Jump to content
Serguei2

If Atari released panther instead Jaguar

Recommended Posts

A quick read of the following threads should explain the situation easily enough:

 

http://atariage.com/forums/topic/80735-panther/page-1

 

 

 

http://assemblergames.com/threads/the-atari-panther-the-game-claims-uk-press-coverage-etc.66307/

 

....

Panther was yet another Atari disaster in the making.

 

I say that as an ST,2600,800XL,Lynx and Jaguar owner.

 

We didn't need another console to add to the things could of been so different, if only....saga of Atari.

 

Looking at those pictures, it looked like the Panther would just be a Lynx you hook up to the TV with only 32 on-screen colors and nothing but ST ports. Definitely not the SNES killer...

 

Honestly, no matter what would have been different the Tramiels would always screw it up and Jack will always have a bad reputation for anyone to deal with him. I'm surprised the ST managed to turn out to be a decent computer and Commodore 64 was so successful at all!

Edited by MrMaddog
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

I know that; I even acknowledged this in my above reply. But you also have to understand that Sega's publishing model meant they didn't need to rely on a handful of million-sellers to justify the publishing output, and also you have to take in account that with the arcade ports in particular, the home system sales were mainly a bonus on top of the revenue generated by the arcade release (heck, games usually didn't even GET home ports unless they did well in the arcades to begin with). In today's market we know the Nintendo model works out but the market at the time was, on a whole, different, and various models worked for what they did, in their own ways.

 

Also it's not really a surprise if SNES was catching up to Genesis in America; it WAS following up the NES, after all, which was still being commercially sold up to and even after SNES's release. It was expected to do very well and that's partly why many saw the Genesis as the underdog in that fight. It was expected to get a lot of press and media hype, that's what a follow-up to a best-selling system tends to receive. But you can't pin Genesis's sustained momentum (at least up until 32X) being squarely on the back of Sonic; Sonic was definitely an anchor for the platform but various other releases obviously benefited the system sustaining its momentum in NA, both sports and non-sports, even if they were mega-million sellers as I've already mentioned why that in itself wasn't necessarily an issue for Sega-published games (for 3rd parties, keep in mind most 3rd parties released their games on literally almost any platform that could run them. The combined sales across multiple systems would both justify releasing versions on them AND cover the costs for publishing on them while generating a profit, otherwise they wouldn't have kept doing such).

 

I'd also suggest you look back over Genesis hardware if you think that was a big issue; there are a few areas where SNES outdoes it but that is primarily in terms of color depth and (arguably) sound (I mention arguably because you can't directly compare sample-based playback to FM synthesis). In other areas such as CPU speed, resolution, RAM bandwidth etc. Genesis routinely outdid the SNES. The perception of SNES being a clear-out more powerful system is actually moreso due to the coprocessors a lot of SNES games tended to include on their carts; this was a pretty smart design decision actually, but did routinely mean SNES games costed more than the Genesis equivalents.

 

Also I still fail to see these multiple "screw ups" you are implying, which I'm assuming you mean in terms of hardware. The 32X was the only serious screw up, admittedly a big enough one to cause some serious issues for Saturn. The Sega CD is retroactively seen as a 'screw up" because of the infamous FMV games, but at the time on the market it was the best-selling add-on device for a home console, and best-selling CD peripheral add-on as well. If it was such a strong blemish on Genesis at the time, we would've seen a monumental shift in Genesis's market momentum well before late '94. And you can't hold things like the Activator against it too seriously considering things like the Power Glove were also notable blemishes but aren't used against their host platforms (NES in that case).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I know that; I even acknowledged this in my above reply. But you also have to understand that Sega's publishing model meant they didn't need to rely on a handful of million-sellers to justify the publishing output, and also you have to take in account that with the arcade ports in particular, the home system sales were mainly a bonus on top of the revenue generated by the arcade release (heck, games usually didn't even GET home ports unless they did well in the arcades to begin with). In today's market we know the Nintendo model works out but the market at the time was, on a whole, different, and various models worked for what they did, in their own ways.

 

Also it's not really a surprise if SNES was catching up to Genesis in America; it WAS following up the NES, after all, which was still being commercially sold up to and even after SNES's release. It was expected to do very well and that's partly why many saw the Genesis as the underdog in that fight. It was expected to get a lot of press and media hype, that's what a follow-up to a best-selling system tends to receive. But you can't pin Genesis's sustained momentum (at least up until 32X) being squarely on the back of Sonic; Sonic was definitely an anchor for the platform but various other releases obviously benefited the system sustaining its momentum in NA, both sports and non-sports, even if they were mega-million sellers as I've already mentioned why that in itself wasn't necessarily an issue for Sega-published games (for 3rd parties, keep in mind most 3rd parties released their games on literally almost any platform that could run them. The combined sales across multiple systems would both justify releasing versions on them AND cover the costs for publishing on them while generating a profit, otherwise they wouldn't have kept doing such).

 

I'd also suggest you look back over Genesis hardware if you think that was a big issue; there are a few areas where SNES outdoes it but that is primarily in terms of color depth and (arguably) sound (I mention arguably because you can't directly compare sample-based playback to FM synthesis). In other areas such as CPU speed, resolution, RAM bandwidth etc. Genesis routinely outdid the SNES. The perception of SNES being a clear-out more powerful system is actually moreso due to the coprocessors a lot of SNES games tended to include on their carts; this was a pretty smart design decision actually, but did routinely mean SNES games costed more than the Genesis equivalents.

 

Also I still fail to see these multiple "screw ups" you are implying, which I'm assuming you mean in terms of hardware. The 32X was the only serious screw up, admittedly a big enough one to cause some serious issues for Saturn. The Sega CD is retroactively seen as a 'screw up" because of the infamous FMV games, but at the time on the market it was the best-selling add-on device for a home console, and best-selling CD peripheral add-on as well. If it was such a strong blemish on Genesis at the time, we would've seen a monumental shift in Genesis's market momentum well before late '94. And you can't hold things like the Activator against it too seriously considering things like the Power Glove were also notable blemishes but aren't used against their host platforms (NES in that case).

Of course I can. Until 1993 Sonic was the only major seller. From 93 onward you got your MK ports, Nba jam etc. The Sega model didn't work, because the two year head start (3 year in Asia) wasn't producing results. Sonic, outside Japan, was the first game that did. The SNES caught up with the GEN way too quick to only blame it on the NES success. It just wasn't doing that great until after Sonic 2. You keep mentioning sports games but those didn't become bigger deals until later either, just modest. There's a reason most of the best selling Genesis games were after 92. There was no real momentum until after Sonic. The SNES million seller lists is across multiple genres and companies. On the Gen Midway alone was over a third.

 

Not to mention Sega was earning less and less money from the arcades as time went on, until the 96 release of the model 3 which then had Sega losing money until Naomi.

 

As for graphics, back then it was all about how clean, realistic, or pseudo 3D your games were and despite the SNES not besting the Gen in all areas it bested it in the areas the US market wanted. With colorful large sprites, and Mode 7. That's one of the reasons the SNES closed the gap so fast. No other console had that when the SNES launched and the Genesis couldn't do it as well as the SNES when it tried to immitate it. Add in Starfox and the SNES had the preception it was always three steps ahead. It may not have been accurate but the perception was there.

