Bubsy3000

Your first sentence I agree with as many people continue to think FF6 and the like did much better than they actually did. In fact Square talked about FF6/3 underperforming. I don't however understand the PSX comparison to the GEN. PSX had several his releases in the first full year in Japan, and 1996 saw big hit games in NA. The Genesis really did have some good games, but it's not even about blowing up, they rarely had just "above average" sales successes. I never include the Sega CD as one of Segas screw-ups, it was a bonus and didn't effect sales and FMVs are often written off but they were very popular back then (corpse killer did like 3 million) despite popular belief retrospectively. No when I say mistakes I talk about marketing, partnerships, inner company mismanagement, and lack of keeping projects going long-term. I'm not saying the Jaguar would be redesigned, but a 95 Jaguar would likely be similar just have slightly higher specs, and thus more likely to be more powerful and easier to develop for than the Saturn. In a late Jaguar hypothetical, the 32X would be the only mistake avoided, all the other mistakes still would have happened. My second example does include the Panther, my first scenario does not. In my first scenario the Jaguar still releases in 93 with the 3DO, but with all the bugs ironed out and ready with games. The only reason the 3DO wasn't dead on arrival is because Atari screwed up. If Atari was ready it'd be a more powerful $250 console against a weaker $700-$500 console. There is no scenario where the 3DO would survive. With the Panther it's different. Because the 3DO would be alone for 3 years getting all the 32-bit software and having plenty of time to gradually drop it's price without having to react in panic. Remember by the the discontinuation in 97 the 3DO sold over 2 million units. With no reactive moves and no Jaguar the 3DO is likely to be much more successful. So with a Panther launch in 91, the 3DO has no competition. So $500-$700 would almost seem worth it because you'd have only one console that had games much improved from what everyone else was playing, with cheaper games since they were on CDs. That Alone would still make Sony jump in even if the market did seem crowded. As Panasonic was Sony's major domestic competitor. As for the last part of your post. Regardless of which Jaguar scenario the 1st parties of the Saturn wouldn't do anything. The Saturn would still end up failing for the same reasons. Nothing would prevent the N64 situation from changing either. It would still be late and only sell well in the US. The only things that would change are how Sony jumps in and no 32X.

I mentioned a few games above. The company was profitable, growing, and buying a bunch of companies in the late 90's. I don't get why some people think Atari was a more valuable brand. I mean as the above was going on Atari just discontinued the Jaguar and got sold off. The brand was tarnished imo. I'd argue any future potential for the brand is basically dead now. Even if Atari SA went out of business, could someone revive the brand outside of 80's re-releases? At this point Infogrames has done permanent damage to the Atari name imo. Oh well.

This doesn't work because based on Nintendo games and Third-party games the million sellers list is much bigger than Segas and it's across many devs and genres. Segas strategy of throwing everything at the wall hurt The Genesis' ability to sell cross platform games. SFii SNES and Genesis is a good example. Also I know the Gen released in 89 but it was 88 tech, and that ended up becoming an issue later in the Gens life. Also we can't forget the SNES was closing the gap fast. Beating the TG16 was one thing but the amount of Gens before Sonic wasn't big enough to prevent the massive coverage the SNES was getting. Sonic 2 onward Sega slowed it down and arguably even increased the gap a few times but Sega had nothing to keep long-term interest, and their later screw ups lost them first place. A Panther would likely do the same, especially since it would be more powerful. It still would lose to the SNES, but I easily see a Panther hitting second due to Sega screw ups.

