a video Jenovi did somewhat recently that featured a quote from Ken Kutaragi as he was (more or less) criticizing and making light of SEGA's situation with the Saturn. It's interesting not just because it shows how brazen Ken was at the time (I hardly think most Japanese tech or business guys would speak to Hayao Nakayama the way Kutaragi did xD), but also kind of shows why SEGA COULDN'T have made a "beastly 3D Saturn" (at least the way Sony made the PS1), if we're being honest.

The thing is, at that time Sony had their own production lines, their own fabs, their own tech departments to pick and pull R&D for the PS1 from (as well as source components from internally, massively helping with keeping the prices down), etc. SEGA (and Nintendo) were relegated to sourcing all of their components from other companies like Hitachi, NEC, etc., meaning they would always be dependent on what their partners could produce and manufacture in time. It also meant that no matter how much in bulk they purchased components, they were still paying a bit of a premium for them since their partners still needed to make SOME type of profit through those deals. The situation with the SH4 shortage for Dreamcast illustrates the unfortunate side of that dynamic perfectly (also ironic is how Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo now all basically have a similar relationship with AMD/Nvidia today, rather than building their own custom silicon in-house and manufacturing it themselves).

Sony simply had the tech resources, financial muscle and R&D experience to pull from to make a 3D console in that era the way no other competitor, including SEGA, was ever going to be able to do at that price point and global distribution level. I also think people sometimes forget how damn popular Sony was in the mid '90s; to many, they were THE consumer electronics manufacturer for anything related to televisions, CD players, cassette players, cameras, video recorders, etc. In a lot of ways that rubbed off on giving the PS1 a reputable boost as they essentially positioned it as a product within that lineage, rather than having the name of "just" a video game machine the way SEGA and Nintendo's systems were seen in the public eye.

That was a perfect storm for Sony when they came out with the PS1, both internally and externally. I don't think we'll see another "perfect storm" open up like that in the industry until probably 2025, and some company like Apple (or God forbid, Tencent) perfects the game streaming model.
Even so I just can't understand to this day, how Sega, with all the hard-work put in with the Genesis, and how popular it was outside of Japan, could un-do all that success with the release of the Saturn, a system which was the complete opposite of what made the genesis so great previously....."Oh look Sony's machine has better capabilities on the 3d front than we thought, quick throw some extra chips in there, that will do the trick- ease of use of the architecture be damned! Do we need to give developers extra support so they can see the true potential of the system? Of course not!" how they messed up with the Saturn marked the beginning of the end for Sega in the hardware scene...2 years after its launch, Stolar says: "Saturn is not our future.."....Subsequently the Dreamcast barely lasted 2 years as well...
 
Even so I just can't understand to this day, how Sega, with all the hard-work put in with the Genesis, and how popular it was outside of Japan, could un-do all that success with the release of the Saturn, a system which was the complete opposite of what made the genesis so great previously....."Oh look Sony's machine has better capabilities on the 3d front than we thought, quick throw some extra chips in there, that will do the trick- ease of use of the architecture be damned! Do we need to give developers extra support so they can see the true potential of the system? Of course not!" how they messed up with the Saturn marked the beginning of the end for Sega in the hardware scene...2 years after its launch, Stolar says: "Saturn is not our future.."....Subsequently the Dreamcast barely lasted 2 years as well...

FWIW, I do think a good deal of the Saturn's supposed programming difficulty is overblown. It wasn't doing anything different vs. the previous generation in terms of providing documentation for developers, as games were primarily programmed in assembly at that time on home consoles (with some C language used in other cases). SEGA provided full documentation of Saturn's hardware from the beginning, but it was up to the developers to learn it. They simply couldn't have expected Sony to come out of the gate with a suite that prioritized C language and handled a lot of the assembly behind-the-scenes and out of the developer's eye, allowing them to still get great performance out of the hardware but do it much quicker than with past systems.

