Support NeoGAF

[UnNamed]

Pretty strange for a "Mythbuster" video.

Some aspect about dual CPU were debunked multiple times, and Saturn as a 2D/3D platform was confirmed by many people including Hideki Sato, IIRC.

SATURN as intentionally messy platform has no sense from a technical, economical, and historical point of view.

Simply SEGA made some bad and some mandatory/forced choices developing the Saturn, a system with valid softwares but a disaster for the developers.

 

[RAIDEN1]

Another thing u guys gotta keep in mind, is sega had 8bit then 16bit systems, then suddenly started to launch add ons, expensive af and soon abandoned them, so customers lost a lot of patience and faith in te brand too, and both of those add ons sold terribly, sega-cd and sega 32x while costing a lot(300$ for sega cd in 1992 was fricken crazy, 160$ for 32x in late 94 too ;/).

That's why I say that when it came to the Dreamcast it wasn't shouten from the roof-tops that it was a Sega machine, it was as if it was a independent brand, a new kid on the block...and not a sega product, more so because the Sega name back then (circa 1998) was in the dirt after the debacle of the 32x and Saturn...that's why you rarely hear Sega's swansong console referred to as the "Sega Dreamcast"....Just "Dreamcast"

 

[BlackTron]

I know its failure is well documented but in hindsight - the Saturn is one of gaming's best libraries for the hardcore gamer. Shmups and fighting games in particular. Its Japanese releases are just riddled with hidden gems. Anyone serious about skill based arcade action games simply needs to own one - especially because the emulation still isnt up to snuff all these years later.

You're making me ponder over this ancient Saturn I grabbed at a tag sale over a decade ago with no cables or accessories. I never figured out if it even works, but I still have it. Just never got the motivation to get all the needed stuff (and even knowledge) to try it. I emulated Sonic Jam on PC once to check out the 3D hub instead LOL.

The people in this thread are probably going to die knowing I've been sitting on a real ass Saturn for that long.

 

[cireza]

They must be confusing it with the second SH2 CPU that was added later

This is just as baseless than adding the second VDP "later"...

but not giving the cartridge slot backward compatibility with the Genesis was definitely one of them

You don't understand the implications. If anything, it would have made the architecture even more complex and rose cost even more.

 

[AJUMP23]

Bad Timing
Bad Marketing

 

[DForce]

Wait, many gamers on here told me Tomb Raider being exclusive to PlayStation 1 was one of the main reasons why Sega went under.

 

[PeteBull]

That's why I say that when it came to the Dreamcast it wasn't shouten from the roof-tops that it was a Sega machine, it was as if it was a independent brand, a new kid on the block...and not a sega product, more so because the Sega name back then (circa 1998) was in the dirt after the debacle of the 32x and Saturn...that's why you rarely hear Sega's swansong console referred to as the "Sega Dreamcast"....Just "Dreamcast"

True but its not like most customers forgot about sega-cd, 32x and saturn, brand took irreversable dmg coz of that, which we know about now- in hindsight ;/

 

[SmokedMeat]

It was planned to be both 2d and 3d from the start, using the same kind of multiprocessing in their arcade machines. Sony was also changing things down the line according to 3rd parties' requests.

I’m not seeing where this video provides the receipts to back that up?

The people you quoted who commented about Sega tacking on 3D capabilities at the last minute after finding out Sony was going heavy on 3D with PlayStation, weren’t speculating. They’re going by what was reported back then. I read the same thing myself. That Sega was focusing on 2D, and after catching wind that Sony was focusing on 3D with their new console, Sega tacked 3D capabilities on at the 11th hour. Hence the reason 3D was so shoddy in comparison to PlayStation, and why the hardware was so difficult to develop for. Sega excused it saying it was a system designed for those who liked to code to the metal, which didn’t work out.

Not saying that’s the true story, but it is what was being told back in the mid nineties. I’d seen it in a trade magazine.

 

[cireza]

I’m not seeing where this video provides the receipts to back that up?

The people you quoted who commented about Sega tacking on 3D capabilities at the last minute after finding out Sony was going heavy on 3D with PlayStation, weren’t speculating. They’re going by what was reported back then. I read the same thing myself. That Sega was focusing on 2D, and after catching wind that Sony was focusing on 3D with their new console, Sega tacked 3D capabilities on at the 11th hour. Hence the reason 3D was so shoddy in comparison to PlayStation, and why the hardware was so difficult to develop for. Sega excused it saying it was a system designed for those who liked to code to the metal, which didn’t work out.

Not saying that’s the true story, but it is what was being told back in the mid nineties. I’d seen it in a trade magazine.