Jaguar couldn't have used the same specs in 95. The Jaguar specs are only good for the time it came out. In the best case scenario a balanced, flexible, Dev friendly Jaguar would out perform the 3DO at launch and thus kill the 3DO on arrival leading to 3 years of Jaguar sales to itself. But since this is about the Panther, it's a bit more iffy. Asia was never going to be a thing, Atari lost to ColecoVision in Japan reportedly, and never did well there at any point. The computer industry in the 90's was near dead at that point and what was left was sharp, NEC, and MSX with a crumbling FM Towns. So Atari couldn't get computer recognition either. Europe, a Panther had a chance at succeeding. Atari would just need to get star computer developers to make games on the Panther with a few being exclusive. It wouldn't be hard to show it was more capable than the mega drive either. US is a bit different. There's this misunderstanding about the Genesis in NA it was a slow burner. Most of the genesis' best selling titles were post 93. SNES was closing the gap really fast. Sonic 2 onward helped slow down the SNES momentum but due to lack of long-term software solutions and multiple screw-ups SNES passed it. The Panther specs were clearly better than the 88 tech in the Genesis, so I think a good launch with some show-off games would have likely ended up in second place for similar reasons for why the SNES would end up in first. As for the 3DO, it would be a battle royal. A Panther 91 launch would remove a 93 Jaguar launch, leading the 3DO to launch by itself with no Jag giving it a comparison boost. This would Lead to either one or two things. One, it would lead to the 3DO dominating with third party devs and having a huge quality library as its price went down. Or two, the first console to release after 3DO would likely be end up getting all the software support. But I think the former would be more likely. Metal Gear, FF7, Rude Racer, etc all considered or originally had 3DO games in mind. Those games would have likely released on it if it was the only capable system in town getting all the attention for several years. I don't think your theory of a 97 N64 launch would work. It had to launch no later than 96. The Dreamcast would come out in 98, and PC graphics would be right behind it. The N64 would get slaughtered. Your JAG spec theory would change the Saturn issue as well. As I said before, the Jaguar can't have it's 93 specs in 95, it would be demolished. It'd likely be stronger, likely leading to the late release Jaguar being more powerful and easier to develop than the Saturn, likely leading to the same NA and European Saturn outcome and the DC releasing 2.5 years later.

Yeah but everywhere else Infogrames was a more notable name worldwide. What's even more baffling is the results of the mistake happened early put they continued on naming the rest of the smaller subsidiaries Atari as well. It really seems to have been quite the odd decision. The stocks basically worthless these days. Worse than Sega.

This thread is about the Panther not the Jaguar, in NA 1991 SNES and Genesis didn't sewn up anything yet so I don't get this. Also the Jaguar had differentiating games in 1st half 94, the Jags problem wasn't triple A games, it was money. Jag could have had 12 10/10 goty games in a row, meant nothing if Atari couldn't market them or produce enough units of software/hardware to sell. Look at AVP. Yeah those games missed the Jaguar but would they have missed a console that came out at the same time as the SNES? Especially if the Panther ended up being finished and got some show off games at launch? The Jaguar cameout in 1993, late, buggy, and hard to develop for, and was being sucker punched by its direct competitor. A complete Panther, on paper, would have none of those problems and be easy to port to. Not to mention that the Genesis would not really start taking off in game sales until 1993 relying on sonic 1 and 2 for the most part along with a slew of hit and miss games. SNES would still getmajor help by SFII and alot more money for marketing, but I think, on paper, a second place Panther would be possible, provided the Panther got some decent games that showed off the capabilities. That 2-2.5 year difference between the supposed Panther launch and the 93 Jaguar launch makes a huge difference in the US market. Atari would have literally released the Panther at the best possible time if it was released without bugs in 91. If the Panther had more colorful games and some capability advantages to the SNES at launch that would be a reason one would buy a Panther over an SNES. Ifeel people keep forgetting the SNES came out in 91 in the US. It's one of the original reasons some Atari fans were mad at the Panthers cancellation.

Can we install blinking lights in the padded room for 5 easy payments of $129.99??? We even took a General Electric light lens and relabeled it Gyruss so we could pretend we made it from scratch!!!!!

I'm with you but #4 seems a bit iffy. I think one thing people do when they bring up software as an advantage for the GEN/SNES they don't look at the NA market by itself but worldwide. In NA the SNES came out in 1991, and it wouldn't skyrocket until Street Fighter II the next year. The Genesis basically relied on Sonic until 1993-94 which is when the genesis started getting it's big hitting games like Aladdin, MK1, Nba Jam and others. The Genesis itself sold well but you'd be surprised at how much of a slow burner it was in the U.S. for actual game sales. Genesis got most of its best selling LTD games after 1992, that would be 4 years later from launch, in contrast to the 1 year it took for the SNES to skyrocket in software sales. I don't think based on the above it would be impossible for an Atari with a "finished" Panther to grab a few impressive looking games and giving itself a good start. It would result in Atari getting those ports of MK and SF that the Gen/SNES did as well. While the SNES would still likely end up winning Atari may have been able to take advantage of the slow burn of the Genesis as well as capitalizing on its screw ups later on for a solid second place. On paper.

But you yourself didn't read what you wrote. Your original reply was to my statement that Nintendo dominated Japan in modern times, by saying it wasn't. But we have Japanese sales proving otherwise due to the transparency of Japanese hardware and software sales, unlike in NA and Europe where things are not as transparent. If not Nintendo the only other possible company would have been Sony, so either you believed Sony dominated and not Nintendo, or your objection to Nintendo doesn't really make much sense. Wii U had the crown and passed it off to the Switch. I don't see anything controversial with that statement.

