Support NeoGAF

[RetroAV]

I'm sure it was Japan that Nintendo had 90% Marketshare and hey SEGA Japan was able to crush that with the Saturn, So you can shove Tom's so-called miracle up his ass.
And I'm sorry to break this you.. SEGA Europe was enjoying massive success with the Master System long before bulling shitting Tom came online to SOA.

Sales exploded not thanks to TOM, but Sonic and most people know it.

Get the facts straight — Sega's success in Europe (and earlier with the Master System) came mostly because Nintendo barely showed up there. That's not strategy; that's opportunity. The real uphill battle was in the U.S., where Tom Kalinske and Sega of America took Nintendo's 90% market share and cut it in half — something Sega Japan or Europe never came close to doing.

And as for "Sega Japan crushing Nintendo with the Saturn," come on — that only happened in Japan. Globally, the Saturn got destroyed by PlayStation and N64. That's not "crushing," that's surviving one round before being KO'd.

Also, let's not forget — Sonic was Kalinske's move. He's the one who decided to pack Sonic with the Genesis against Sega of Japan's wishes. Without that decision, Sonic never would've become the system-seller that put Sega on the map. So if you're giving Sonic credit, you're giving Kalinske credit whether you like it or not.

Don't go down that road, this theory that Nintendo games are good just because fans say they are good is false.
If 10 million people said VF2 was a good game, that wouldn't make it good. People's minds crave coherence; the design problems of these games are real and undeniable, which is why they don't sell well.

Sales don't equal quality — they equal market reach. Sega's games didn't underperform because of "design flaws," but because they targeted a different kind of player. Nintendo has a multi-generational fanbase that treats the brand like family tradition, which guarantees a baseline of massive sales no matter what. Sega's best work focused on speed, style, and challenge over mass appeal — and that's not bad design, that's creative identity. The real difference isn't quality, it's audience and influence.

Sega of America too was very successful with the same strategy during the Mega Drive/Genesis days, what I'm saying is that a main focus on sport simulations by the first-party is a very shortsighted strategy for the long survival, especially if we are talking about a first-party driven console manufacturer.
As Sony did, and as EA aimed over a long stretch of time, a resourceful new/old competitor could steal away/keep a big marketshare with relatively ease because a lot for sport simulation revolves around licenses, thus having money could bring you far almost overnight.
When the real battle of the mid '90s was a challenge between the different core ideals of the incumbent smaller first-party driven console manufacturers with a gaming core, in which first party hardware and software are interwined, and resorceful big corporations adopting a third-party driven model based around a pure concept of platform it's easy to identify SoA main focus on sport simulations/licenses a liability long (really medium) term.

Every manager in the industry knew that since the beginning (or almost) of the gaming industry the sport genre was a main driver for the North America market (and Europe) and thus you can find, for instance, Nintendo investing in sport games with also licensing (Ken Griffey, Kobe Bryant) however for Nintendo these sport simulations were never positioned as the main draw and played a second fiddle role behind first-party tentpole releases that were almost always from in-house owned IPs.

As with most practices employed y Sega of America it was "more smoke than meat".

That's easy to say in hindsight, but Sega of America was operating in a market Nintendo had locked down for nearly a decade. They didn't have the luxury of relying on existing IP the way Nintendo did, so they had to lean into sports realism, edgy marketing, and cultural timing — and it worked. Calling it "smoke" ignores the fact that they actually pulled off the impossible: breaking Nintendo's near-monopoly. If it was really that simple, everyone else would've done it too — but they didn't.

Anyways, Sega's biggest mistake with the Saturn was Sega of Japan shunning Tom Kalinske, the guy who made the Genesis a hit.

Kalinske understood the Western market. He made Sega cool, beat Nintendo in the U.S., and wanted a clean 3D-focused console with a smart, coordinated launch. Sega of Japan ignored him, redesigned the system in secret, and pulled the infamous "surprise early launch" stunt that pissed off retailers and devs alike.

The result? A $399 console that was hard to develop for, poorly marketed, and dead on arrival once Sony dropped the PlayStation at $299.

If Sega had backed Kalinske — kept the proper launch timing, simplified the hardware, and built a real Western strategy — the Saturn might not have "won," but it damn sure wouldn't have crashed the way it did.