That allowed devs to focus on the content itself and getting more work done in less time, vs. micromanaging every single byte access, flag, register call etc. if they were forced to go pure assembly to get any real results. Publishers prioritized bigger games with relatively short development times (or at least not much longer dev times than typical 16-bit games), and systems like the PS1 were preferred because they could get those results with less effort and in manageable time scales vs. something like the Saturn. If milestones and time weren't as big of concerns (and the Saturn itself a bigger commercial success), you would've seen a lot less complaining by devs over the difficulty in developing for it. A perfect example of a system's commercial success and profit potential sequestering most any criticism over programming difficulty would be the PS2 ;)

In addition to that, SEGA's own internal arcade devs were already really experienced with dual-processor architectures and programming for them, so they may've had tunnel vision and assumed that if they could do it relatively handily, it wouldn't have been too hard for 3rd parties to do so, either. But they underestimated (and misread) the market trends of the mid-'90s in terms of development pipelines and workspace priorities from publishers.
 

Alexios

Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Yeah people talk about how Saturn went against established things like triangles and c but that's the time they were being established, 3D itself was a new concept still, especially for home systems and the years before release that they were being engineered, they did a swing and a miss but not by going against standards, just not foreseeing them. And we got many great 3D games on the system, pretending it was some half assed solution just because it was a little bit worse than PS1 is silly, the multiplatform games it did get (with actual effort from the developers) often had less and more superficial differences than you see people being perfectly fine with nowadays. You aren't missing anything of note if you played Tomb Raider or Resident Evil on the Saturn, but are missing out on great and beautiful for the time games if you didn't play its 1st and 3rd party exclusives.
 
Last edited:
True, also a lot of times 3rd party Saturn ports were not done by the "A-teams", as it were. That was the case for SOTN, and RE1 as well, which were both outsourced to other companies (the latter would explain why Capcom had so much difficulty porting RE2 to Saturn, since that port they were doing in-house instead of outsourcing on contract, and it was their first time really doing any 3D games on the platform). Budgets were also generally smaller for the Saturn ports; I'm sure budgets for ports in general are smaller than the budgets for the target platform's version of a game, but in some cases you can REALLY tell publishers shortchanged 3rd-party Saturn ports.

These sort of things are why it's important to discuss the nuance into these type of systems; assuming they had success or failure simply because of numbers compared to competitors does not account for things like distribution channels, retailer relationships, advertising (or lack thereof), budget allocation for ports, target platforms, print runs, "access media" etc. All of those things generally play much bigger roles in a platform's success or failure relative to market performance than using subjective arguments of the games' qualities in your eyes. But I get why people do it; they just need to know that the truth is often much more complicated than that.
 

cireza

Member
Currently playing Policenauts in English on Saturn thanks to the awesome guys who translated this version.

I am enjoying the game so far (probably close to the end) but still find it inferior to Snatcher on Sega-CD. Visuals are pretty much your standard anime from the 90s, which is actually a pretty big loss compared to the wonderful pixel-art of Snatcher. Soundtrack is good, but again pretty far from the fantastic, yet simple, tunes from Snatcher.

The story has quite some elements in common as well. It is interesting overall, but the way it unfolds is not as good. In Policenauts you are forced on a linear path and can't advance as long as you have not talked to absolutely everybody and clicked everywhere in each room. This is a bit tiresome, Snatcher only works by menu and I think it was better. Also, there were a few moments that were too predictable, which kinds of kills the mood.

Also the few video are anime, they are quite good, but of course they suffer from artifact compression from the Saturn. Again, videos seen on Sega-CD in games like Lunar Eternal Blue and Popful Mail are timeless and pixel perfect, another loss in my opinion when we made the shift the 32 bits.

Good game overall, but not as enjoyable as Snatcher on Sega-CD. Will probably complete my playthrough tonight.
 
Last edited:

cireza

Member
Terrible architecture, terrible development tools, terrible marketing, terrible ported games, ... i can not understand Sega apologists.
You missed this one : awesome games. And many ports were fantastic.
 
Last edited:
Terrible architecture, terrible development tools, terrible marketing, terrible ported games, ... i can not understand Sega apologists.

The architecture was nowhere near as botched as, say, the Atari Jaguar's, and in terms of going with a dual CPU setup, it was something SEGA's arcade developers were already used to.

The dev tools were pretty shitty at the start...by the standard of the PS1. But in terms of how consoles had been providing documentation up to that point, it was perfectly in-line. They provided full documentation of all the hardware's components, but developers were moving towards use of C language as the primary language that gen, and reducing need of pure assembly for more time-critical tasks the C-orientated SDKs couldn't do as effectively.

...the marketing was pretty bad overall. It's an interesting curiosity now, but it wasn't effective in the West. Japan though had a more effective ad campaign in the likes of Segata Sanshiro.