I know the public reason was to break confusion and to have a "globally recognized name" but from mid 90's-2008 Infogrames seemed to be more recognized than Atari, at least for current titles then and now. Atari at the time was remembered for old school stuff, it wasn't a new software seller, and the results that followed showed that clearly. At the time before the buyout, Atari-Hasbro put out remakes of old games on PSX and friends. Infogrames actually had a "recent" legacy connected to them with Alone in the Dark and other games. In fact the growth led to the massive buy outs, and got them a whole slew of popular IPS and big game company acquisitions. I don't understand by what metric they measured to come to the conclusion renaming everything Atari was somehow going to make them big. A couple years later after the name change, up until present day, "Atari" has basically done nothing but flop around and lose half of what they gained in the 90's. Everything during the "though process" for considering naming themselves Atari, to the post name change, has done nothing at all. Who on the board, or rather who in the marketing apartment pulled a chart out their ass showing the board and CEO that changing the name to Atari would have done anything? They had to see SOMETHING to come to that conclusion, it can't be 100% incompetence. They haven't really put out many notable software that was originally created by themselves since the merger either. Thye published already established brands or games from acquired companies at best. They haven't really put out any new hardware either, which infogrames at the merger had enough money to do and teased, but didn't because...They changed their mind. They'll likely never released new console but they may trick people into thinking they will for money. At this point Infogrames name is more toxic than Atari now, just by how they have mismanaged the Atari name and basically destroyed their own earlier legacy. These were the Guys that did Alone in the Dark 1,2, and 3, North Vs South, Drakkhen, "Need for Speed" V-rally, and an early 3D platformed Alpha Waves. I don't get why they threw that all away for absolutely nothing and kept on going even though it was clear things were not going to work out.

I do find it odd he has admitted to playing games on ST's and Amigas but won't put up reviews for them. In fact his C64 reviews are actually not his, they are by a contributor. The only computers he's reviewed is the 8-bit line and I think that was because of the XEGS. I'd write it off as him doing those because the XEGS was a console, but he had a 64GS and he had An ST and an Amiga so it seems there's something going on where he refuses to review computer games most of the time.

My joke was more obvious but it seemed to go over your head more than yours did over mine.

Not really, while that may make some iffy Sprite games, but still competitive somewhat, the Panther was capable of polygons at a certain level without chips like the SNES and GEN did with Star Fox and Virtua Racing, and that may have been enough back then. Sure years later few would go back to it because the 3D would have aged like shit but for the time that would have likely been a big deal.

Well, an Xbox powered Atari in the early 90's would have been sold by everyone else as a miracle and Atari screwing up really wouldn't matter because the machine would sell itself. unless it was $1000 or more of course.

The one thing I'll ding Switch on is power, but that's understandable given it's hybrid architecture and Nintendo hasn't really went all in on power since the GC.

It isn't because the Wii U was the champ and then it's successor continued where it left off, so when did Sony dominate? Only really works if you decide to discard the hybrid part of the Switch.

You do know you made your own points irrelevant with this statement right? Also yes for what was left, Nintendo did hold the crown, and then gave it up. I have no issue with Sony taking advantage of that and being given the win by default, the issue is you implying the PS4 doubled the Wii u sales because it did much better than it in japan. Which isn't the case. But that was then. PS4 is currently the only relevant home console in Japan right now. I would say only entirely but the Xbox One does technically still exist there.

Well since that post was referring to the Jaguar, I think that a 1993 head start would have given the jaguar, if it was ready and had games, a good million or so before the late 90's console explosion happened and rose to a few million after that. For the panther it's a bit more iffy. But a 1991 Panther would be a big graphical improvement to the Mega Drive which sold around 4-5 million before the console boom so I don't think, if the panther was ready and Atari had money, it would be impossible for the hypothetical Panther to grab 2 million or so. Not much more than that certainly. It's why I always believed that a PSX situation couldn't have happened in Europe until the late 90's. Even game developers have said that the MegaDrive could have sold PSX levels if it was managed well, but I don't believe that's possible for the reasons you stated: computers were the main platform.