Sega Saturn was already pushing 3D in its conception phase from the very beginning of 1993.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Sega had Daytona, Namco had Ridge Racer. Sega had VF, Namco had Tekken. Sega had VC, Namco had Time Crisis.
If Sony didn't have Namco, it might have been a very different story.

Sony had a lot more than that though.

Toshinden was a very big deal at the time. Mortal Kombat 3 was pretty much an arcade perfect port in the home and exclusive to PlayStation.
Wipeout and Destruction Derby were not only great, but visually outclassed anything Sega had.
NFL Gameday was so big and so good, Madden had to take a year off, because for the first time ever - EA got their asses royally kicked.

Sony had a lot more than just Namco, which was just another cherry on top.

I backed Saturn at the time, and just watched as Sony complete spanked it.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Sega Saturn was already pushing 3D in its conception phase from the very beginning of 1993.

So not even a year and half of going for 3D graphics with the Saturn. We were well past a “conception phase” by January 1, 1993.
Sounds true that it was indeed last minute.

 

[cireza]

So not even a year and half of going for 3D graphics with the Saturn. Sounds true that it was indeed last minute.

3D was obviously included before 1993 (maybe read the content of the tweet ?).

Anyway, thinking that 3D was an afterthought, that VDP2 was added later, or that a second CPU was added later is absolutely ludicrous and only people that don't have any knowledge on how hardware is designed and the implications would support such nonsense. Same bullshit as Saturn cannot do transparency. We got that a lot as well.

Saturn and 32X+MD share the same design philosophies with both CPUs and VDP1/2 when compared to 32X(VDP1) and MD(VDP2) in how they were practically used. 3D was always part of the equation as well as 2D, and this is precisely why VDP1 was built the way it was with quads.

 

[SomeGit]

I don't bite that the Saturn changed much post PSX, I think it all came down to lack of focus and expertise, they did complain that they only received partial support from the arcade team and minimal support from external teams with know how in 3D development, it would explain why their solution was basically brute force a 2D tile/sprite design into a 3D one.

EDIT: Scratch that the added processor was the second SH-2, it was added in fall of 93.
https://forums.sonicretro.org/index...o-interview-discussing-the-sega-saturn.40684/

 

[deriks]

We live in a world of "what if"....what if the Saturn wasn't as bad a failure as it ended up...who knows Sega may have continued till at least 2004

The problem is that the Saturn was only one of the problems of Sega, not the problem. Master System was famous only in Brazil, Sega CD and 32X failed in every market and sense, bets on the Mega Drive online was too expensive for the company and for the consumer at the time, there's fight between Sega US and Japan only because of ego...

The Dreamcast architecture was what the Saturn should have been, but even the executives wanted Sega as a third party company. So even if the Saturn was a success, chances are that Sega was still to end in the console market, or becoming in someway what Xbox is now

 

[SmokedMeat]

3D was obviously included before 1993 (maybe read the content of the tweet ?).

Anyway, thinking that 3D was an afterthought, that VDP2 was added later, or that a second CPU was added later is absolutely ludicrous and only people that don't have any knowledge on how hardware is designed and the implications would support such nonsense. Same bullshit as Saturn cannot do transparency. We got that a lot as well.

Saturn and 32X+MD share the same design philosophies with both CPUs and VDP1/2 when compared to 32X(VDP1) and MD(VDP2) in how they were practically used. 3D was always part of the equation as well as 2D, and this is precisely why VDP1 was built the way it was with quads.

Nowhere does the tweet indicate that 3D was intended from the start. That tweet indicates they brought Yoji Ishii on to help with 3D game development on January 1, 1993 with an intended November 1994 launch! That’s not much time for 3D development and indicates to me that it was a tacked on idea.

You can say whatever you’d like, it doesn’t change the fact of what was being reported back then.

And yes, Saturn was known for not doing transparencies because the games themselves lacked transparencies! Games like Last Bronx, Virtual On, Toshinden had to use other methods. The Super Famicom used transparencies in their Super Mario World launch game. Saturn games lacked them, so yeah, there’s a pretty obvious reason why people say that.

I experienced it all first hand, so I’m going by personal experience and what was printed at the time in 1995-1998. Not feelings and YouTube.

Edit: Oh would you look at this!

https://forums.sonicretro.org/index...o-interview-discussing-the-sega-saturn.40684/

Exactly what I’ve been saying.

Sato: Right. The Sony side was completely free of the constraints of worrying about the capabilities of development teams, so they were able to fully embrace polygons. When we found out about that, we realized we were in trouble. At that point, the Saturn had only a single SH-2 for its main CPU, so we added a second SH-2 to boost the console’s processing power. Thankfully, the SH-2s could be linked in a cascade connection. A large amount of geometry calculations are required to do polygon graphics, and a single SH-2 was completely insufficient.