Once they stopped listening to the guy who saved them, Sega stopped winning.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

Sales don't equal quality — they equal market reach. Sega's games didn't underperform because of "design flaws," but because they targeted a different kind of player.

When it comes to games, sales are the expression of quality. I refuse to even debate this, imagine having to read that the best-selling games for each console are bad games and that Sega Saturn games are good.
There are exceptions like Porsche Challenge, which sold few copies, perhaps because of the huge number of racing games on the PS1, perhaps because of Gran Turismo, which came out soon after. but it's a rule, if the game sells few units, there are conceptual flaws or flaws in the execution of the idea (if the idea is good).

 

[NeverYouMind]

When it comes to games, sales are the expression of quality. I refuse to even debate this, imagine having to read that the best-selling games for each console are bad games and that Sega Saturn games are good.
There are exceptions like Porsche Challenge, which sold few copies, perhaps because of the huge number of racing games on the PS1, perhaps because of Gran Turismo, which came out soon after. but it's a rule, if the game sells few units, there are conceptual flaws or flaws in the execution of the idea (if the idea is good).

No. Sales are a reflection of popularity. Dead Space 1/2 are the best space horror games ever made with high production quality and they sold like crap. Even the fantastic recent remake sold poorly. Resident Evil 7 is objectively garbage and it sold gangbusters.

 

[Team Andromeda]

Get the facts straight — Sega's success in Europe (and earlier with the Master System) came mostly because Nintendo barely showed up there. That's not strategy; that's opportunity. The real uphill battle was in the U.S., where Tom Kalinske and Sega of America took Nintendo's 90% market share and cut it in half — something Sega Japan or Europe never came close to doing.

SEGA Europe did far better in terms of MarketShare than Nintendo ever did and unlike SOA, were the ones who beat Nintendo twice. In Japan Nintendo had 92% of the Japanese market and SEGA Japan was able to overturn that with the Saturn and outsell the N64. Hell for 2 years, SEGA Japan was also able to outsell the PS1 , No Tom bullshit needed there...

Also, let's not forget — Sonic was Kalinske's move. He's the one who decided to pack Sonic with the Genesis against Sega of Japan's wishes

Also, let's not forget- Tom likes to say every move was forced on him by SEGA Japan *rollseyes*. Tom is your typical salesman or football manager... Takes all the credit for the good moves, looks to blame the chairman, for all the bad moves.


And Tom didn't have a clue in the 32bit era. Listen to him the 32X was the future and the only true next gen mass market system and if Tom and had his staff had their way, the Saturn CPU would have been 68020 LOL and thats before you look how ill-prepared SOA 32bit pipelines were, the miss-management of STI, Multi Mega studio and even basic stuff like not getting a 32-bit Joe Montana out; For which I seemed to remember Joe even sued for.

SOA was the muppet show in the 32-Bit era.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Sounds like Sega of Japan should have done a better job selecting better management of Sega of America.

The buck stops with Hayao Nakayama

 

[Team Andromeda]

Sounds like Sega of Japan should have done a better job selecting better management of Sega of America.

They got it right with Peter Moore though, the best boss SEGA America ever had and for added irony it was then Sega Japan turn to make cock ups and silly mistakes on the DC
The less said about Sega Europe the better in the DC era, with Geroge W Bush levels of incompetence

 

[RetroGamingUK]

They got it right with Peter Moore though, the best boss SEGA America ever had and for added irony it was then Sega Japan turn to make cock ups and silly mistakes on the DC
The less said about Sega Europe the better in the DC era, with Geroge W Bush levels of incompetence

Ah yes, Jez "let's spend half our marketing budget sponsoring football teams despite having no good football games" Cecillon.

Sega did seem to do more marketing in the UK when it came to Dreamcast (demo pods everywhere), but I think that came at the expense of smaller European countries

 

[Team Andromeda]

Ah yes, Jez "let's spend half our marketing budget sponsoring football teams despite having no good football games" Cecillon.

Jean was an utter twat, about as incompetent Tom was in the 32-Bit era. That said I found Irimajiri-san inept too even if he always came across as a nice guy.