A lot of the 3rd-party ports weren't that great, but those ones were often not handled by the same team that developed the original ones, and were allotted smaller budgets and resources. They also made very little changes to fit the Saturn's architecture. That said there were still a lot of ports either on par or better than their PS1 counterparts; RE1, Road Rash, Need for Speed, Mega Man 8, all the Capcom VS. fighters, Silhouette Mirage, Tomb Raider (which technically wasn't a port), etc.

It's not about being an apologist, it's about being mature and thoughtful enough to see the good even when you can acknowledge the bad. You could replace the Saturn with, say, your girlfriend, and list all her faults...is that suddenly going to make you stop loving her? Or you can use your first car as another example; it may've been a shitty vehicle with the engine always having problems, other problems here and there and a pain in the ass to cover maintenance for, but chances are you're still going to appreciate that car for the good things it provided.

This idea that in gaming, consoles have to be an either/or thing, that you can only like a console (or game) that is #1 or the popular pick, is just more of that gradeschool stuff being injected into the hobby for zero good reason. Rationalizing why things are the way they are or played out the way they did, is literally a common thing to do in life. It's how we as a society learn from previous mistakes or how to improve on what's worked. So to act like doing that very thing in terms of older game systems, even if many of us genuinely like them and appreciate their value in light of whatever mistakes they made, is just brazenly odd. It's literally how we learn information, and the more nuance, introspection, neutrality and knowledge (from making those observations through digging into the what/why/how/when/who of an event) you bring into discussion of that subject, the better.
 
Last edited:

Naibel

Member
Dude, you gave that troll way too much attention 😆 ! Great response, very thoughtful, but still, no need to argue with people like them. They just want to rile us up :messenger_winking:

As for the Saturn Mini, man, if that happens, that means God truly exists ! Or that Sega finally remembered that they didn't spent 94/98 twiddling their thumbs. And I'm not very sure they quite reached that stage yet...
 
Last edited:
I skipped school the day my best bud got his with his first paycheck. We lived off of Daytona USA, Mortal KOmbat and World Series Baseball.

Little did we know that you could import games until it was too late. Also We rented Tomb Raider over half a dozen times from BLockbusters before both of us got PlayStations.
I didn't know anyone who owned a Saturn in its heyday, but I can see how cool it would've been to own during that time if you liked arcade games. The import scene really makes the console reasonable for a modern collector. You're still gonna pay full price for classics like Dodonpachi, though, and you're gonna overpay for the rare ones like Radiant Silvergun and Battle Garegga.
 

Daniel Thomas MacInnes

GAF's Resident Saturn Omnibus
Yes it does because your claim was that the Saturn was AHEAD until FF7 when that's not the case. You're backtracking.

Your original quote:



The spin about "anticipation" meant nothing either, PSX didn't see a massive growth until after it came out, not in 1996, also the PSX was always ahead so that's not really relevant either way.

I will say that the Saturn first two fiscal years were likely it's best in terms of sales in japan. Not sure what made the sales collapse at the end of 1996 going into 1997 though.


What made Saturn's Japanese sales collapse is obvious: Sony secured exclusive rights to Square and Enix, capturing the two biggest videogame franchises of its day. A 2006 Famitsu poll of the 100 greatest videogames ever made was dominated by Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest titles.
 

Daniel Thomas MacInnes

GAF's Resident Saturn Omnibus
(Long, rambling spiel ahead, be warned.)

It's always fun to see another Sega Saturn thread. It's hard to believe it's been 25 years since its Japanese launch. A fantastic system and one that is well worth playing today. It's probably my favorite Sega console of them all, thanks to its superb arcade titles and diverse software library. If you enjoy Sega arcade hits, fighting games, spaceship shoot-em-ups and Strategy-RPGs, you'll love the Saturn.

The hardware has always received endless grief, but I find myself admiring what Sega did in those days, how the multiple console projects evolved and changed from 1991-1994, and the sheer inventiveness of their engineers and programmers. They really did try to thread the needle between 2D and 3D, and this move was universally criticized by the late '90s, but it has also endeared the console to today's retro gamers who hunger for classic 2D pixel art games.

While it's true that the hardware design was complex for its time, and the learning curve was much steeper than the Sony Playstation, which was geared far more successfully towards Western studios, the multi-processor design was perfect for Assembly coders and programmers who liked to think outside the box. In its best moments, Saturn could pull off some amazing visuals that combined 2D sprites and bitmaps with 3D polygons.