 

Meanwhile Sega was struggling to keep the Genesis relevant after mid 94 and couldn't find anything to keep it's lead. Which transferred to the Saturns launch, which other mistakes aside launched with games that the US market had no long-term appeal for.

 

Panther likely would have handled the US market better than Sega.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Genesis/PS1 comparison is both in terms of software style output and overall being a slow-and-steady burn until the "breakouts" arrived. I know when people think of PS1 they think of the cinematic games like MGS, RE2, FFVII and VIII etc., but the truth is the early library focused mainly on action-shooters, platformers, sports games, and arcade ports and arcade-style games. Quite a lot like the Genesis, actually (and SNES as well). Not only in those terms, but also particularly in the Western marketing; Sony basically continued what Sega already was establishing with Genesis/MegaDrive, which Nintendo themselves started taking inspiration from in marketing SNES and Gameboy in the West during the rest of the '90s.

 

PS1 did have some early big games yes, but I think a lot of those are in relation to under-performance from the Saturn in those territories, rather than the games themselves. Stuff like Ridge Racer and Toshinden, Twisted Metal, Loaded etc. did well but not in the sort of numbers later releases like Tekken 3 and FFVII accomplished. That can be chalked up purely to timing of release, though; the hardware install base was smaller and didn't start to steamroll until around mid '97 onward, primarily off the release of games like FFVII.

 

I don't see a 3DO lacking competition from fellow 32-bit systems actually dropping price all that much, honestly. In fact, it'd just be more reason to try maintaining a higher price, to milk the market while it's devoid of direct competition. There'd be no external factors to influence such, anyway. As for a redesigned Jaguar, yes I agree it'd benefit from being better designed and the such, but then there's nothing stopping the same from being the case with the Saturn, either.

 

A higher-priced 3DO would mean less sales than you think, though it'd still do better than it did as we know it, and that means less pressure on Sega to rush Saturn. Since that would (per your timeline) mean a later Jaguar release, you'd still see the Saturn we have now, but from a brand much weaker (in grand scheme of things) than Sony and therefore not as likely to spook them into rushing the design or putting out a lackluster SDK. Assuming Jaguar would still be w/o a CD, Sega could even leverage having CD onboard as a selling point against Jaguar, and a Jaguar w/ CD from the start would mean a system comparatively priced to Saturn, so no "Surprise Price Bomb" from Atari to create a May Fiasco for Saturn. Their launches would mostly play it straight.

 

And in that given instance, I don't see Saturn or N64 staying static; no Panther and ONLY Jaguar hurts Atari more than it does Sega or Nintendo, for reasons I've mentioned earlier on (particularly in that super-long post that I swear didn't intend to make so long but I just had a lot to talk about there so there 'ya go o.0)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course I can. Until 1993 Sonic was the only major seller. From 93 onward you got your MK ports, Nba jam etc. The Sega model didn't work, because the two year head start (3 year in Asia) wasn't producing results. Sonic, outside Japan, was the first game that did. The SNES caught up with the GEN way too quick to only blame it on the NES success. It just wasn't doing that great until after Sonic 2. You keep mentioning sports games but those didn't become bigger deals until later either, just modest. There's a reason most of the best selling Genesis games were after 92. There was no real momentum until after Sonic. The SNES million seller lists is across multiple genres and companies. On the Gen Midway alone was over a third.

 

Not to mention Sega was earning less and less money from the arcades as time went on, until the 96 release of the model 3 which then had Sega losing money until Naomi.

 

As for graphics, back then it was all about how clean, realistic, or pseudo 3D your games were and despite the SNES not besting the Gen in all areas it bested it in the areas the US market wanted. With colorful large sprites, and Mode 7. That's one of the reasons the SNES closed the gap so fast. No other console had that when the SNES launched and the Genesis couldn't do it as well as the SNES when it tried to immitate it. Add in Starfox and the SNES had the preception it was always three steps ahead. It may not have been accurate but the perception was there.

 

Meanwhile Sega was struggling to keep the Genesis relevant after mid 94 and couldn't find anything to keep it's lead. Which transferred to the Saturns launch, which other mistakes aside launched with games that the US market had no long-term appeal for.

 

Panther likely would have handled the US market better than Sega.

 

You're giving a lot of examples to try justifying your points but you're failing to elaborate on most of them, from what I'm seeing.

 

Your perception of "major seller" seems to be with modern sales in mind or those when the market was particularly big, but again you are failing to take into consideration the market size of the time or the fact that Sega's publishing strategy accounted for a different means of balancing budget with revenue and profit. You're also forgetting the arcade versions bringing in revenue to justify home ports (and seem to be overstating the degree of money that was lost with arcade games as a whole during that period; there was a reduction in the West yes, but it wasn't the sharp stone drop you're making it out to sound like, not until a bit after the 5th gen was underway, which obviously affects Model 3 but that is a discussion for another time).

 

What are these "areas" you are referring to? IMO you need to list actual technical areas, and I've already done some myself and could do more. Nevermind the Genesis could accomplish things like Mode 7 in software and in fact various games *did* implement it in software via the CPU to do so. You are also overestimating StarFox's impact; on a technical level the game was outdone by Virtua Fighter on SVP cart a little later.

 

Yeah, after mid '94 they were running into trouble w/ Genesis but we can agree that was caused by deteriorating corporate in-fighting pulling away focus from Genesis. And again, it feels like you are retroactively strong-arming with your Saturn quips there; 3D racers, platformers, 3D fighters etc. obviously were still big. It's precisely those types of games that helped PS1 so much early on; in Saturn's case it was more an issue w/ home ports of arcade titles being content-starved, but that's something I'd rather get into when talking about the misconception of arcade-style games suddenly "losing market appeal wholesale" in 5th and even 6th gen when many games of that very ilk have results that prove otherwise :/

 

As for the Panther quip....well, we'll have to agree to disagree there xD. If it's the same Atari as was managing the 5200 and 7800, I don't see them doing so well w/ Panther so as to just eclipse Genesis in the NA market, assuming things played out the same there. In my own timeline scenarios I see Panther doing well but that assumes Atari literally did everything correct; they didn't have the elbow room to afford even the slightest mistakes in the home console market, and in my own scenarios I still see them messing up here and there, just not to such a degree so as to completely fall well behind SNES and Genesis like the TG-16 did. And that of course is assuming a '91 Panther release; anything later and things would just play out worst, even with the extra power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I know that; I even acknowledged this in my above reply. But you also have to understand that Sega's publishing model meant they didn't need to rely on a handful of million-sellers to justify the publishing output, and also you have to take in account that with the arcade ports in particular, the home system sales were mainly a bonus on top of the revenue generated by the arcade release (heck, games usually didn't even GET home ports unless they did well in the arcades to begin with). In today's market we know the Nintendo model works out but the market at the time was, on a whole, different, and various models worked for what they did, in their own ways.