 

[cireza]

something Sega Japan or Europe never came close to doing

In Europe Master System and MegaDrive both sold more than NES and SNES respectively, if I recall correctly. Europe was SEGA's strongest region in terms of market share, if you don't count South America of course.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Jean was an utter twat, about as incompetent Tom was in the 32-Bit era. That said I found Irimajiri-san inept too even if he always came across as a nice guy.

I liked Irimajiri, he was the face of Dreamcast after all

One piece of really bad fortune Sega had under his tenure was the utter collapse of the arcades in 2000 (3 in my town shut that same very year)

 

[Team Andromeda]

I liked Irimajiri, he was the face of Dreamcast after all

I liked him too as he always came across as a nice guy. He just wasn't up to the top role; A bit like Brian Kidd IMO a good coach just couldn't handle the step up to manager

 

[RetroAV]

When it comes to games, sales are the expression of quality. I refuse to even debate this, imagine having to read that the best-selling games for each console are bad games and that Sega Saturn games are good.
There are exceptions like Porsche Challenge, which sold few copies, perhaps because of the huge number of racing games on the PS1, perhaps because of Gran Turismo, which came out soon after. but it's a rule, if the game sells few units, there are conceptual flaws or flaws in the execution of the idea (if the idea is good).

If sales were a measure of quality, then FIFA and Just Dance would be the greatest games ever made, and Vanquish, Okami, and Psychonauts would be trash. Sales reflect reach and marketing, not artistic or mechanical quality. The market rewards accessibility and brand familiarity more than innovation.

You even named Porsche Challenge as an exception — that alone disproves your "rule."

SEGA Europe did far better in terms of MarketShare than Nintendo ever did and unlike SOA, were the ones who beat Nintendo twice. In Japan Nintendo had 92% of the Japanese market and SEGA Japan was able to overturn that with the Saturn and outsell the N64. Hell for 2 years, SEGA Japan was also able to outsell the PS1 , No Tom bullshit needed there...



Also, let's not forget- Tom likes to say every move was forced on him by SEGA Japan *rollseyes*. Tom is your typical salesman or football manager... Takes all the credit for the good moves, looks to blame the chairman, for all the bad moves.


And Tom didn't have a clue in the 32bit era. Listen to him the 32X was the future and the only true next gen mass market system and if Tom and had his staff had their way, the Saturn CPU would have been 68020 LOL and thats before you look how ill-prepared SOA 32bit pipelines were, the miss-management of STI, Multi Mega studio and even basic stuff like not getting a 32-bit Joe Montana out; For which I seemed to remember Joe even sued for.

SOA was the muppet show in the 32-Bit era.

You're clearly passionate about the topic, but you're skipping context to fit a narrative. Sega Europe's "victories" happened mostly in regions where Nintendo wasn't entrenched — they filled a vacuum. Sega of America, on the other hand, took Nintendo's dominant market and split it — that's a completely different challenge.

As for Kalinske and the 32X, promoting the hardware his company was launching isn't evidence of incompetence, it's literally his job. SOA wasn't perfect, but pretending they were irrelevant or that Japan and Europe succeeded because of their own brilliance ignores how much their momentum was built off the Genesis foundation SOA laid in the first place.

 

[Team Andromeda]

You're clearly passionate about the topic, but you're skipping context to fit a narrative. Sega Europe's "victories" happened mostly in regions where Nintendo wasn't entrenched — they filled a vacuum. Sega of America, on the other hand, took Nintendo's dominant market and split it — that's a completely different challenge.

As for Kalinske and the 32X, promoting the hardware his company was launching isn't evidence of incompetence, it's literally his job. SOA wasn't perfect, but pretending they were irrelevant or that Japan and Europe succeeded because of their own brilliance ignores how much their momentum was built off the Genesis foundation SOA laid in the first place.

The point you seem to overlook is SEGA Europe beat Nintendo twice without the need for Tom and Mega Drive sales only really took off in massive numbers after Sonic in Europe and the USA. You also look over how SEGA Japan took on Nintendo dominate position in Japan (92% markeshare) and outsold the N64 for its life span in Japan and hell for 2 years , even the PS1.

You also overlook Kalinske didn't push or promote the Sega Saturn, for him it was the 32X that was going to be only mass market system. It would be better if Tom just owned his mistake, but he never will and will look to blame SEGA Japan and talk crap of how he could have worked with SONY and had the PS1 chipset. Like I say he's just a typical sales man, takes all the credit for the good none of the the bad.