I'm playing Virtua Fighter Remix right now and am quite impressed at how Sega AM2 thought to use the VDP2 background planes for the arenas instead of polygons. Whoever thought up that idea was a genius. The Panzer Dragoon Trilogy also demonstrates brilliance in fusing 2D and 3D to create immersive worlds.

Saturn's 3D games don't get enough respect for the high screen resolutions or smooth frame rates. That was Sega's trademark, and while it fell wildly out of fashion during the Playstation's rise, it swung back into style with Dreamcast. Japanese developers were far more successful in exploiting that hardware design than most Western counterparts, and the reasons for this range from programmers' skill sets to Sega of America's lack of proper documentation or support, experience in Assembly versus C, and good 'ole time and budget constraints. Thankfully, there are examples of excellent Western developers, and once again, I'm going to sing the praises of Lobotomy's fantastic trilogy of FPS titles. Powerslave is absolutely fantastic on Saturn, as is Duke Nukem 3D and Quake. Those three play better than any FPS game on Dreamcast.

I think Saturn needed another two years on the market, especially in the West. Programmers were making great strides in cracking the hardware and all that was needed was just a little more time. Today, we understand that a longer learning curve is necessary (see: Playstation 2 and PS3), but everybody was so damned impatient back then. Saturn was dead in the West less than two years after it launched, and when you consider just how many great software titles were available, this seems almost criminal.

Two more years of Saturn would mean the following: Saturn Virtua Fighter 3, Shenmue, Sonic Adventure, Marvel Vs. Capcom, Resident Evil 2, maybe Tony Hawk Pro Skater if the console was really successful. That would make for a pretty solid lineup.

As for 32X, I always felt that it was an over-priced albatross that nearly buried Sega. It cost the company crucial time that should have been spent learning the Saturn, as well as straining resources of their software studios. And its reputation haunted the company for years.

The real problem for Sega of America was what to do about the 16-bit market and the aging Genesis which had become outshined by the Super NES in the wake of Donkey Kong Country. Tom Kalinske believed that the current generation would be sustainable through 1997, and that the high price of the 32-bit consoles would hold them back until they reached a mass market (under $200) price point. This meant that another temporary hardware solution was needed.

Ideally, Sega needed a cartridge upgrade for Genesis like Nintendo's FX chip, and they did pursue this with their SVP and Virtua Racing. The problem: VR cost a whopping $100, which killed any chance of retail success (even today, you can find used VR carts for pocket change). If that price could have been brought down to $70, all would have been well.

This is all personal speculation and theory, but my own thinking is that Kalinske was following Nintendo's strategy: hold onto the 16-bit market for a couple more seasons, release the 5th Generation console later. He certainly wasn't happy with the Saturn design or its Hitachi chipset. His people had lobbied hard for the Motorola 680x0 chipset that was used in the Atari Falcon, and he also famously endorsed the Silicon Graphics design that was later picked up by Nintendo.

So Sega winds up with another hardware idea, one based on the "Mars" project that was among the early Saturn ideas, based on twin Hitachi processors similar to its bigger brother. One could almost see it working, in theory, especially if the right killer app came along to justify the retail price. But it was one hell of a gamble.

It was often said that Sony's great strength in Generation 5 was having only one console and not having to spread resources among multiple platforms. They could focus all their attention on wooing software developers, building the Playstation brand, refining and perfecting their software tools and pushing the technical envelope. Sega and Nintendo had to keep one foot in Generation 4 during the crucial years of '94-'97, and that might have held them back.'

I also wonder if Kalinske secretly wanted Saturn to fail and quickly collapse. While nobody will ever accept responsibility for the infamous May '95 surprise launch, there are so many baffling mistakes to lay at Sega of America's feet: poor hardware documentation, a blaze attitude towards third-party software developers, an unwillingness to provide Saturn with the key genres it needed the most: Sonic and Sports. To that, we can add the US Saturn controller, a cheap all-black color scheme, the use of balloon font for the Saturn logo (again, instead of the superior Saturn design). There's a certain sense of laziness, of dragging one heel's, of moving at half-speed instead of full.