-So, you added a second processor…

Sato: Then we improved the graphics engine in order to do pseudo-3D graphics, and after that made further improvements. Hitachi was delighted because, for each Saturn sold, they sold two SH-2s. Our initial target selling points for the Saturn were that it could display 4,000 or 5,000 sprites, it had four or five background layers that could rotate, and so on, but at the very last minute, we somehow managed to cram 3D capabilities into it.

 

[SkylineRKR]

True. I‘d also say that the timing of the Dreamcast was quite unfortunate; I’d argue it came too soon in Japan (where the Saturn was still far from dead), but too late in the west (where the Saturn had been dead since 1997 or so, and the hype train for the PS2 was getting started). I think it would’ve been better if Sega had launched the DC in the west first in 1998, and then in Japan in 1999. Though I‘m not sure if that would’ve been enough to save their console business in the long run…

There was nothing ready for the DC in Japan. It was yet another weird decision since Japan needed the DC the least. They should've delayed the Japanese launch to at least sept 1999 too.

They could've swapped it around which would make sense since Sega had nothing in the west from 1998 onward, but the games have to be ready.

I still don't see the huge gap in 2D prowess between the Saturn vs the PS1 in 2D graphics though, despite the PS1 being better at 3D and transparencies. Whatever difference must be small and (as proven) did not worth sacrificing 3D performance for it.

Again, it's not like the PS1 or even the N64 can't do nice looking 2D. All 3 consoles were a proper generational jump over the SNES/Genesis in that aspect. And, IMO, the best looking 2D game of that generation belongs to the PS1 anyway (Lomax). Not to mention how so many 2D Saturn games and ports still suffered because of the ugly dithering meshes so it's not like only the 3D games suffered. I hear all the time how the Saturn was a "2D graphics beast" but honestly, i think this is exaggerated a lot, probably because Saturn owners needed something to balance out the not so great 3D capabilities compared to PS1.

PS1 has some amazing 2D games also also shmups. But it was not Sony's focus. They would ignore and not promote a lot of them. I think games like Symphony of the Night prove a fair point of what the PS1 could do on the 2D front.

And Einhander is perhaps my favourite shmup of all time. Amazing looking game still. And I almost forget R-Type Delta and Ray Crisis.

 

[Mr Hyde]

And Einhander is perhaps my favourite shmup of all time. Amazing looking game still.

 

[SkylineRKR]

Its painful, I can't find my JP login. I have the game on my PS3 lol.

 

[Mr Hyde]

I have the original copy on PSX but can't play it at the moment since I haven't the console hooked up anymore. And my PS3 only reads PAL discs and Einhander never got a EU release. But I'm gonna emulate it when I get my hands on the ROG Ally.

 

[cireza]

And yes, Saturn was known for not doing transparencies because the games themselves lacked transparencies! Games like Last Bronx, Virtual On, Toshinden had to use other methods. The Super Famicom used transparencies in their Super Mario World launch game. Saturn games lacked them, so yeah, there’s a pretty obvious reason why people say that.

Doesn't change the fact that people were ignorant and didn't see transparency where it was present. Saturn didn't lack in transparencies in 2D games that's for sure.

Edit: Oh would you look at this!

That interview was met with a lot skepticism and after so many years you really wonder how much truth there is behind it.

 

[Valonquar]

The Saturn had TITS while the PS1 almost always got a "limited" port with tits removed. True hardware supremacy.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Doesn't change the fact that people were ignorant and didn't see transparency where it was present. Saturn didn't lack in transparencies in 2D games that's for sure.


That interview was met with a lot skepticism and after so many years you really wonder how much truth there is behind it.

Like I said before, it’s what was said decades ago during Saturn’s lifespan. The only skepticism is from Sega fans (most of whom weren’t even around for the Saturn) who want to believe their own fantasy version that’s not grounded in reality. It’s like that YouTube video based of no facts, and that Tweet, that proves 3D was a tacked in addition.

As for lack of transparency it’s right there firsthand, and I named games that didn’t have it due to Saturn’s poorly conceived graphical setup. I owned the games. The lack of transparency smacks you in the face, be it screenshots or gameplay. Meanwhile Playstation games simply had it across the board.

More evidence of just how poorly designed the system was.

I’m not going to go into it further, because I was around for all of this. It looks like you weren’t.

 

[Krathoon]

Oh yeah. There are arcade machines that are simply suped up PlayStations. Imagine what the PlayStation could have done if it had an option to expand the memory.

 

[RAIDEN1]

As failures go though, the Sega CD sold relatively well all things considered, especially as add-ons don't tend sell hugely well anyway, if you compare the Sega CD to the 32x it did a fine enough job for about 4 years, problem was aside from the "worse than CD-i" video playback quality, not enough developers took advantage of what it could do....I mean imagine Super Streetfighter 2 being released for the Sega CD with music similar to the 3DO version, that would have sold the add-on like crazy with a near arcade perfect port...certainly more of an impact than Final Fight CD ever had...