 

Also it's not really a surprise if SNES was catching up to Genesis in America; it WAS following up the NES, after all, which was still being commercially sold up to and even after SNES's release. It was expected to do very well and that's partly why many saw the Genesis as the underdog in that fight. It was expected to get a lot of press and media hype, that's what a follow-up to a best-selling system tends to receive. But you can't pin Genesis's sustained momentum (at least up until 32X) being squarely on the back of Sonic; Sonic was definitely an anchor for the platform but various other releases obviously benefited the system sustaining its momentum in NA, both sports and non-sports, even if they were mega-million sellers as I've already mentioned why that in itself wasn't necessarily an issue for Sega-published games (for 3rd parties, keep in mind most 3rd parties released their games on literally almost any platform that could run them. The combined sales across multiple systems would both justify releasing versions on them AND cover the costs for publishing on them while generating a profit, otherwise they wouldn't have kept doing such).

 

I'd also suggest you look back over Genesis hardware if you think that was a big issue; there are a few areas where SNES outdoes it but that is primarily in terms of color depth and (arguably) sound (I mention arguably because you can't directly compare sample-based playback to FM synthesis). In other areas such as CPU speed, resolution, RAM bandwidth etc. Genesis routinely outdid the SNES. The perception of SNES being a clear-out more powerful system is actually moreso due to the coprocessors a lot of SNES games tended to include on their carts; this was a pretty smart design decision actually, but did routinely mean SNES games costed more than the Genesis equivalents.

 

Also I still fail to see these multiple "screw ups" you are implying, which I'm assuming you mean in terms of hardware. The 32X was the only serious screw up, admittedly a big enough one to cause some serious issues for Saturn. The Sega CD is retroactively seen as a 'screw up" because of the infamous FMV games, but at the time on the market it was the best-selling add-on device for a home console, and best-selling CD peripheral add-on as well. If it was such a strong blemish on Genesis at the time, we would've seen a monumental shift in Genesis's market momentum well before late '94. And you can't hold things like the Activator against it too seriously considering things like the Power Glove were also notable blemishes but aren't used against their host platforms (NES in that case).

The SNES GPU (VDP) was way more advanced than the one in the Genesis. It could do way more effects in hardware. Just look at this comparison video of Street Racer. Its impossible for the Genesis to pull off what the SNES is doing.

 

https://youtu.be/KRzmWBs02AQ

 

Sound hardware wise there is obviously no comparison between the two. I could easily see someone preferring the Genesis audio but technically its no where near what the SNES can do stock.

 

https://youtu.be/U7W57S3Sa68

 

I was blown away hearing Aerosmith actually playing during gameplay back in the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SNES GPU (VDP) was way more advanced than the one in the Genesis. It could do way more effects in hardware. Just look at this comparison video of Street Racer. Its impossible for the Genesis to pull off what the SNES is doing.

 

 

Sound hardware wise there is obviously no comparison between the two. I could easily see someone preferring the Genesis audio but technically its no where near what the SNES can do stock.

 

 

I was blown away hearing Aerosmith actually playing during gameplay back in the day.

 

Same uploader; compares a (homebrew) F-Zero on Genesis vs. F-Zero on SNES. Looks pretty comparable to me; obviously the actual F-Zero looks better but it's got an actual budget behind it. Point being though, Mode 7 was capable on Genesis through software.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuGq6E4hcGI

 

Another homebrew example so obviously, not the best looker, but gives an indication of what could be with something more commercial:

 

https://youtu.be/yNjOh3ewTzk

 

For something more commercial, you can look to Piers Solar:

 

https://youtu.be/wG4V_kLL0NI

 

https://youtu.be/n5hdak0JhlA

 

Also in terms of sound you actually *can't* directly compare the two; sample-based synthesis is fundamentally different than FM, it does mainly come down to taste. We're aware of the bad-sounding Genesis games but those actually used the awful GEMS sound library; Japanese developers in particular were actually not generally lazy enough to fall back on that and programmed for the sound hardware directly. That's how you end up with beauts like the ThunderForce IV OST:

 

https://youtu.be/E4-laKZSboI

 

https://youtu.be/KOzgUtumOo0

 

...or the Shinobi 3 OST:

 

https://youtu.be/TRrn8yhaYmU

 

https://youtu.be/xwaHvh6qa68

 

....if developers didn't rely on GEMS and actually put the effort in, you got some of the best OSTs that generation (and gaming in general imo). Also while games like Super Metroid and FF6 have obviously superb sound and OSTs, those are the cream-of-the-crop. It doesn't take a lot of looking to find SNES games with clipping sound issues in the samples, fake echo effects and muffled sound that give some of the worst sounding GEMS disasters on Genesis a run for their money. Getting good sound out of these systems always generally came down to talent, sound engineering expertise and budget; generally speaking on the 2nd of those it was somewhat easier on SNES but not to the point of relegating Genesis to some 2nd class citizen imo (never mind things like the ATGames models actually have poor sound not indicative of actual Model 1 or Model 2 Genesis hardware), though yes, one can have preferences in taste of course.

 

It's just imo the Genesis/MegaDrive sound architecture has aged better than the SNES's; FM synthesis designs were pretty much at the fine-tuned point around then whereas sample-based systems were still in the early stages, and even mid-90s commercial systems show demonstrate that given their jump from SNES in that department. Comparatively FM synth-based solutions on the commercial level (as in, mass-market friendly prices) obviously refined over time but the ceiling was in much closer reach even by the early-mid '90s.

 

As far as SNES GPU (VDP) capabilities, well no, it wouldn't surprise me if it was more feature-rich, seeing as how it came out much later. It would obviously benefit from Moore's Law in that case. But Genesis's faster and better CPU, VRAM, RAM bandwidth etc. meant it could implement at least much of that type of stuff (or equivalents) in software. It'd be a more roundabout process and more time-consuming I'd imagine, but not impossible, and in fact there are quite a few commercial releases from the time that demonstrate such. It might be a fun idea to do a thread on that sometime, but not right now.

Edited by 00010000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh.....you clearly are a Sega fanboy so I wont even attempt to argue with you.

 

Too even compare the two Fzero's is laughable

 

You call me a Sega fanboy yet there's someone else who clearly is an Atari stan yet you don't call them out? You list examples and then use definitive clauses like "never" and "impossible", which obviously can be challenged because I did so in my reply. And in doing so, you're already frustrated by that alone to the point of labeling me as a fanboy?

 

I've been nothing but as fair as could be in this thread with the topic at hand. If you read my other posts actually more directly on the topic, why would a "Sega fanboy" give scenarios where Atari clearly comes out ahead, and consider as many different factors as possible while trying to keep things managed? The truth is I'm one of the most honest on these boards and apparently since I don't shit on Sega or the Genesis like others, that automatically makes me a "fanboy"? I find that very tasteless to accuse me of quite honestly, if you're aware of my posting history, which you seem not to be.

 

Anyways, this topic isn't really about Genesis vs. SNES anyhow, it's about a hypothetical Panther. And I discussed of that and even went into Jaguar as well. I won't go off into Genesis/SNES or Sega/Nintendo/whatever stuff if others don't and/or don't say things I feel I can easily disprove and rationalize while doing so. I'd do the same if it was say the SNES or PS1 or Jaguar (in fact I actually did so in regards to Jaguar, saying many underestimate its hardware potential compared to Saturn and PS1, but I guess I'm still a "Sega fanboy" right?); it's just that I've only seen in in particular regarding Genesis and Saturn here so that just happens to be where I'm chiming in.

