67 replies to this topic

[PFL]

I think I'd have to go with the NGPC as well.  That system had some serious potential that was never realised.

My criteria for 'failure' isn't based on sales and market penetration but more on how much the system was pushed... To me, a successful system is one that's pushed to the max in it's capabilities.

The NGPC had a lot of power left untapped, IMHO.

[sdamon]

I really like all of the "class of 1982" systems - the Vectrex, Colecovision, and Atari 5200.  None of them lasted more than two years, thanks to the great video game crash.

[doubleminor]

Another vote for Dreamcast and adding Sega Master System. It was better than the NES, but lack of 3rd party support because of Nintendo's policy at the time all but doomed it.

[mbd30]

The Dreamcast was a quantum leap ahead of the original Playstation and N64, and approximately on par with the PS2 in terms of technology. It probably could have competed with the PS2/XBOX/Gamecube generation of consoles as programmers learned how to squeeze even more out of it.

[FujiSkunk]

The Sega Master System did very well for itself in areas outside of the U.S., and had very good third-party support as well.  Only in America did Nintendo trounce it, though Sega actually must share a little of that blame.

I'd say the Dreamcast didn't get a fair shake.  It seemed Sega did the same thing Atari did with the Jaguar: make one last half-hearted "Hail Mary" pass, and then give up altogether when the competition came around.

I also agree about the Lynx.  Atari had an excellent system on its hands and really should have tried harder to market it.

[mbd30]

FujiSkunk, on Thu May 3, 2012 2:09 PM, said:

I'd say the Dreamcast didn't get a fair shake.  It seemed Sega did the same thing Atari did with the Jaguar: make one last half-hearted "Hail Mary" pass, and then give up altogether when the competition came around.

Atari were smart to give up. The Jaguar really was obsolete almost as soon as it came out. More powerful than the SNES but no Playstation, Saturn or N64.

At least the Dreamcast could have competed on a technological level. People on internet forums still bicker about whether the DC has better graphics than the PS2.

[xDragonWarrior]

When i say failure,i mean nobody brought the Damn thing,and you were the only one with it after 2 years.and the Dreamcast,Lynx,Master system,Jaguar(sorta),Saturn,etc.And maybe i should change it from "failure" to "underrated",it sounds more efficient.

[the.golden.ax]

mbd30, on Thu May 3, 2012 2:22 PM, said:

FujiSkunk, on Thu May 3, 2012 2:09 PM, said:

I'd say the Dreamcast didn't get a fair shake.  It seemed Sega did the same thing Atari did with the Jaguar: make one last half-hearted "Hail Mary" pass, and then give up altogether when the competition came around.

Atari were smart to give up. The Jaguar really was obsolete almost as soon as it came out. More powerful than the SNES but no Playstation, Saturn or N64.

At least the Dreamcast could have competed on a technological level. People on internet forums still bicker about whether the DC has better graphics than the PS2.

I wouldn't say that it was obsolete for a good 2 years. My local EB Games (in Tennessee) never had the damn thing in stock. They got one or two every week and sold them quicker than I could go in and get one. It took a long time after release before I could finally get my hands on one. Then it was by mail order.

[mbd30]

the.golden.ax, on Thu May 3, 2012 3:27 PM, said:

I wouldn't say that it was obsolete for a good 2 years.

Fair point. The Jag may have had a good year or two before being totally obsolete.

Even the 3DO seems like a stronger alternative for the time, but was also twice as expensive.

[atarilovesyou]

Maybe a poll could give an idea of what the systems were that fit your description.  It seems a lot of people don't agree on whether certain systems failed or not.

And of course, there's the "Sega Master System did quite well everywhere except the USA" argument....well, if that's the case, then why is it that the only system that one could clarify as a success was the Genesis?  Nintendo can't be blamed for all Sega's woes.  But even Nintendo's Gamecube was a bit of a failure, in my mind at least...so even the mighty can fall, at least momentarily.

The problem with the Lynx was cost, mostly.  Short battery life didn't help matters.  It's the old adage, "Does McDonalds make the best burger?...no.  Do they sell the most burgers?  Yes."...Nintendo was the McDonalds of handhelds.  The market was younger players.  The Lynx, had it been a success, woulda been something like the PSP of today: great hardware, but definitely not aimed at the same demographic as the Nintendo DS.

[BillyHW]

mbd30, on Thu May 3, 2012 2:22 PM, said:

FujiSkunk, on Thu May 3, 2012 2:09 PM, said:

I'd say the Dreamcast didn't get a fair shake.  It seemed Sega did the same thing Atari did with the Jaguar: make one last half-hearted "Hail Mary" pass, and then give up altogether when the competition came around.

Atari were smart to give up. The Jaguar really was obsolete almost as soon as it came out. More powerful than the SNES but no Playstation, Saturn or N64.

At least the Dreamcast could have competed on a technological level. People on internet forums still bicker about whether the DC has better graphics than the PS2.

That's not true. The Jaguar was as powerful, if not more powerful, than the Sega Saturn and slightly weaker than the Sony Playstation.

[mbd30]

BillyHW, on Thu May 3, 2012 8:31 PM, said:

mbd30, on Thu May 3, 2012 2:22 PM, said:

FujiSkunk, on Thu May 3, 2012 2:09 PM, said:

I'd say the Dreamcast didn't get a fair shake.  It seemed Sega did the same thing Atari did with the Jaguar: make one last half-hearted "Hail Mary" pass, and then give up altogether when the competition came around.