The problem is that the Saturn was only one of the problems of Sega, not the problem. Master System was famous only in Brazil, Sega CD and 32X failed in every market and sense, bets on the Mega Drive online was too expensive for the company and for the consumer at the time, there's fight between Sega US and Japan only because of ego...

The Dreamcast architecture was what the Saturn should have been, but even the executives wanted Sega as a third party company. So even if the Saturn was a success, chances are that Sega was still to end in the console market, or becoming in someway what Xbox is now

 

[Ecotic]

What the Saturn needed was a powerful, straight-forward hardware design and a killer launch lineup, and it just simply didn't have those. It started so far in the hole right out of the gate that it was an irreparable situation.

 

[RoboFu]

Saturns downfall had nothing to do with graphics. Ps1 didn’t really start to take off until end of 96 with games like RE, but then in 97 even deeper games like GT, and FF7 came out.

The Saturn finally did start getting great games in 97 and 98 but it was too little too late. Literally 3/4s of the saturns catalog remained in Japan because it was so hard to get games green lighted for NA. because of the " NO RPGS AND NO 2D Command"

 

[Sub_Level]

Wait, many gamers on here told me Tomb Raider being exclusive to PlayStation 1 was one of the main reasons why Sega went under.

Well those people are dumb. But to be fair Classic Tomb Raider is for all practical intents and purposes a Playstation franchise. FFVII, Metal Gear Solid, and Resident Evil were also multiplatform but the core fanbase was on PS1.

 

[Lysandros]

The thing is, most the the psx 3d game look completely terrible nowsday and saturn 2d game STILL hold up perfectly fine.

What about Saturn 3D games and PlayStation 2D games?...

 

[SkylineRKR]

Well those people are dumb. But to be fair Classic Tomb Raider is for all practical intents and purposes a Playstation franchise. FFVII, Metal Gear Solid, and Resident Evil were also multiplatform but the core fanbase was on PS1.

Tomb Raider actually debuted on Saturn first, Sega had a timed exclusive on it. But the PSX version ended up selling better and while TR2 for Saturn was in development, it was cancelled. They couldn't get it to run well on Saturn. I'm inclined to believe it. TR2 was quite an improvement over the first game, technically. The cancellation also happened quite a bit before Eidos made a deal with Sony, and Adrian Smith said it to DC-UK in 2000, after the exclusivity deal with Sony had been expired.

 

[Krathoon]

It really need to dig into the old Tomb Raiders. I beat the first one. I never made it that far in two and three.

 

[RoboFu]

Tomb Raider actually debuted on Saturn first, Sega had a timed exclusive on it. But the PSX version ended up selling better and while TR2 for Saturn was in development, it was cancelled. They couldn't get it to run well on Saturn. I'm inclined to believe it. TR2 was quite an improvement over the first game, technically. The cancellation also happened quite a bit before Eidos made a deal with Sony, and Adrian Smith said it to DC-UK in 2000, after the exclusivity deal with Sony had been expired.

didnt run well AKA " GOT MONEY FROM SONY" this has been confirmed through the years. its even on the wiki now.

"In September 1997, Eidos signed a deal with Sony, making the console versions of Tomb Raider exclusive to the PlayStation until the year 2000"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_... Eidos signed,PlayStation until the year 2000.

 

[cireza]

I mean imagine Super Streetfighter 2 being released for the Sega CD with music similar to the 3DO version, that would have sold the add-on like crazy with a near arcade perfect port

Technically impossible on SEGA-CD due to the loss of the ability to stream animations on the fly. The console did not have enough RAM to push arcade perfect conversions from arcade fighting games, that's for sure. CD consoles were not well suited for arcade games.

As for lack of transparency it’s right there firsthand, and I named games that didn’t have it due to Saturn’s poorly conceived graphical setup. I owned the games. The lack of transparency smacks you in the face, be it screenshots or gameplay. Meanwhile Playstation games simply had it across the board.

More evidence of just how poorly designed the system was.

Some games not having transparency doesn't mean the console can't do it. The console not covering as many use-cases of transparency than the competitor doesn't mean it was poorly designed. Nobody says that PS1 is poorly designed because it cannot achieve the crazy stuff achieved by VDP2, yet it is a fact.

 

[Krathoon]

It really annoys me that the Mister core for the Sega CD does not emulate 32x.

There are 32x Sega CD games, you know.

 

[RAIDEN1]

It really annoys me that the Mister core for the Sega CD does not emulate 32x.

There are 32x Sega CD games, you know.

Probably a handful at best?