 

Anyhow, I think that's likely all for tonight. Guess we'll see how the convo goes from here...hopefully not into console wars stuff or me being labeled a fanboy dismissively, but guess we'll see :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MrMaddog:That's basically been my impression of the Panther...

 

Atari's 16 bit console with better than ST versions of things like Shadow Of The Beast, Strider II (which itself would of appeared once the Lynx version had been released), an RPG which had started life on the Konix Multisystem,Jeff Minter having already tried his hand at his versions of Robotron and Defender on the ST now doing a personal take on Star Raiders and a few original titles from within Atari Corp.

 

It's not SNES or Genesis killing software.

 

 

The very fact developers best known for delivering conversions at a price the likes of Atari liked,rather than their actual quality (Tiertex and Imagitec Design) were onboard didn't bode well for the machines future.

 

Imagitec left a slew of unfinished games behind on the 7800,Falcon, ST, Lynx as it was, let alone the Commodore and Sega formats.

 

People talk about European support...

 

Try asking Andrew Hewson what he thought of Atari consoles or Mev from Vivid Image or better yet ask Gremlins Ian Stewart how Switchblade II fared on the Lynx.

 

That will answer in part why European developers wouldn't of been interested, then ask likes of Core Design how Atari compared to Sega in terms of a working partner and paying up on time and paying well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Genesis/PS1 comparison is both in terms of software style output and overall being a slow-and-steady burn until the "breakouts" arrived. I know when people think of PS1 they think of the cinematic games like MGS, RE2, FFVII and VIII etc., but the truth is the early library focused mainly on action-shooters, platformers, sports games, and arcade ports and arcade-style games. Quite a lot like the Genesis, actually (and SNES as well). Not only in those terms, but also particularly in the Western marketing; Sony basically continued what Sega already was establishing with Genesis/MegaDrive, which Nintendo themselves started taking inspiration from in marketing SNES and Gameboy in the West during the rest of the '90s.

 

PS1 did have some early big games yes, but I think a lot of those are in relation to under-performance from the Saturn in those territories, rather than the games themselves. Stuff like Ridge Racer and Toshinden, Twisted Metal, Loaded etc. did well but not in the sort of numbers later releases like Tekken 3 and FFVII accomplished. That can be chalked up purely to timing of release, though; the hardware install base was smaller and didn't start to steamroll until around mid '97 onward, primarily off the release of games like FFVII.

 

I don't see a 3DO lacking competition from fellow 32-bit systems actually dropping price all that much, honestly. In fact, it'd just be more reason to try maintaining a higher price, to milk the market while it's devoid of direct competition. There'd be no external factors to influence such, anyway. As for a redesigned Jaguar, yes I agree it'd benefit from being better designed and the such, but then there's nothing stopping the same from being the case with the Saturn, either.

 

A higher-priced 3DO would mean less sales than you think, though it'd still do better than it did as we know it, and that means less pressure on Sega to rush Saturn. Since that would (per your timeline) mean a later Jaguar release, you'd still see the Saturn we have now, but from a brand much weaker (in grand scheme of things) than Sony and therefore not as likely to spook them into rushing the design or putting out a lackluster SDK. Assuming Jaguar would still be w/o a CD, Sega could even leverage having CD onboard as a selling point against Jaguar, and a Jaguar w/ CD from the start would mean a system comparatively priced to Saturn, so no "Surprise Price Bomb" from Atari to create a May Fiasco for Saturn. Their launches would mostly play it straight.

 

And in that given instance, I don't see Saturn or N64 staying static; no Panther and ONLY Jaguar hurts Atari more than it does Sega or Nintendo, for reasons I've mentioned earlier on (particularly in that super-long post that I swear didn't intend to make so long but I just had a lot to talk about there so there 'ya go o.0)

Ok so heres the thing the PSX was not a slow burn, after the 95 US release the PSX got several hit games in 1996 only 1 year later and some of those games less than 1 year later. Same with Japan with it's 94 release, got his games in 95. Since both launches were late in their launch years you didn't have to wait long.

 

Crash Bandicoot, Area 51, MK trilogy/MK3, Parappa, Fade to Black (ugh), Gex, Jet Moto, Loaded, Myst, Need For Speed, Ridge Racer, Road Rash, Tomb Raider, Tekken 2, Rayman, Twisted Metal 1 & 2, etc all within ONE year.

 

In comparison, only Altered Beast did any real numbers for the Genesis within it's first year. The next beset selling game would be Ms.Pac-man followed by Sonic.

 

You seem to be trying to make an excuses for the Genesis here. The PSX had a variety of hit games most of which hit over 1 million or near that within their first year. Games like Toshinden aren't even on the list. Toshinden didn't even sell 500k in the US.

 

Twisted Metal 1 sold over 1 million units, Twisted Metal 2 almost sold 2. Loaded did over 400k, RidgeRacer was right next to 600k. These were games that sold systems, I don't know why you're trying to downplay them in importance. Using FF7 which came out two years later, and Tekken 3 which came out 8 (both of which sold less than Crash 1, Spyro 1, and Frogger) doesn't really help you here. The PSX had million sellers within its first year, multiple, across genres.

 

Your 3DO stance doesn't make much sense either. The 3DO dropped the price initially due to slow sales, and then continued to do by reaction later. So with no Jaguar they would have a lower early adopter count and would likely drop the price sooner. By 1994 they would hear of the PSX and the Ultra and still would have continued dropping the price, it's just they would have less to worry about in terms for competiting for software.

 

The PSX would still cause Sega to panic and rush in a second VDP. There not being a 1993 jaguar wouldn't change that and I am confused you would think so. in fact Sega might panic more because the 3DO's head start would actually likely be bigger without a Jagur because the 3DO would only start eyeing the PSX and the SAT in 194 instead of wondering if Atari was going to make a comeback.

 

An increased spec jaguar would still be cheaper in 1995 than a $299 PSX so why you think Atari would be equal in price with or without a CD drive doesn't make much sense. PSX would still walk off the stage saying $299 and the new jaguar is cheaper than the Saturn AS WELL? None of that is good for Sega.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You're giving a lot of examples to try justifying your points but you're failing to elaborate on most of them, from what I'm seeing.

 

Your perception of "major seller" seems to be with modern sales in mind or those when the market was particularly big, but again you are failing to take into consideration the market size of the time or the fact that Sega's publishing strategy accounted for a different means of balancing budget with revenue and profit. You're also forgetting the arcade versions bringing in revenue to justify home ports (and seem to be overstating the degree of money that was lost with arcade games as a whole during that period; there was a reduction in the West yes, but it wasn't the sharp stone drop you're making it out to sound like, not until a bit after the 5th gen was underway, which obviously affects Model 3 but that is a discussion for another time).

 

What are these "areas" you are referring to? IMO you need to list actual technical areas, and I've already done some myself and could do more. Nevermind the Genesis could accomplish things like Mode 7 in software and in fact various games *did* implement it in software via the CPU to do so. You are also overestimating StarFox's impact; on a technical level the game was outdone by Virtua Fighter on SVP cart a little later.