Shame too, because to Tom and SOA credit they did a far better job of making the Mega-CD worth owning, showing off what it could do and creating hype. Tom made a mistake with the 32X and thinking that people weren't bored of the 16-bit gen and didn't have money to move to the 32-Bit dream, just own your mistake and be truthful.

GOD loves a trier, but not a lair

 

[NeverYouMind]

Mega-CD was a mistake. 32X was a cool piece of hardware once prices dropped. Sega Saturn was a localization disaster outside of Japan.

 

[cireza]

Mega-CD was a mistake. 32X was a cool piece of hardware once prices dropped. Sega Saturn was a localization disaster outside of Japan.

You got this wrong though. Mega-CD was pretty successful, served its purpose, was supported for 5 full years and helped SEGA fill the communication landscape. While 32X was totally unnecessary, died after a single year and led to negative communication.

But as you are a 32X fanboy, you don't have any objectivity about the add-on.

 

[nkarafo]

Mega-CD was pretty successful

If Wikipedia's numbers are correct, then how is the Sega CD considered "pretty successful"?

It sold less than the Sega Pico. It sold less than the Nokia N-Gage.

Is it only a success by add-on standards? Did it do better than the PC-Engine CD? I can't tell. If my math is correct, only a 7% of Mega Drive/Genesis owners had one. Is that considered good?

I had a European Mega CD 2 myself (got one for cheap from a friend who wanted to get rid of it) and it was the most underwhelming console i ever had. Nobody else i knew had it, despite many having a Mega Drive, and i struggled to find games even for rent. Final Fight and Yumemi Mystery Mansion were great but that was it for me. And even if you fancied FMV slop games, the Sega CD was worst FMV capable console because it had the worst video quality of any other.

So what exactly did this console brought to the table, objectively speaking, ignoring any warm, fluffy memories one might have for it? Even it's most well regarded game, Snatcher, seems to look better in every other port. But correct me if i'm wrong, i have no experience with this game.

 

[NeverYouMind]

If Wikipedia's numbers are correct, then how is the Sega CD considered "pretty successful"?

It sold less than the Sega Pico. It sold less than the Nokia N-Gage.

Is it only a success by add-on standards? Did it do better than the PC-Engine CD? I can't tell. If my math is correct, only a 7% of Mega Drive/Genesis owners had one. Is that considered good?

I had a European Mega CD 2 myself (got one for cheap from a friend who wanted to get rid of it) and it was the most underwhelming console i ever had. Nobody else i knew had it, despite many having a Mega Drive, and i struggled to find games even for rent. Final Fight and Yumemi Mystery Mansion were great but that was it for me. And even if you fancied FMV slop games, the Sega CD was worst FMV capable console because it had the worst video quality of any other.

So what exactly did this console brought to the table, objectively speaking, ignoring any warm, fluffy memories one might have for it? Even it's most well regarded game, Snatcher, seems to look better in every other port. But correct me if i'm wrong, i have no experience with this game.

PC-Engine CD is a godsend compared to the crap Mega-CD. Some people love it but I can't stand how the library it adds is worse than the base console. Some Mega-CD ports are objectively worse than the versions for the base console and that alone should shitcan that whole sidegrade.

 

[Crayon]

I cannot believe the resilience of this thread. I want to go back and read all of it but

 

[NeverYouMind]

I cannot believe the resilience of this thread. I want to go back and read all of it but

Saturn's best 2D graphics, audio, and gameplay are still better than anything released on N64 almost 30 years later.

 

[Geometric-Crusher]

Saturn 2D graphics and audio are still better than anything released on N64 almost 30 years later.

 

[nkarafo]

Saturn's best 2D graphics, audio, and gameplay are still better than anything released on N64 almost 30 years later.

 

[Crayon]

Saturn 2D graphics and audio are still better than anything released on N64 almost 30 years later.

Oh totally. I get way, waaaay more use out of my saturns than n64's. That's mostly because every game worth a shit on saturn hasn't been re-released like on n64. But really, on a technical level, n64 only trades blows with saturn similar to the way it does with ps1.