 

[Krathoon]

Probably a handful at best?

I want my 32x Night Trap and Corpse Killer.

The 3DO Sewer Shark is the best version of that game. I think there was a 3DO Night Trap.

 

[SkylineRKR]

didnt run well AKA " GOT MONEY FROM SONY" this has been confirmed through the years. its even on the wiki now.

"In September 1997, Eidos signed a deal with Sony, making the console versions of Tomb Raider exclusive to the PlayStation until the year 2000"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_Raider_II#:~:text=In September 1997, Eidos signed,PlayStation until the year 2000.

Saturn version was cancelled well before this. And after the deal expired they would claim they couldn't do it justice on Saturn, while releasing Dreamcast versions.

 

[Krathoon]

Isn't there like a fan patch that fixes up Tomb Raider: Angle of Darkness?

 

[DEAD ORIGINAL]

Bad Timing
Bad Marketing

Big turd

 

[Draxon Gamer]

I always find it odd these video makers can get away with seeming knowledgeable repeating incomplete wikipedia information.

The problem with the Saturn is always believed by people to be factors that didn't help the company, but had little to do with why the Saturn failed. The Saturn was cemented as the loser of the Generation by around fall a year after it's NA launch. By then it was determined that many Genesis owners were not moving or going elsewhere, and Segas featured titles were poor for gaining marketshare. Sega of Japan actually started a ton of Pet Project only a few months after the NA launch before it was clear they couldn't save it and while they were going well locally in Japan, which means the numbers SOJ were seeing weren't good even then before the fact.

I think the biggest thing people make a mistake on, is assuming that fans of the Sega Saturn games during or in retrospect, are the same Sega fans that were obsessed with the Genesis and arcade games leading up until 1994. This is even more true in the west were many of Segas features titles were alien and had no staying power to sell consoles off shelves.

Compare the 1995 libraries and you see PSX had medium and large hits every other month.

 

[Naked Lunch]

You're making me ponder over this ancient Saturn I grabbed at a tag sale over a decade ago with no cables or accessories. I never figured out if it even works, but I still have it. Just never got the motivation to get all the needed stuff (and even knowledge) to try it. I emulated Sonic Jam on PC once to check out the 3D hub instead LOL.

The people in this thread are probably going to die knowing I've been sitting on a real ass Saturn for that long.

Doesnt hurt to try to see if it works.
Remember there are options like the pseudo saturn to play "backups" - as well as ODE solutions.

For cables: you can use an xbox one, ps2, dreamcast power cable on the saturn.
For AV (composite, scart, component) im pretty sure youll need a saturn specific cable.

 

[MrA]

I always find it odd these video makers can get away with seeming knowledgeable repeating incomplete wikipedia information.

The problem with the Saturn is always believed by people to be factors that didn't help the company, but had little to do with why the Saturn failed. The Saturn was cemented as the loser of the Generation by around fall a year after it's NA launch. By then it was determined that many Genesis owners were not moving or going elsewhere, and Segas featured titles were poor for gaining marketshare. Sega of Japan actually started a ton of Pet Project only a few months after the NA launch before it was clear they couldn't save it and while they were going well locally in Japan, which means the numbers SOJ were seeing weren't good even then before the fact.

I think the biggest thing people make a mistake on, is assuming that fans of the Sega Saturn games during or in retrospect, are the same Sega fans that were obsessed with the Genesis and arcade games leading up until 1994. This is even more true in the west were many of Segas features titles were alien and had no staying power to sell consoles off shelves.

Compare the 1995 libraries and you see PSX had medium and large hits every other month.

1995 libraries were completely competitive, I'm going off memory for the US releases
Saturn had panzer dragoon, virtua fighter 1, remix and 2, virtua cop, daytona usa, sega rally, clockwork knight, bug, sim city 2000, wing arms , shinobi legions, astal, ghen war
playstation had tekken, ridge racer, wipeout, mk3, jumping flash, battle arena toshinden, Raiden , zero divide, doom, air combat, loaded, discworld, viewpoint, twisted metal , warhawk and cybersled
plus some notable shared titles, Rayman gex a couple of arcade ports,
both have a few more exclusives, but I don't think any of them are amazing, but neither really is massively better plus they shared some solid i guess the ps1 benefitted from virtual hydlide not stinking up store shelves, but 6 of the ps1 games would hit saturn in 96, only 1 of the saturns 95 games would hit psx
96 and 97 saw a healthy saturn release schedule as well... then 98, the ps1 had the most games released yet and the saturn had 5, though at least the 5 were good games.
Playstation benefitted heavily from sony marketing clout, sony would subsidize store promotions, cut exclusive deals, and heavily indulge in the always questionable games journalism (gameplayers magazine actually said repeatedly the Saturn had the best library by late 96 but don't buy it ,buy PlayStation because reasons)
But sega didn't help themselves with their totally bananas incompetent ways of doing everything, sega of japan and sega of america actually viewed each other with disdain, sega of japan cancelled eternal champions 3 seemingly out of spite, tool pipelines were a complete mess

 

[Krathoon]

Sega does have really bad luck with their consoles. That is why they do primarily software now.