 

Yeah, after mid '94 they were running into trouble w/ Genesis but we can agree that was caused by deteriorating corporate in-fighting pulling away focus from Genesis. And again, it feels like you are retroactively strong-arming with your Saturn quips there; 3D racers, platformers, 3D fighters etc. obviously were still big. It's precisely those types of games that helped PS1 so much early on; in Saturn's case it was more an issue w/ home ports of arcade titles being content-starved, but that's something I'd rather get into when talking about the misconception of arcade-style games suddenly "losing market appeal wholesale" in 5th and even 6th gen when many games of that very ilk have results that prove otherwise :/

 

As for the Panther quip....well, we'll have to agree to disagree there xD. If it's the same Atari as was managing the 5200 and 7800, I don't see them doing so well w/ Panther so as to just eclipse Genesis in the NA market, assuming things played out the same there. In my own timeline scenarios I see Panther doing well but that assumes Atari literally did everything correct; they didn't have the elbow room to afford even the slightest mistakes in the home console market, and in my own scenarios I still see them messing up here and there, just not to such a degree so as to completely fall well behind SNES and Genesis like the TG-16 did. And that of course is assuming a '91 Panther release; anything later and things would just play out worst, even with the extra power.

'

No, Major seller means Major seller. Which the genesis did not have outside of Altered Beast and Ms.Pac-man before Sonic. other systems had games selling near 1 million or hitting past 1 million within the first years, the Genesis had very few even decently big sellers for a long period of time. most of the bigger sellers came after 92.

 

But that's irrelevant, Segas strategy, did not work. So it doesn't matter how you try to keep using it as an excuse for them, it didn't work, they had hot arcade games that looked good and then never kept following through with those games. Outside of Altered Beast not one Sega arcade game sold 1 million on the genesis. Their lack of long-term strategy prevented them from capitalizing on their head start and only started attempting to remedy the problem post Sonic the Hedgehog and still couldn't manage to do it competently.

 

I'm also not overstating anything, you and many other Sega guys continue to waive the fact Nintendo had the perception. it doesn't matter of Virtual Racing had a better chip, Star Fox had the PERCEPTION of being this big behemoth of a game, and the SNES had the perception of being two steps ahead. Sega never put out software, or marketed them competently enough when they did, to get rid of that perception. The fact the SNES was actually more powerful just made that perception stay. It's why VR sdid nothing close to SNES Star Fox, because Sega hadn't done anything to improve the Genesis perception.

 

Also it wasn't just corporate in fighting, you don't make the same mistakes four years in a row ONLY with corporate in fighting. They never had a clear message in the US, they had no idea how to handled the momentum Sonic gave them, their game contract choices and marketing decisions were poor, and all this applies to Japan as well. Genesis was never handled well and that was the main issue with the system. Sonic and MK basically saved it from crashing earlier.

 

Also I have already listed games within the PSX's first year that cover many genres in the above post. But my thing is it's more confusing you're trying to use the PSX situation to help the Genesis, and downplay Saturns mistakes, which doesn't make any sense.

 

Also firstly, the 5200 and 7800 where made by two different Ataris. Secondly, it wouldn't take much for Atari to beat the Genesis for second place. bundled in a good show off game, market titles that have hype from third-parties, and automatically the Panthers is in second place. The incompetence of Sega can't be underestimated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so heres the thing the PSX was not a slow burn, after the 95 US release the PSX got several hit games in 1996 only 1 year later and some of those games less than 1 year later. Same with Japan with it's 94 release, got his games in 95. Since both launches were late in their launch years you didn't have to wait long.

 

Crash Bandicoot, Area 51, MK trilogy/MK3, Parappa, Fade to Black (ugh), Gex, Jet Moto, Loaded, Myst, Need For Speed, Ridge Racer, Road Rash, Tomb Raider, Tekken 2, Rayman, Twisted Metal 1 & 2, etc all within ONE year.

 

In comparison, only Altered Beast did any real numbers for the Genesis within it's first year. The next beset selling game would be Ms.Pac-man followed by Sonic.

 

You seem to be trying to make an excuses for the Genesis here. The PSX had a variety of hit games most of which hit over 1 million or near that within their first year. Games like Toshinden aren't even on the list. Toshinden didn't even sell 500k in the US.

 

Twisted Metal 1 sold over 1 million units, Twisted Metal 2 almost sold 2. Loaded did over 400k, RidgeRacer was right next to 600k. These were games that sold systems, I don't know why you're trying to downplay them in importance. Using FF7 which came out two years later, and Tekken 3 which came out 8 (both of which sold less than Crash 1, Spyro 1, and Frogger) doesn't really help you here. The PSX had million sellers within its first year, multiple, across genres.

 

Your 3DO stance doesn't make much sense either. The 3DO dropped the price initially due to slow sales, and then continued to do by reaction later. So with no Jaguar they would have a lower early adopter count and would likely drop the price sooner. By 1994 they would hear of the PSX and the Ultra and still would have continued dropping the price, it's just they would have less to worry about in terms for competiting for software.

 

The PSX would still cause Sega to panic and rush in a second VDP. There not being a 1993 jaguar wouldn't change that and I am confused you would think so. in fact Sega might panic more because the 3DO's head start would actually likely be bigger without a Jagur because the 3DO would only start eyeing the PSX and the SAT in 194 instead of wondering if Atari was going to make a comeback.

 

An increased spec jaguar would still be cheaper in 1995 than a $299 PSX so why you think Atari would be equal in price with or without a CD drive doesn't make much sense. PSX would still walk off the stage saying $299 and the new jaguar is cheaper than the Saturn AS WELL? None of that is good for Sega.

 

Look, I know what your angle is in this discussion and it's probably what's preventing you from being more well-reasoned here, so likely consider this the last response from me on this unless you happen to say something completely out of left field that makes zero sense and warrants a rebuttal. Anyway...

 

Your PS numbers are actually really, REALLY skewed, because you're using LTD numbers, NOT numbers from time of release or months following. Of course you can look up some NPD or whatever-site-you're-using-to-get-numbers and see 2 million and use that in your defense, but that's 2 million over the course of the PS1's commercial retail presence. So for something like Twisted Metal 2, that's equivalent to going from 1996 to 2002 (I believe that's the year PS One was officially discontinued and the last commercial releases were officially tracked, just going on a hunch there). It'd be like me saying Tekken 3 sold 10 million units...on its launch day....in 1998. Which obviously would not have happened. Those are numbers including both the original and Greatest Hits re-release (those were $20 btw), and track it years following the initial release phase.

 

This is what I meant earlier when I said your points lack context; you're using these various games in one system's case to paint a perception they did gangbusters right at release, within "launch period phase" (say 3 months), or well before the games I specifically mentioned as being big pushes for the system starting late '96 with Resident Evil, Tomb Raider etc and accelerating its sales (btw, you threw in Parappa as one of your examples...that falls in line with the timing of games I already mentioned as being when PS1 steam started to really pick up), yet for the other platform you're both going off of memory perception and (likely) limiting your range to very specific time periods to conveniently cut them off at a very specific point (Sonic in this case). If that's not subconscious bias at work, I don't know what is. You're also failing to factor in things like the aforementioned Greatest Hits re-releases, which significantly cut the price on games (games had to have at least 400,000 in sales to qualify for it I believe, but the time range for that 400K was pretty damn generous, more than I initially thought tbh) and would obviously boost sales. There was no Greatest Hits equivalent on Genesis or SNES. But you aren't taking any of this into consideration.