Again, pet theory for the drama department. Perhaps Kalinske is thinking that if Saturn fails in the West, it could be quickly replaced by a more powerful console for release in '96 or even '97. Goodness knows that many gamers have speculated on such an idea. Perhaps Saturn was too old, too attached to the days of 2D arcade videogames and not focused enough on the future.

And let us all not forget that in addition to Nintendo, Sega and Sony, Matsushita lay waiting in the wings with the most powerful hardware chipset of Generation 5, the M2. If they were as committed to the gaming market as Sony, that would dramatically raise the stakes. Sega quickly becomes the poor man in that poker match and almost certainly loses. By the time M2 folds and walks away from the table, the damage was already done. And Microsoft was waiting in the wings, ready to jump into the game.

Meanwhile, Sega of Japan were exploring possibilities for new consoles, including a possible Saturn successor created by Lockheed Martin and based on the Model 3 arcade board for a possible 1996 release date. This never happened, of course, and likely never progressed beyond the exploratory stage, but it does add fuel to the fire and demonstrates the lack of focus or confidence on both sides of the Pacific, as well as the growing fear that time was running out for Sega.

All Sega of Japan could say, I suppose, is Thank God for Virtua Fighter, the arcade blockbuster hit which sold a million Saturns in its first year, followed by the spectacular Virtua Fighter 2 which sold millions more. By that point, momentum was working in their favor, until Sony remembered just how much money they could throw onto that poker table, and bought their way into the good graces of Square and Enix. Securing exclusive rights to Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest, Japan's two biggest gaming blockbusters, ended the 5th Generation war. and by '98 Saturn's hardware sales had flatlined. They bet everything they had left on one last gamble, the Dreamcast, a console that was either designed to bring Sega back into the game or allow them to respectfully withdraw with honor.

The USA, however, was far less lucky, and despite its early launch and superb Christmas '95 counterpunch of VF2, Sega Rally and Virtua Cop, the Saturn quickly fell behind and disappeared completely with the arrival of Nintendo 64 and the "Greatest Videogame of All Time," Super Mario 64. Blame Sega of America's management, blame fickle consumers, blame changing trends, who can say? In '96, Kalinske was out, replaced by former Sony executive Bernie Stolar who notoriously declared the following year that "Saturn is not our future," as Sega's marketshare shrank to less than five percent. Saturn was killed and buried in an unmarked grave. And then Stolar checked the calendar for the arrival of Dreamcast, which was eighteen months away. Might have been a good idea to keep that patient alive a little longer, Bern.

In time, the Sega faithful found their scapegoat to blame for everything, the cause behind Why Everything That Went Wrong, and they found their target: that little mushroom-shaped hunk of plastic attached to the old Genesis. Is it fair to blame 32X for everything bad that happened to Sega after 1994? I may be a harsh critic of the hardware, but I'm not that harsh. I think it definitely deserves some measure of blame, but it doesn't deserve to become the next 2600 E.T. There's plenty of blame to spread around, quite evenly, for this tragedy. In any case, it's all water under the bridge. 25 years in computer years is like 175 in dog years, and arguing about the fall of 32X or Saturn is like arguing about Edgar Allen Poe's drinking habits.

I'd much rather spend my time enjoying the videogames and being grateful for Sega for having existed in the first place. God only knows that this industry hasn't been anywhere near as much reckless fun without them in the hardware poker match. They were notorious gamblers and knew how live on the edge, always on the edge of catastrophe and somehow escaping to survive another day. For 32X, I'd play Afterburner and Space Harrier, both excellent translations of the classic Super Scaler arcade games. For Saturn, let's be honest, I'll play damned near everything. Time for another round or ten of Virtua Fighter Remix.
 
Daniel Thomas MacInnes Daniel Thomas MacInnes , very solid post man. To answer the question at the end: No.

While IMHO 32X was a product doomed to fail in the long-run and should have never been released, SEGA was having problems before its release. I'm talking about internal issues not reliant on external factors, such as the arcade market unfortunately shrinking.