Still, I love all of them. Sega has it's own flavor compared to Nintendo. They are not afraid to get gory or weird.

 

[Ozzie666]

Can someone explain to me if the Saturn could do transparencies, why do I see nothing but Mesh everywhere I look?

Also, Einhander was great then and now. Needs a sequel.

 

[Krathoon]

The Sega Saturn did have some shitty shadows. Look at Panzer Dragoon Saga.

 

[cireza]

Can someone explain to me if the Saturn could do transspecies, why do I see nothing but Mesh everywhere I look?

I see nothing but bad faith.









Saturn games are loaded with transparency effects. And do you know what is even better than having a lot of transparency effects ? Having a ton of amazing games. This focus on transparency is ridiculous.

 

[Krathoon]

Did they ever translate Cotton 2 in that Switch release?

 

[cartman414]

Why assume proper transparencies would necessarily gimp 2D performance?

And even if it did, would it be much worse than the Playstation? I mean, outside of the Saturn 2D games that were improved by the RAM expansion carts, the PS1 was good enough at 2D.

Not to mention 3D performance was more important than 2D in 1994/95. That was the whole selling point of "next gen". So yeah, if they had to choose they chose poorly.

I still don't see the huge gap in 2D prowess between the Saturn vs the PS1 in 2D graphics though, despite the PS1 being better at 3D and transparencies. Whatever difference must be small and (as proven) did not worth sacrificing 3D performance for it.

Again, it's not like the PS1 or even the N64 can't do nice looking 2D. All 3 consoles were a proper generational jump over the SNES/Genesis in that aspect. And, IMO, the best looking 2D game of that generation belongs to the PS1 anyway (Lomax). Not to mention how so many 2D Saturn games and ports still suffered because of the ugly dithering meshes so it's not like only the 3D games suffered. I hear all the time how the Saturn was a "2D graphics beast" but honestly, i think this is exaggerated a lot, probably because Saturn owners needed something to balance out the not so great 3D capabilities compared to PS1.

Yes, both consoles are a bit hacks in their 3D support (warping quads, which used to be best practice for modellers to avoid issues but very inefficient for the kind of budgets they use on consoles/PC gaming HW still).

Not as capable, not nearly as easy to use, and they bet on a very very very different way to do texturing (lower pixel fill rate too) than anyone else went with (HW enforced batching in a way, render texture by texture)… as you said embedding lots of components which increased costs. So yes, they did not choose as well as their competition, but it made sense internally HW wise perhaps… maybe.


No reason to get offended, 2D was not ridiculed (it did worse to the craft leaving all those games unlocalised on Saturn), you can do really good 2D with 3D HW (as long as you do not skimp too much on memory).

I disagree, 32X did damage the brand a bit (it was a marketing wasted opportunity) and Saturn would have had a lot more software (if they accepted a slightly higher cost they could have outdone Sony RAM wise and still got the best 2D games… or accepted to co develop Saturn with them as they accepted, but that is a much bigger WhatIf) and earlier in instead of the massive draught at launch in the West which in turn would have better positioned the Dreamcast that would not arrive too early or too late (in the West) to help the brand.

They had a niche they could keep carving for longer.

These are cool looking, though very flat.

In the end though, i still think the best console for 2D graphics remained the Neo-Geo. The Saturn (and the other consoles) could do more fancy 2D effects and all, sure, but neither were capable of the most important thing about 2D graphics:

A fast storage to hold enough sprites and animations.

Both the PS1 and Saturn are slow CD based consoles so there's no way to stream the sprites in the same way Arcades or ROM cart based consoles do. And they can't use RAM either because 2MB was too small for the standards of the time (which is why the Saturn needed those RAM carts). The Neo-Geo CD needed 7 whole MB or RAM to compensate for the usage of the CD media. In that sense, i really believe the N64 was a more capable 2D console than the Sat/PS1 since it had both more RAM and ROM carts. Sure the carts were small but later in N64's life the 32MB ones were common. Those would be able to fit games like SF Alpha or Metal Slug without cuts.

So yeah, 2D beast or not, the Saturn still wasn't the ideal 2D machine IMO. Lack of fast storage and a small RAM are not a good combination for a 2D based machine.