 

I also said early PS1 and early Genesis situation was "comparable", never did I say they were "exact". So in at least some of these instances you are basically arguing semantics. And again, you keep using "million seller" as your only metric for constituting a "successful" game; you still haven't taken into consideration that not every game needed to sell a million to be considered "successful" by their publisher back then, heck that isn't even the case today unless you're a company like Square Enix that considers 6.5 million a "failure" because you can't manage your own budgets, but I digress. You STILL haven't factored how with many arcade ports, home sale numbers were a bonus on top of the revenue generated in arcades, and a lot of those ports were to help diversify system library offerings and bring in modest income rather than being some do-or-die "it's gotta go mega-big!" situation in regards sales. That's partly because, unlike something like say FF6 or Chrono Trigger, the average arcade game didn't need a massive team of people working on it, so they had smaller budgets. Smaller budgets meant baseline requirements of sales being lower to justify porting and publishing costs on other platforms.

 

My 3DO stance actually makes complete sense; again, you're lacking context. 3DO sales weren't slow mainly on the price; they were slow on the price AND people knowing alternatives were right around the corner or on the way, in this case the Jaguar. It's the COMBINATION that led to those initial slow sales. With no Jaguar present, 3DO would've had less pressure to lower its price, and hardcore early adopters would've justified spending more to get one. In case sales were still slower-than-expected, they would've lowered the price but NOT to the degree they did in our timeline, because (again) less active competitive pressure. That's basic business strategy. And your example in trying to imply a 3DO by itself would "scare" (these are companies, not people :/) Sega even more doesn't add up; the price of the 3DO alone would have still meant more modest early sales, even if there was nothing else on the horizon.

 

You're completely wrong about Jaguar w/ a CD included being cheaper than PS1. The main reason PS1 was able to hit that price-point was because Sony owned their own assembly processes and manufactured CD drives themselves. They ALSO owned part of the CD format and thus didn't need to pay royalty fees. Atari would have benefited from none of that, and given their relative financial position, would not have likely taken the losses on lost revenue just to push for a cheaper launch price; at such a point they'd be losing too much money. A re-speced Jaguar....wait, didn't I already say the Jaguar wouldn't likely need a big respec? Are you under the impression the Jaguar itself was simply too weak, and it wasn't the hardware bugs and poor SDK being issues? Because again, I seem to be one of the few thinking the Jaguar wouldn't of needed a big redesign to compete w/ PS1 and Saturn if they just got the hardware bugs worked out and made a much better SDK to make Tom + Jerry use more intuitive. Ironic, that. Never mind the fact that a re-speced Jaguar would still most likely be a cartridge-based Jaguar; going up against two CD-based systems, would be very bad for them giving people the impression it was "old technology". Not even the N64 was able to shake off that stigma in the long-term once it launched.

 

Sega adding in the 2nd VDP likely would've happened (assuming a timeline where PS1 actually launches), but the difference here is a later Jaguar would have a very big problem: lack of compelling content. Even assuming both it and PS1 would be cheaper than Saturn, you'd still be looking at a Saturn that's technically more powerful than the Jaguar and a PS1 that's certainly so, though the Jaguar would still be technically competitive and the differences in the systems likely not manifesting strongly until some 2+ years after the gen was underway. A $299 PS1 would still cause some issues for Saturn but in this timeline you yourself have created, 32X wouldn't be a factor because modest 3DO sales + no '93 Jaguar means much less incentive for a 32X, freeing Saturn up from that mess. So that's a Saturn in much better public standing with the Western market, likely meaning more focus to stick with the original release date plan.

 

Atari in that scenario would lack active market share thanks to no Panther and lack active development experience to pull from in the 16-bit gen to help in the 32-bit gen as a result. They wouldn't have Sony's pockets, or Sega's 1st-party studios, and would likely lack the pull to get most any of the big name devs to drive exclusive content to Jaguar for launch. So you'd be looking at a stable of stuff like Cybermorphs, Tempest 2000 and AVP for Jaguar's launch window, Ridge Racer, Tekken etc. for PS1s, and (non-buggy) Daytona, Virtua Fighter, Panzer Dragoon etc. for Saturn's. All during Fall '95, likely September. In that situation, I don't see Jaguar's lineup being a strong draw compared to Saturn's or PS1's, and that's despite Tempest and AVP being good games. The question is would they have been good ENOUGH, because Atari would be in a situation in this timeline where they likely wouldn't have the pull to get much more great stuff as exclusive content in that critical launch window, whereas PS1'd get Toshinden, Destruction Derby etc. and Saturn would get Virtua Fighter 2, Sega Rally, Clockwork Knight etc. Looking at it this way, it's honestly the Jaguar that seems to lose out the most here.

 

That's why I've been insisting the whole time Panther DID need to be a thing, and preferably in 1990 and not 1991. Without it any lane of success for a non- '93 Jaguar is both pretty impossible and dismal imho.

 

EDIT: Seeing your 2nd reply above confirms everything I suspected. It's impossible to have an honest discussion on a topic like this with someone as agenda-driven as yourself, so don't consider replying unless you actually want to take off the hater glasses.

 

Clear biases on your part here, yet I'm the one who gets labeled in this thread? What ridiculous absurdities xD

Edited by 00010000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Look, I know what your angle is in this discussion and it's probably what's preventing you from being more well-reasoned here, so likely consider this the last response from me on this unless you happen to say something completely out of left field that makes zero sense and warrants a rebuttal. Anyway...

 

Your PS numbers are actually really, REALLY skewed, because you're using LTD numbers, NOT numbers from time of release or months following. Of course you can look up some NPD or whatever-site-you're-using-to-get-numbers and see 2 million and use that in your defense, but that's 2 million over the course of the PS1's commercial retail presence. So for something like Twisted Metal 2, that's equivalent to going from 1996 to 2002 (I believe that's the year PS One was officially discontinued and the last commercial releases were officially tracked, just going on a hunch there). It'd be like me saying Tekken 3 sold 10 million units...on its launch day....in 1998. Which obviously would not have happened. Those are numbers including both the original and Greatest Hits re-release (those were $20 btw), and track it years following the initial release phase.

 

This is what I meant earlier when I said your points lack context; you're using these various games in one system's case to paint a perception they did gangbusters right at release, within "launch period phase" (say 3 months), or well before the games I specifically mentioned as being big pushes for the system starting late '96 with Resident Evil, Tomb Raider etc and accelerating its sales (btw, you threw in Parappa as one of your examples...that falls in line with the timing of games I already mentioned as being when PS1 steam started to really pick up), yet for the other platform you're both going off of memory perception and (likely) limiting your range to very specific time periods to conveniently cut them off at a very specific point (Sonic in this case). If that's not subconscious bias at work, I don't know what is. You're also failing to factor in things like the aforementioned Greatest Hits re-releases, which significantly cut the price on games (games had to have at least 400,000 in sales to qualify for it I believe, but the time range for that 400K was pretty damn generous, more than I initially thought tbh) and would obviously boost sales. There was no Greatest Hits equivalent on Genesis or SNES. But you aren't taking any of this into consideration.