Honestly, I think you pin SEGA's problems down to two main factors:

1: Being reactive instead of proactive

The 1st one's like this: we saw SEGA pursuing a lot of initiatives that were basically in reaction to competitors, and then retrofitted as a value-add to the Genesis ecosystem. The Mega CD (which in truth wasn't a bad add-on; it certainly seems to be seen more favorably these days and deservedly so, once you ignore most of the FMV crap) was their response to the PC-Engine CD from NEC and then-upcoming multimedia systems like the Phillips CD-i. The 32X was a reaction to the Atari Jaguar (which might sound crazy today, but in Europe in particular Atari still had a strong brand name and Jaguar preorders there seemingly reached 2 million. I don't have a source to that claim though and it seems a bit exaggerated considering even PS4 and XBO didn't hit preorder numbers that high and their parent companies have been far more successful as platform holders, particularly Sony); even the SVP was a reaction to the FX Chip (and if SEGA wanted to provide a power boost to the MegaDrive, SVP was the far better and more economical option vs. 32X in hindsight).

It honestly felt almost opposite at times to their arcade division, which was very much proactive and saw fit to chart its own course, generally setting the tone for competitors such as Namco to follow. Being proactive doesn't mean you operate in a bubble, of course: other companies were doing some of the things SEGA'd end up doing before SEGA did (such as 3D polygons), but SEGA were arguably the first in the arcade scene to refine and nail the execution of those things, not just 3D but other things such as force feedback controls too. Throughout the later half of the MegaDrive's life and throughout more or less the rest of the '90s (even including some aspects of Dreamcast), SEGA's console division felt like it was being more reactive than proactive.

That's in big contrast to, say, Nintendo, who've always been pretty proactive with their console vision. In fact arguably the only times they were really reactive were Gamecube and Wii U, which incidentally are their two worst-performing home consoles on record. You could say part of this was due to Nintendo's stubbornness to catch on with the big market trends of the time, but that also helped them with managing budgets and production costs in the long-term, hence their massive cash reserves. They had a vision and stuck with it, competitors be damned. The same can be said of their portable line like the Gameboy; when everyone else was trying to cram full-color graphics and crazy horsepower into device that couldn't even manage a two-hour battery at full charge, Nintendo prioritized QoL and cost-saving features for their Gameboy line that translated to the consumer (more or less), and that's a massive part why they've maintained their dominance in the portable landscape.

Honestly, you can see the contrast between Nintendo and SEGA pretty clearly during 5th gen; whereas SEGA tried going beyond their financial means and competing toe-to-toe against a tech juggernaut like Sony, Nintendo wisely "knew their place", knew that trying to compete with Sony's pockets would be a game they simply couldn't win, and decided to carve out their own niche as an alternative that could ultimately co-exist with Sony, rather than being an outright competitor. They listened to their fans and carried over many IP and ideas from the SNES respectfully, and decided to focus on cartridges over CDs (partly because that's where their experience was, partly because they were jaded by the format after the whole fallout with Sony). That's ultimately what helped the N64 get a very respectful 2nd place that generation. That also leads into the 2nd point.

2: Poor long-term IP retainment

Long-term IP retention has never really felt like a strong suit of SEGA's, even to this day, while they do have a couple of IPs from old they're still keeping going now, the only truly healthy out of those two is Yakuza; Sonic is simply too scattershot in quality between releases to be considered a truly healthy long-running IP. Aside from that, the only other IP I can think of from SEGA that had long-term retention of regular releases and high quality of those releases is Virtua Fighter, which has been MIA for a new entry (a truly new entry) for almost 15 years now (ignoring the VF5 updates, since those are still essentially VF5).

Everything else? They either had strong showings for only a few years/a single generation (Streets of Rage, Panzer Dragoon, Dragon Force, etc.), or only had a single installment before SEGA left them for a new IP, even when the single entry was well-received and had a lot of potential for future sequels (Ristar, Deep Fear, Billy Hatcher, GunValkyrie, Burning Rangers etc.). Other IP like Outrun (in terms of the main games) had really active periods for a few years, then fell off the face of the Earth for over a decade.

I can't stress enough how important regular, high-quality refresh of IP retention is for building brand awareness and a strong fanbase. It's literally the reason many of Nintendo's IPs, such as Mario and Zelda, are as massive and popular as they are today. A lot goes into strong long-term IP retention and Nintendo's arguably the best at it, since they mainly took from the Disney model as their example. Some people may complain why there's so many Mario-themed spinoff games (Mario Tennis series, the Striker series, Mario Kart series etc.), but the truth is all of those play a large-scale, long-term role in IP retention with not just the fanbases (which grown installment-over-installment as long as the games themselves are good, which 99% of the time they are in Nintendo's case, if not great), but the general gaming public at large. That gives them both nostalgia and mindshare to build off of, which benefits areas such as marketing (which itself is a massive component to IP retention as well).