Youtube has proven many people want a new anything, the question is, is it feasible to do? In this case it wouldn't. Since the CD-i was a multi-media device you'd basically have to pun in effort just to strip down everything and just have it play games, which would defeat the entire point of the CD-i and also likely cost more to do. It'd likely be better just to release the games they still have rights to in a collection disc for PC/Xbox/PS4/Swtich than a mini version if they ever were serious about re-releasing software. That way you can play Burn:Cycle, Flashback, Your Zelda/Mario CD-i games, and uh....... Other games.

You can't spin that it took the PS4 years to catch the Wii U and that was only after Nintendo put focus on the 3DS, the new console announcement, and the removal of the Wii U from retail. PS4 having 2017 mostly to itself with a bit of a fight given by the new Switch launch in 2017, greatly increased the PS4's numbers. During Holiday 2016 the PS4 was less than 400k ahead. By august 2017 it was nearing 2 million ahead, and that was before 4th quarter 2017. That's the biggest gap the PS4 ever had compared to the Wii U. You keep making it seem like the PS4 quickly outsold the Wii U, and your statement that the PS4 had doubled the Wii U "So far" continues to Imply that this is just the beginning when it's not even been 2 full years since the PS4 passed the Wii U. The PS4 been selling much more than the Wii U RECENTLY because the WIi U stopped competing and the PS4 is effectively the only real home console in Japan. While the Switch is taking up some sales it's still mostly the Nintendo Handheld in Japan. PS4's only "competition" for home console in Japan is the Xbox One, who may as well not even be competing. You can't explain away that most of the PS4 sales increases came after there was no competition. If the PS4 was always doing better it would have outsold the Wii U earlier or at least showed that it was doubling Wii U sales, many times in weekly MC/FM releases the Wii U was beating the PS4. Nintendo toning down the Wii U, and eventually abandoning it directly correlates with the PS4 sales having much bigger gains. Also PS4 beating the Wii U with no competition doesn't excuse the fact it's still not selling that well, it's slightly behind the PS3. In 2017 with two months of Wii U stock selling at bargain prices for clearance in japan, and no other competition (outside a minimal bump for Xbox one month), PS4 sold less than 2 million in japan in 2017 or just hit that depending on which tracker you use. As of Jan 2018 till Sept 2018, the PS4 has sold less than 1.3 million. The console market in Japan is still basically dead, it's just the PS4 is doing well relatively because there's no competition. No early Xbox 360 sales and no Wii outlier. It's doing well in relation to the contracted market, absolutely, but let's not go crazy now. There's a reason PS4 launched in Japan late, and that was because the market is different from what it used to be.

But Wu Tang Shaolin style is already an official release!

You mean the reality that the PS4 took around 5 years to outsell the Wii U in japan and it was the last country to discontinue the system because it did well there? Wii U was a flop pretty much everywhere, but Japan. But just because it wasn't a flop in Japan doesn't mean Japan made up for the losses everywhere else, they still had to replace the Wii U with the Switch for profits sake. It also wouldn't have made sense to have the Wii U and 3DS eat at Switch sales.

Atari did release a slimmer version of their handheld. they called it the Lynx II (debatably confusing name) As for power, the Jaguar was actually pretty powerful, it was just designed really bad. Too many bugs and bottlenecks. They put it out before it was ready, 1994 at the earliest is when it should have released, maybe spring. Have Rayman, Tempest, and Alien Vs. Predator available day one. Also pay their damn programmers so they don't get revenge by release intentionally buggy games.

Now hold on a sec there, Wii U was ahead of the PS4 for quite some time before it passed it. It took the PS4 5 years to outsell the Wii U in Japan you know. Nintendo abandoning the Wii U in combinations with switching most focus into the 3DS until the "new console" launched, which ended up being switch, got PS4 to widen the gap against the Wii U substantially during 2017. So by saying "so far" you imply the PS4 recently launched relative to the Wii u and has been outselling it for awhile which isn't the case for japan. So I'm not sure if it's the Wii U selling poorly rather than the PS4 having no competition and Nintendo abandoning the Wii U. But Nintendo pretty much had japan until they did. Switch had a release date right around when the PS4 passed the Wii U.

In Japan sure, but I don't know about Crushed, I'd say it got clobbered a bit, but Kinect did slow that widening gap down a bit. But yeah you're right, thing is 360 mismanaged Europe a bit, not so much UK, Italy, and Eastern Europe, but more the rest of the countries. Germany was their biggest misstep and they pissed off several distributors there and the nordic countries/Netherlands. But at least it was better than calling multiple countries "Tier 2 in relevance" like with the Xbox One so...