I get people have a special place in their hearts for the Saturn. But please don't try to convince yourselves it was a powerful wonder of chips. It was thrown together with off the shelf parts and overly complex. But even when figured out it was still not as powerful or capable as the PS1 overall. Give the PS1 a 4 MEG RAM or ROM cart and see what it can do in terms of 2D games. I enjoyed the 2D Capcom master pieces and Deep Fear later in its life.

The Saturn at its best was far exceeded by later PS1 generation games. Now the question I can't answer fully is: is that because people pushed the PS1 to the max and never bother with the Saturn, or was the Saturn clearly incapable? I tend to believe the latter and that there wasn't much more left in the tank for the Saturn. The Saturn has a graphical look to it, I think people prefer that look just like some people prefer the N64 look. The arrogance of Sega design was a rite of passage to weed out poor coders on their hardware. totally misread the room and what developers wanted.

Whatever the case, Sega dropped the ball entirely on power and 3D capabilities. They failed to read the market even though 3D was already taking hold. Sega of Japan was jealous and made many stupid decisions for fear of a nearly out money Atari. But I still loved my 32X and its great launch lineup and best versions of MK2, NBA Jam, WWF Arcade (no load times!), Primal Rage and Star Wars. I still love you Sega, but you deserved to die.

Several 2d games that appeared on both systems were gimped comparatively on PS1, which lacked the former's ability to mix 2d and 3d, on top of its extra (V)RAM. SFA3 lacked the Dramatic Battle Mode of the Saturn port, on top of the animation frames. Games like Thunderforce V and Grandia lost several nifty backgrounds seen in the Saturn versions in transition to PS1. Radiant Silvergun and D&D Collection ports for PS1 were nixed altogether because they would have fared much worse.

 

[Alexios]

More bad faith arguments of things known since the 90s that are now challenged by backyard junior school fanboys fighting by pulling things out of their asses for no reason. That goes for things like 3D being more important, no, it became more important by what Sony was peddling and the same goes for the whole not following 3D "standards" with Saturn deal given they were not at all standardized in those pioneering and experimental times (as others said Saturn was similar to Sega arcade systems in architecture, just obviously vastly inferior as it didn't cost thousands of dollars). Even if we hypothetically acknowledge the differences as missteps, the Saturn was still the 2nd most powerful 3D console by a large margin from the 3rd and much smaller margin from the 1st (at least while both lived) with plenty beautiful 3D games, with or without transparencies. Focusing on an OK port of an outdated by then arcade game like VF or poorer efforts ignoring that within the year there were plenty 3D releases on par with anything on PS (including multi plats like Tomb Raider, Wipeout XL & RE with smaller differences than PS360 games) which had its share of duds is sleazy.

Like sure, Daytona USA was hugely cut down because it was a port of the most powerful at the time arcade machine, PS wouldn't have done much better just because it got a better Ridge Racer port from inferior hardware so the cut downs weren't as huge. Drift King '97 and other random racers on Saturn look similar so obviously it could do much better than Daytona, but Sega wasn't about to dedicate enough resources to essentially remake their best game to the Saturn's specification and you may fault them for not doing that, but not for a home console being weaker than the Model 2.

I wouldn't even say development was harder on Saturn, 3D was new and hard for all systems but developers focusing on/learning the PS due to its marketing success wouldn't invest as much on Saturn. Some of the best Saturn graphics are from tiny teams that did awesome, fast, cheap work rivaling anything on PS (which had plenty duds too, even good games with tech issues so obviously it wasn't trivial to get a good 3D engine on it either) given AAA was barely even a concept by then and until the likes of FFVII and MGS showed up. Though Shenmue also shows that it wasn't meaningfully behind on those terms either, if anyone actually invested in it. Sure, the performance wasn't great (but fine for an adventure a la Echo Night 2) but the visuals top anything from the era that isn't a pure fighting game or uses polygon saving tricks like pre-rendered backgrounds, chibi art styles, etc.

Why assume proper transparencies would necessarily gimp 2D performance?

And even if it did, would it be much worse than the Playstation? I mean, outside of the Saturn 2D games that were improved by the RAM expansion carts, the PS1 was good enough at 2D.

Not to mention 3D performance was more important than 2D in 1994/95. That was the whole selling point of "next gen". So yeah, if they had to choose they chose poorly.

The Saturn had way superior to PS 2D without the ram cart too, just because developers in Japan wanted to use the carts to make as perfect arcade fighting game ports as possible doesn't mean it needed that to top PS. Street Fighter Alpha 2 on Saturn among others is a 99% arcade perfect port missing like one background elephant's frames and one zangief victory or entrance animation and many other games are equally impressive, arcade ports or not. Some optionally use the ram cart just to speed up loading and others are gimped by the cart causing slowdowns due to sloppy programming. How is a ~5fps difference something to call out Saturn for in some 3D multi plats that still run similar to epic classics like OoT but for 2D missing a third of the animation frames is no biggie and being arcade perfect in most respects is suddenly not desired or celebrated?