 

I also said early PS1 and early Genesis situation was "comparable", never did I say they were "exact". So in at least some of these instances you are basically arguing semantics. And again, you keep using "million seller" as your only metric for constituting a "successful" game; you still haven't taken into consideration that not every game needed to sell a million to be considered "successful" by their publisher back then, heck that isn't even the case today unless you're a company like Square Enix that considers 6.5 million a "failure" because you can't manage your own budgets, but I digress. You STILL haven't factored how with many arcade ports, home sale numbers were a bonus on top of the revenue generated in arcades, and a lot of those ports were to help diversify system library offerings and bring in modest income rather than being some do-or-die "it's gotta go mega-big!" situation in regards sales. That's partly because, unlike something like say FF6 or Chrono Trigger, the average arcade game didn't need a massive team of people working on it, so they had smaller budgets. Smaller budgets meant baseline requirements of sales being lower to justify porting and publishing costs on other platforms.

 

My 3DO stance actually makes complete sense; again, you're lacking context. 3DO sales weren't slow mainly on the price; they were slow on the price AND people knowing alternatives were right around the corner or on the way, in this case the Jaguar. It's the COMBINATION that led to those initial slow sales. With no Jaguar present, 3DO would've had less pressure to lower its price, and hardcore early adopters would've justified spending more to get one. In case sales were still slower-than-expected, they would've lowered the price but NOT to the degree they did in our timeline, because (again) less active competitive pressure. That's basic business strategy. And your example in trying to imply a 3DO by itself would "scare" (these are companies, not people :/) Sega even more doesn't add up; the price of the 3DO alone would have still meant more modest early sales, even if there was nothing else on the horizon.

 

You're completely wrong about Jaguar w/ a CD included being cheaper than PS1. The main reason PS1 was able to hit that price-point was because Sony owned their own assembly processes and manufactured CD drives themselves. They ALSO owned part of the CD format and thus didn't need to pay royalty fees. Atari would have benefited from none of that, and given their relative financial position, would not have likely taken the losses on lost revenue just to push for a cheaper launch price; at such a point they'd be losing too much money. A re-speced Jaguar....wait, didn't I already say the Jaguar wouldn't likely need a big respec? Are you under the impression the Jaguar itself was simply too weak, and it wasn't the hardware bugs and poor SDK being issues? Because again, I seem to be one of the few thinking the Jaguar wouldn't of needed a big redesign to compete w/ PS1 and Saturn if they just got the hardware bugs worked out and made a much better SDK to make Tom + Jerry use more intuitive. Ironic, that. Never mind the fact that a re-speced Jaguar would still most likely be a cartridge-based Jaguar; going up against two CD-based systems, would be very bad for them giving people the impression it was "old technology". Not even the N64 was able to shake off that stigma in the long-term once it launched.

 

Sega adding in the 2nd VDP likely would've happened (assuming a timeline where PS1 actually launches), but the difference here is a later Jaguar would have a very big problem: lack of compelling content. Even assuming both it and PS1 would be cheaper than Saturn, you'd still be looking at a Saturn that's technically more powerful than the Jaguar and a PS1 that's certainly so, though the Jaguar would still be technically competitive and the differences in the systems likely not manifesting strongly until some 2+ years after the gen was underway. A $299 PS1 would still cause some issues for Saturn but in this timeline you yourself have created, 32X wouldn't be a factor because modest 3DO sales + no '93 Jaguar means much less incentive for a 32X, freeing Saturn up from that mess. So that's a Saturn in much better public standing with the Western market, likely meaning more focus to stick with the original release date plan.

 

Atari in that scenario would lack active market share thanks to no Panther and lack active development experience to pull from in the 16-bit gen to help in the 32-bit gen as a result. They wouldn't have Sony's pockets, or Sega's 1st-party studios, and would likely lack the pull to get most any of the big name devs to drive exclusive content to Jaguar for launch. So you'd be looking at a stable of stuff like Cybermorphs, Tempest 2000 and AVP for Jaguar's launch window, Ridge Racer, Tekken etc. for PS1s, and (non-buggy) Daytona, Virtua Fighter, Panzer Dragoon etc. for Saturn's. All during Fall '95, likely September. In that situation, I don't see Jaguar's lineup being a strong draw compared to Saturn's or PS1's, and that's despite Tempest and AVP being good games. The question is would they have been good ENOUGH, because Atari would be in a situation in this timeline where they likely wouldn't have the pull to get much more great stuff as exclusive content in that critical launch window, whereas PS1'd get Toshinden, Destruction Derby etc. and Saturn would get Virtua Fighter 2, Sega Rally, Clockwork Knight etc. Looking at it this way, it's honestly the Jaguar that seems to lose out the most here.

 

That's why I've been insisting the whole time Panther DID need to be a thing, and preferably in 1990 and not 1991. Without it any lane of success for a non- '93 Jaguar is both pretty impossible and dismal imho.

 

EDIT: Seeing your 2nd reply above confirms everything I suspected. It's impossible to have an honest discussion on a topic like this with someone as agenda-driven as yourself, so don't consider replying unless you actually want to take off the hater glasses.

 

Clear biases on your part here, yet I'm the one who gets labeled in this thread? What ridiculous absurdities xD

They aren't skewed. The middle selling games I posted had reached 90% or more of their LTD within 1.5 years or before. The bigger ones like Rayman and Crash sold 1-2 million or more within their first years and then went on to sell 4+ million later. That's still a bunch of million sellers or near million sellers within 1 year of the PSX's life. Rayman was already over 2 million sold after 96 for example.

 

And what am I skewing against? the Saturn? The Genesis? None of those consoles had multiple hit games like the PSX in such a short time frame. There's a reason starting from 1996 PSX exploded. You think it was a ghost that did it? N64 was the one that had games that took awhile to reach high numbers, but many more of those still hit them unlike the Saturn or the Genesis. Twisted Metal sold most of it's LTD when TM 2 came out and T<2 itself reached 1 million in some months.

 

Also you didn't mention 96 you named games like Tekken 3 which was a 1998 game and FF7 which was a 1997 game. PSX had hit games less than 1 year from launch. Same in japan where it got hit games by 95. I don't understand why you're downplaying the PSX software sales here at all.The SNES wasn't as good as the PSX, but you got plenty of games doing over 500k before SF2 which after that, you got many more 1 million games shortly after.

 

The Genesis had Altered beast and Ms. Pac-man before Sonic. Sonic in the US was two years after launch for it to get one huge hitter and only having 2 big hitters before it. There's no spin here, it was a very slow burn, and the Genesis hit games sales would not substantially improve until after 1992 and most of the Genesis best selling games were released post 1992. MK, Aladdin, etc.

 

I also didn't only use million seller. I even mentioned Ridge Racers 500k+ in the US, there are not similarities between the Genesis and the PSX other than you trying your best to waive that it took the Genesis around 4 years to start getting a flow of big hit software.

 

Also your low budget excuses don't mean anything for Genesis sales. We are talking about Console sales not Sega being ok if a game sold 50 copies because they MAY have made money on it. You can't talk about console sales than switch the subject. Those games were not moving the hardware which is why the SNES was quickly able to catch up. Not until Sonic and MK later on did the games start moving significant hardware. None of the other details matter if the goal is to be the #1 console manufacturer. In order to do this you have to sell consoles.