If SEGA had a clearer vision of where they wanted to go as a platform holder, and didn't have such disharmony between their divisions during the '90s, they would've been able to fully identify their niche and cater to it, while keeping costs down, and iterating regularly on key IP with strong and growing fanbases like SoR, Eternal Champions, Phantasy Star, etc. They would've been able to focus on that IP retention instead of trying to come at Sony's throat, an aim destined to fail, and likely still be in the hardware game today as a platform holder.

And this is just my opinion, but I really think SEGA's niche would've been in fully streamlining their arcade and console divisions, and taking a more SNK-style approach to the console side. I.e instead of making commodity consoles to sell low, they should've instead switched to making premium consoles virtually 100% the same as their arcade hardware, and treating it like the Neo-Geo. They could've really perfected that model given their larger size (in comparison to SNK), and worked with arcade and FEC chains in integrating/streamlining
the distribution of the consoles as an extension for arcade players to use at home, while keeping the arcade/FEC chains in the cut financially. After all, SEGA's motto was always "bringing the arcade experience home"; it's just ironic that while Dreamcast achieved that more or less on the technical front, SNK may've had the better approach from the business front, for that particular type of market niche.
 
Last edited:

cireza

Member
(Long, rambling spiel ahead, be warned.)
Great post as always coming from you.

I like how you talk about resolution and framerate. Sega always was about having a high resolution and a good framerate. Still, back then, the Tekken games were largely below the 640x480@60fps you would see on Virtua Fighter 2, but people would still be satisfied with this and pretty much don't see the difference.

Just as people did not see the difference between 256x224 on SNES and 320x224 on MegaDrive, or the fact that the signal was blurrier on Nintendo consoles, or the fact that Sega was bundling Scart RGB cables in France vs Composite for Nintendo and PS1. Or the fact that almost all first party games were PAL optimized on Saturn etc...

It is a question of respecting the consumer. Sega was respectful. The others did not care, they simply threw whatever shit they had and got a pass from the mass market. This still applies today. Consumers won't see or won't care about having lower resolutions or framerate.

When conceiving the Saturn, Sega decided to put two VDPs to retain proper 2D and 3D capabilities. I also believe this was a good choice. The PS1 was strictly oriented towards 3D, and 2D games eventually arrived because developers had to put the effort, since the console was selling so much. But still, the console was not made for this at all. If the PS1 did not encounter success, you can be sure that no one would have made any efforts for 2D games.
 
Last edited:
cireza cireza those are some good points; the only thing I might disagree with is the relationship between PS1 and 2D. To be completely fair, there were already 2D games on PS1 from the moment it launched in Japan, and early 2D games like Gunner's Heaven, Hermie Hopperhead, etc.

On the technical side, I remember someone having a thread on ResetEra (yeah, I know, garbage forum. But the retro game-focused threads are usually quality) that went into how sprites worked on older systems; they then talked about framebuffers and how systems like the PS1 were among the first to have direct memory framebuffers on a per-pixel level (I think they mentioned the Jaguar technically being the first). Whereas systems like MegaDrive, SNES etc. used custom chips for handling blocks of tiles, sprites etc. and where devs could only access pixels on a tile or sprite-based basis (or something like that).

It came down to systems like PS1 having the horsepower needed to drive direct memory framebuffers whereas earlier systems lacked the power to do so, and then they made specification that in general terms, there was nothing necessarily preventing PS1 from having excellent 2D games other than RAM, and perhaps tech still not being that advanced by that point to allow non-custom blitting, sprite etc. hardware to operate as well as hardware tailored for those purposes.

The Saturn really does carry on a mesh of ideas of both the older 2D systems (having some hardware dedicated for 2D tasks specifically) and the 32-bit 3D systems (polygons). I think the popular idea is that in implementing 3D in the Saturn's design, SEGA actually just rapidly pushed on the superscaler design of tech like the System32 board, as the Saturn generates its polygons from distorted sprites (if you've seen the DF Retro vid on Tomb Raider they show exactly how the hardware actually generated the polygons and the distortion devs had to provide as calculations to for the 3D environments), so that supports the idea that it definitely has some hardware specifically dedicated for 2D tasks at its core. Basically, picture a 2D raster bitmap in a program like Photoshop and then using the Transformation matrix tools on it to change things like perspective, shear, rotation etc. That's basically how the Saturn did its 3D.