Atari were smart to give up. The Jaguar really was obsolete almost as soon as it came out. More powerful than the SNES but no Playstation, Saturn or N64.

At least the Dreamcast could have competed on a technological level. People on internet forums still bicker about whether the DC has better graphics than the PS2.

That's not true. The Jaguar was as powerful, if not more powerful, than the Sega Saturn and slightly weaker than the Sony Playstation.

Then programmers had no clue how to utilize that power.

[StoneAgeGamer]

doubleminor, on Thu May 3, 2012 1:38 PM, said:

Another vote for Dreamcast and adding Sega Master System. It was better than the NES, but lack of 3rd party support because of Nintendo's policy at the time all but doomed it.

Master System may have been a failure in the U.S., but was very popular in other parts of the world.

Its almost hard to call the Dreamcast a failure because the system wasn't a failure, Sega was. If Sega wasn't already bleeding money so bad because of its past mistakes the Dreamcast would have been a success. Maybe not beating the PS2, but it may have beat the GC and possibly the XBOX.

That being said, it does seem like the Dreamcast is probably the most popular failed system ever. The love for the DC runs deep for many people.

[desiv]

I think I'm beginning to sound like a broken record on AtariAge.  Every other post, I seem to be saying:

Vectrex.  
-Not it's fault, terrible timing to be released, and the homebrews now are showing even more of the potential of this system.

3DO
-Totally their fault!  :-)  What were they thinking with that price.  It did have some great games, and was out (just ungodly priced) plenty before the Playstation to have made a much better market... (Had some really really bad games too.. A little quality control on releases might have been nice..

Odyssey II
-Again, their fault.  One guy wrote most of the games.  And the marketing was pretty bad.  Still, had some fun games and lots of potential.

desiv

[RedRaider]

Vectrex without a doubt.

[atarian63]

neo Geo AES
Sega Saturn
Lynx
32X

[BillyHW]

mbd30, on Thu May 3, 2012 9:00 PM, said:

BillyHW, on Thu May 3, 2012 8:31 PM, said:

mbd30, on Thu May 3, 2012 2:22 PM, said:

FujiSkunk, on Thu May 3, 2012 2:09 PM, said:

I'd say the Dreamcast didn't get a fair shake.  It seemed Sega did the same thing Atari did with the Jaguar: make one last half-hearted "Hail Mary" pass, and then give up altogether when the competition came around.

Atari were smart to give up. The Jaguar really was obsolete almost as soon as it came out. More powerful than the SNES but no Playstation, Saturn or N64.

At least the Dreamcast could have competed on a technological level. People on internet forums still bicker about whether the DC has better graphics than the PS2.

That's not true. The Jaguar was as powerful, if not more powerful, than the Sega Saturn and slightly weaker than the Sony Playstation.

Then programmers had no clue how to utilize that power.

I was making a joke.  

http://archive.games...s/index22.shtml

[atarilovesyou]

I wish I coulda read the original interview!...I'm sure I read it back then, but didn't know any better and probably believed his lies, lol!

[Seob]

atari 7800, on the market to late.
CD-I, marketed wrong in the first years of production.
Vectrex, They pulled out the plug to soon.

[BillyHW]

Seob, on Fri May 4, 2012 12:34 AM, said:

CD-I, marketed wrong in the first years of production.

Gee, ya think?  

[Moya Jackie]

Atari Lynx
Amiga CD32
3DO

The CD32 didn't even get an American release because of the trouble Commodore was in at the time. All those NTSC models stayed in warehouses in Asia.

[desiv]

Moya Jackie, on Fri May 4, 2012 1:41 AM, said:

Amiga CD32

Of course!
I didn't even think of the CD32!!
(Which is REALLY funny, because I just picked up a Surf Squirrel SCSI PCMCIA card for my 1200 and was looking at CD32 games..  Literally JUST this week!!)

Yeah, just as they were going to release to the US market, the XOR patent lawsuit hit them.  They never did "officially" release in the US.  Tho some systems made it here..

Who knows how much longer they might have made it without that lawsuit (or if they had just paid it off initially, as much as I hate that thought).
(I'm guessing that even if they had made it and the CD32 was hugely successful, Commodore would have found a way to mess something up, but who knows.)

Yeah, the CD32, released when it should have been, had the possibility of capturing a market.  (Like the 3DO, there was a window before the competition popped in, and they could have really taken off).
One huge (IMHO) mistake with the CD32 was not including any FASTRAM tho, or even just a socket for it.  Adding as little as 2M basically doubles the speed of the sysem....

desiv

Edited by desiv, Fri May 4, 2012 9:33 AM.

[BillyHW]

Really?  The CD32 never inspired me at all.

[the.golden.ax]

I love my CD32, there are unique games on it. I'm a little weirded out by the control config with up being jump and no sound effects on a ton of games.

[desiv]

the.golden.ax, on Fri May 4, 2012 10:29 AM, said:

I'm a little weirded out by the control config with up being jump and no sound effects on a ton of games.

And now we're back to lazy programmers and "lowest common denominator" programming!!!

No reason the Amiga couldn't use 2 button joysticks and the second button, but almost every game used only 1!!

Did the programmers write their games to allow you to do either, depending?  Nope..  Just UP for jump, as most people have only 1 button.

Now, the CD32 has LOTS of buttons..  No reason not to modify your game to allow people (make it a choice) to use the other buttons?

NO, I'd have to change my code!!
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!  ;-(

Sorry for the off-topic rant.  That one always bugged me..

desiv