 

Your 3DO stance doesn't make sense, it was price that was the main issue with the 3DO, the price was seen as doom until the Jaguar basically handed 3DO a break. Without a Jaguar there would be nothing there to stop the 3Do continuing to get all the software companies on board and have more time to prepare than react. It still wouldn't be 1st place but it would sell more and the M2 likely would have finished. The 3DO would be $300 by the time the PSX came out.

 

Also yes a Jaguar with a CD drive would have been cheaper in 1995. In 1993 the jaguar launched at $250 and was less than $150 by Christmas 1995. The CD Drive for the Jaguar was $150 and part of it being $150 was due to how it was designed and it being an add-on. But even if you were to assume the CD drive would still be $150 Jaguar would still be under $300 in 1995.

 

It's also logical to come to the conclusion that if the Jaguar was released in 95 instead of 1993 it would have a bump in specs just because of cheaper technology. I don't see why that's something you write off.

 

32X wasn't the only reason the Saturn failed, so you pretending no 32X gives Saturn a better standing in the US doesn't make any sense. The Saturn still had marketing issues, it still had no message, it still didn't have the games people were interested in, it still would have had the SOJ/SOA in fighting, it still would have been given bad image after Sony's $299, and it still would have pissed off retailers.

 

Sega had been self-destructing since 1994, even without a 32X that wouldn't change. Atari literally would only have to wait and Sega would collapse on itself. Any modest competition to the Saturn by Atari along with the N64 and PSX would have just made Segas situation worse. Atari in 5th gen could have even gone to last place and they still would have taken Segas spot because they still would abandon the Saturn and the DC would still fail.

 

But in reality it's more probable that a complete jaguar with decent games and marketing would sell more than the 2 million or so the Saturn did in NA just by being consistent.

 

This has less to do with being Anti-Sega and more to do with you not acknowledging Sega was their own enemy for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming this thread is still about the Panther. ..

 

Software support was so poor that despite what The One Magazine reported and was copied and pasted as fact, Atari hadn't even secured a version of Pitfighter which already existed on the ST and Lynx and was thankfully abandoned on the 7800.

 

You can also try asking Domark's head of software development for his thoughts on supporting the Panther and get another major UK publishers thoughts.

 

If it wasn't going to get traction with UK publishers..The US and Japanese support was never going to simply follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming this thread is still about the Panther. ..

 

Software support was so poor that despite what The One Magazine reported and was copied and pasted as fact, Atari hadn't even secured a version of Pitfighter which already existed on the ST and Lynx and was thankfully abandoned on the 7800.

 

You can also try asking Domark's head of software development for his thoughts on supporting the Panther and get another major UK publishers thoughts.

 

If it wasn't going to get traction with UK publishers..The US and Japanese support was never going to simply follow.

US publishers aren't really comparable to the UK/JP but I see where you're coming from.

 

Though I'm curious about your Pit Fighter comment. You think it would have been bad if the 7800 got Pit Fighter? I think it may have helped the 7800 given Pit Fighter was popular at the time. Sure in retrospect it would be a crap game but for the time it may have helped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think trying to do Pitfighter, a terrible game which relied heavily on it's visuals, on any 8 bit console was a bad idea.

 

The Sega MS version is plain awful.

 

I thinking giving Pitfighter to Imagitec Design to do a 7800 version takes a very bad idea and turns it into a disaster in the making.

 

UK publishers had US arms..Ocean USA were ones supposedly planning to do Waterworld on Jaguar, though rumours suggest coding duties would of been given to Tiertex.

 

Then you have likes of Virgin etc.

 

My point is..if Atari couldn't convince the UK arms to back Panther after they'd once been such strong supporters of the ST line, they were never going to convince the US arms...

 

But then Atari's own views on publisher support were pretty out there...

 

Bob Brodie said that Atari is not really interested in getting Acclaim as

a Jaguar developer. "Acclaim just takes Midway's games and put them on less-

powerful platforms...

 

Atari gets Mortal Kombat III for the Jaguar and gives the conversion to Probe who intend to port the Playstation version to the Jaguar. ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I put this in the dedicated Panther thread, but just had the same reply from yet another ex-Imagitec design source (another artist this time) when asked if they had even witnessed any Panther development whilst at the company:

 

"This has been the line from the various people likes of myself, Unseen64 and GTW have had whenever we asked ex-imagitec design artists and coders about possible Panther development at the company:

 

" I can't remember an Atari Panther being at Imagitec TBH "

 

So at this stage, i cannot even add Imagitec Design to list of known Panther developers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I put this in the dedicated Panther thread, but just had the same reply from yet another ex-Imagitec design source (another artist this time) when asked if they had even witnessed any Panther development whilst at the company:

 

"This has been the line from the various people likes of myself, Unseen64 and GTW have had whenever we asked ex-imagitec design artists and coders about possible Panther development at the company:

 

" I can't remember an Atari Panther being at Imagitec TBH "

 

So at this stage, i cannot even add Imagitec Design to list of known Panther developers.

Between this and the guy you said had made up memories about the Panther (Michael?) Imagitec probably never even saw a dev kit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are basically at the stage where despite internal documents between Atari and Imagitec showing previously unknown 7800 development: TOKI..

 

Various people being interviewed and contacted over the years, not 1 coder,artist,musician or producer has ever mentioned Panther work.

 

And these are people who worked on Humans/Dino Dudes, Raiden and Daemonsgate.

 

We know Daemonsgate was born from an aborted attempt to do an RPG based on Nightbreed, C64 code used on the Lynx version, so it's not as if information hasn't been forth coming.

 

It's just that asking Martin Hooley either seems to get you a different answer to the same question he was asked years before or he gives a confused account.

 

It's a real shame RetroGamer magazine are using him as a source of information quite so often.

 

If there is anyone from Imagitec who can show they did any Panther work, we'd love to hear from you.

Edited by Lost Dragon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh it was Martin. Yeah, a lot of publications use him as a key informant. IGN did to.

He's probably a lot easier to reach than individual coders and artists from Imagitec for a start and being the company owner, the first port of call.

 

Magazines aren't looking for high degrees of accuracy, just soundbites to go with an article.

 

It's what i call tick box reporting and sadly it's on the rise.

 

Mark Cale of System 3 told the poor Retro Gamer writer doing a feature on Myth, the ST version had been finished and released.

 

The writer had only played the ZX Spectrum version so had no idea on the other versions status and thus wasn't going to question what the boss of System 3 had told him.

 

I doubt IGN or RG treated Martin any differently ..

 

Martin said...so in it went.

 

I'm not singling out Martin here

 

The crap the likes of Jez San, Peter Molyneux, Jane Whittaker etc have been allowed to state as fact in interviews is just as bad.

 

I was recently invited back to an old haunt of mine, to assist in community interviews.

 

I asked if they'd allow me to confront industry folks with some of the times they had gone back on previous versions of events they had stated as fact...

 

I was politely told no..such questioning wouldn't be suitable as they didn't want to frighten the industry figures away.

 

Mainstream press no doubt has similar fears..hence they allow revised history and speculation to go in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...