Combined with it having more RAM than the PS1 (even without the expansion carts), and that's pretty close as to the reason Saturn was so good at handling 2D graphics, but had some issues when it came to 3D. But systems like the PS1 were right on the cusp of being able to do what older 2D-orientated systems could do, without the specialized hardware specifically dedicated to 2D. By the time of the Dreamcast, more or less any 3D system would have the power, RAM etc. to pull off very effective, arcade-perfect (and beyond) 2D graphics as well. But that makes systems like Saturn even more interesting from a historical and analytical perspective.
 

cireza

Member
cireza cireza those are some good points; the only thing I might disagree with is the relationship between PS1 and 2D. To be completely fair, there were already 2D games on PS1 from the moment it launched in Japan, and early 2D games like Gunner's Heaven, Hermie Hopperhead, etc.

On the technical side, I remember someone having a thread on ResetEra (yeah, I know, garbage forum. But the retro game-focused threads are usually quality) that went into how sprites worked on older systems; they then talked about framebuffers and how systems like the PS1 were among the first to have direct memory framebuffers on a per-pixel level (I think they mentioned the Jaguar technically being the first). Whereas systems like MegaDrive, SNES etc. used custom chips for handling blocks of tiles, sprites etc. and where devs could only access pixels on a tile or sprite-based basis (or something like that).

It came down to systems like PS1 having the horsepower needed to drive direct memory framebuffers whereas earlier systems lacked the power to do so, and then they made specification that in general terms, there was nothing necessarily preventing PS1 from having excellent 2D games other than RAM, and perhaps tech still not being that advanced by that point to allow non-custom blitting, sprite etc. hardware to operate as well as hardware tailored for those purposes.

The Saturn really does carry on a mesh of ideas of both the older 2D systems (having some hardware dedicated for 2D tasks specifically) and the 32-bit 3D systems (polygons). I think the popular idea is that in implementing 3D in the Saturn's design, SEGA actually just rapidly pushed on the superscaler design of tech like the System32 board, as the Saturn generates its polygons from distorted sprites (if you've seen the DF Retro vid on Tomb Raider they show exactly how the hardware actually generated the polygons and the distortion devs had to provide as calculations to for the 3D environments), so that supports the idea that it definitely has some hardware specifically dedicated for 2D tasks at its core. Basically, picture a 2D raster bitmap in a program like Photoshop and then using the Transformation matrix tools on it to change things like perspective, shear, rotation etc. That's basically how the Saturn did its 3D.

Combined with it having more RAM than the PS1 (even without the expansion carts), and that's pretty close as to the reason Saturn was so good at handling 2D graphics, but had some issues when it came to 3D. But systems like the PS1 were right on the cusp of being able to do what older 2D-orientated systems could do, without the specialized hardware specifically dedicated to 2D. By the time of the Dreamcast, more or less any 3D system would have the power, RAM etc. to pull off very effective, arcade-perfect (and beyond) 2D graphics as well. But that makes systems like Saturn even more interesting from a historical and analytical perspective.
The 32X actually uses a double frame buffer and addresses pixels one by one, attributing the color. Very interesting system in the end. But the console was a bit slow for these tasks, I think I read somewhere that it was difficult for the console to refresh all pixels at 60fps, this is why you don't see the 32X handling all the backgrounds in 2D games. Still Kolibri has some pretty huge background elements displayed by the 32X and the game does not slow down.

I am not good enough about the 32X capabilities, but would love to understand better its limitations on that part. If you have any information...
 
Last edited:
The 32X actually uses a double frame buffer and addresses pixels one by one, attributing the color. Very interesting system in the end. But the console was a bit slow for these tasks, I think I read somewhere that it was difficult for the console to refresh all pixels at 60fps, this is why you don't see the 32X handling all the backgrounds in 2D games. Still Kolibri has some pretty huge background elements displayed by the 32X and the game does not slow down.

I am not good enough about the 32X capabilities, but would love to understand better its limitations on that part. If you have any information...

Actually it makes sense if it addresses pixels one by one, since IIRC it was things like scrolling backgrounds where it had issues.

As to a better source on its capabilities? Honestly the best two are the two-part DF Retro episodes on 32X, and SegaRetro. I got a lot of insight on 32X's technical capabilities from those two.
 
Top Bottom