 

[Celine]

What was the cause for this sudden crash in profits after 1993? Was it due to the failure of the Sega CD and 32X?

The center of the rise and fall was in North America overseen by Sega of America (meteoric rise that was built on frail foundations) whereas the questionable decision making was often made in Japan.
Blatant disregard of profits in favour of tactics to increase marketshare, rapid headcount expansion that didn't match the real need of the company and growth, overreliance on new hardware in the hope to become again competitive against Nintendo and to increase the marketshare (revenue) without considering the actual impact on profitability, expensive investments that lead to nowhere (for example SoA spent $10 million on kicking off Sega Multimedia Studio which shipped a grand total of 3 crappy games), leverage of short term tactics that weren't future-proof like the heavy focus on license IPs/star endorsement and the sport simulation genre (Sega position was always secondary to EA and dependent on paying outside parties to get famous licenses, when Sony came in quickly displaced Sega position in the sport simulation genre with the works at 989 Studios and by simply having more money to invest), lots of unsold inventory and first-party games that missed the company forecast especially in the latter part of the Genesis lifespan.
Nintendo had troubles with unsold inventory too but was more conservative and profit oriented, had first-party games that sold much more and continually produced software hits in the latter part of the SNES lifespan (1994-1996 had the following million-sellers: Donkey Kong Country 1,2,3, Super Metroid, Yoshi's Island, Killer Instinct, Super Mario RPG, Kirby Super Star).
Most of Nintendo's mega-hits were (are) IPs controlled directly by the company and tend to be genre kings or to popularize new subgenres (thus become the genre king of the new subgenre).

Translation from japanese business articles that talks about Sega difficulties after 1993:

A Second Atari Shock? The Decline of the 16-Bit Console Era - Mega Drive Shock

I have previously written about the sudden decline of Sega’s 16-bit business in North America and Europe beginning in 1993. Below, I translate an article from the February 29, 1996 edition of the Japanese newspaper Nikkei Sangyo Shimbun that goes into more detail about the 16-bit market crash...

mdshock.com

A Cloud Appears Over Sega of America’s Rapid Progress - Mega Drive Shock

The following is a translation of a news article from the March 27, 1995 issue of the Nikkei Sangyo Shimbun in Japan. This article is part of a series of four articles on Sega's operations in 1995, based on interviews with Sega president Hayao Nakayama and others. Continue reading

mdshock.com

I also wonder how Nintendo managed to remain profitable throughout all this. Not just profitable, but more profitable than even Sony, the undisputed market leader. How on earth did Nintendo make more money during the Gamecube era than Sony with the PS2, despite the fact that the GameCube sold so badly that pretty early on Nintendo had to slash prices to such an extent that they sold it at a loss for a while (something they‘d never done before)? And while Nintendo games sold well on the GC, especially compared to its small install base, their games weren’t yet the mega blockbusters that they’d become on the DS, Wii and Switch. And it’s not like the PS2 didn’t have tons of huge sellers of its own. The PS2 outsold the GC to such a ridiculous degree it‘s not even funny, and it sold more software than any other system before and after. Not to mention that Sony actually sold the PS2 at a higher price than the GC for most of that gen, so they should‘ve made more money from hardware and software than Nintendo, yet they didn’t. Were Nintendo’s profits at the time mainly due to the GBA and Pokemon? That‘s the only explanation I can come up with. I don’t see where else all these Nintendo profits in the early 2000s were coming from.

How much money does Sony spend to secure (read "buy") marketshare (hardware subsidy, exclusivity deal for third-party content, marketing etc.)?
In the years you have highlighted (GC/GBA era) the PlayStation division have always recorded higher revenue than Nintendo but almost always lower operating profits.
(Revenue) marketshare masks the costs a console manufacturer had to sustain to generate such sales.
In other words Nintendo tends to have much better operating profit margins:

If you wonder how, the shortest answer, which likely won't enlight you, is: because Nintendo is special and all their business reveolves around being unique.

 

[Ozzie666]

The Saturn defense force is out as expected and re-writing history. Like Sega didn't scramble to add more chips or it was more powerful than the PS1 for 3D. It was a very capable 2D machine, because Sega read the room wrong.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed my Saturn and was fortunate to have most systems during that time.

But as usual, I always ask - where were all these Saturn lovers and warriors back in 1994-1998.

Any system no matter how powerful can have great games. Thats not the point of this thread. The point is Sega messed up countless times with the Saturn and I will never forgive them for leaving so many games in Japan, including Shining Force parts 2 and 3. Sega was more unsuccessful than successful as a home console manufacturer.

#DEEPFEARISGREAT