Question What killed sega hardware

[kabbes]

You are the one comparing games from different times, not me.

No, you are picking an arbitrary year and comparing what console had what games in that year. That's a ridiculous thing to do. What did the Dreamcast have in 1988 that could compete with the Atari ST? What did it have in 2010 that could compete with the Xbox 360?

The only thing you can realistically do is look back at the complete set of games that the console had and go from there.

 

[Citizen66]

Never had a console in that era of gaming. In fact there was a huuuuge break of gaming altogether from me between the Spectrum 48+ and then a 386 my dad got around 1990. It would almost be a further twenty years before I got an xbox, and I'm pretty much done with consoles all together now.

 

[kabbes]

Gotta say, I'm not inspired at all by the current gen.

 

[Chz]

AND Soul Calibur 2. and VF4. Both of which were better than Soul Calibur.

SC2 better than SC? Well now I understand. You're a fucking heathen and I can ignore your opinion as outright insanity.

 

[Citizen66]

The new xbox just seems massively too expensive, and there's hardly any games out for it. Gf's daughter still plays with the 360, mainly Minecraft, and hasn't made any noises whatsoever about wanting to upgrade. It's all about wanting an iPhone, it seems.

 

[kabbes]

SC2 better than SC? Well now I understand. You're a fucking heathen and I can ignore your opinion as outright insanity.

The first game certainly gets the props for its originality and implementation of new ideas. But the second game took those and improved on them. The first will always get the plaudits, but if you are just interested in playing one Soul Calibur game, stripped from that history, you'd be better off with the second.

 

[Jon-of-arc]

Gotta say, I'm not inspired at all by the current gen.

There's no "killer" games to justify them at the moment, nothing that makes you think "I must upgrade", beyond slightly improved graphics. No Mans Sky is all I can see in the near future, and that doesn't even appear to be particularly "next gen" - just being made PlayStation 4 only so that people buy the console.

 

[Citizen66]

Next Gen is the Oculus Rift. Not even sure if the latest consoles would be able to support it.

 

[DotCommunist]

Silent Scope

 

[mwgdrwg]

No, you are picking an arbitrary year and comparing what console had what games in that year. That's a ridiculous thing to do. What did the Dreamcast have in 1988 that could compete with the Atari ST? What did it have in 2010 that could compete with the Xbox 360?

The only thing you can realistically do is look back at the complete set of games that the console had and go from there.

`

No, I am simply asssessing the Dreamcast from my experiences with it at the time. You are doing it differently, by comparing an entire library. I would agree with you if we were comparing game libraries, the PS2 wins no doubt. But that is not how I judge my favourite consoles. Soul Calibur was mind-blowing, and I had years of fun with it. It was the best looking fighter ever, and it was so good. The fact that VF4 was released over two years later doesn't even come into it. I've played quite a few better fighters since those days, but Soul Calibur is still one of my favourites. If you find that ridiculous, fair enough.

 

[Chz]

The first game certainly gets the props for its originality and implementation of new ideas. But the second game took those and improved on them. The first will always get the plaudits, but if you are just interested in playing one Soul Calibur game, stripped from that history, you'd be better off with the second.

Nope, played 'em both and you're not going to convince me. For starters, I even dig the first one out on occasion to play it. It's more fun, and has less cheese as a fighting game. SCIV sort of came close, but 2 and 3 weren't all that.

 

[J Ed]

There's no "killer" games to justify them at the moment, nothing that makes you think "I must upgrade", beyond slightly improved graphics. No Mans Sky is all I can see in the near future, and that doesn't even appear to be particularly "next gen" - just being made PlayStation 4 only so that people buy the console.

I think it's because of the recession in part. People don't have the cash to shell out on the console so less people have consoles, so developers are more reluctant to make games which in turn means people are less likely to shell out for a console without games..

 

[Chz]

Well that and they decided to play it safe this round. They're nearly the same console, albeit with the PS4 being moderately more powerful because MS gambled on the Kinect and lost. But they're close enough as makes no difference and unlike last time, they weren't even more powerful than a mid-range PC at release date. PC games are going to have gimped graphics for years because of this.

 

[J Ed]

Well that and they decided to play it safe this round. They're nearly the same console, albeit with the PS4 being moderately more powerful because MS gambled on the Kinect and lost. But they're close enough as makes no difference and unlike last time, they weren't even more powerful than a mid-range PC at release date. PC games are going to have gimped graphics for years because of this.

I think you can see the effect of the recession and the decline of wages in real terms on PC games too - there are a lot of very good and popular new games which are relatively low spec. I'm not complaining as I can't afford a higher spec computer to play games on and I have always preferred substance in games to style anyway.

You are right though, the PS4 and XBOX One, when I have seen them, have been really unremarkable. I remember being amazed at the leap in graphics when I saw the Dreamcast, PS2 and PS3 in shops but the PS4 and Xbox One just look the same.

 

[kabbes]

It's not just graphically. The stories are no better. There is no step forward in emotion or characterisation or anything other than violence-as-spectacle. It's boring.

 

[Cid]

I think you can see the effect of the recession and the decline of wages in real terms on PC games too - there are a lot of very good and popular new games which are relatively low spec. I'm not complaining as I can't afford a higher spec computer to play games on and I have always preferred substance in games to style anyway.

You are right though, the PS4 and XBOX One, when I have seen them, have been really unremarkable. I remember being amazed at the leap in graphics when I saw the Dreamcast, PS2 and PS3 in shops but the PS4 and Xbox One just look the same.

I'm not sure that's the effect of the recession. Well, it may be partly in that AAA companies built themselves into a sort of bubble of ever increasing team sizes and budgets which promptly burst, but not just that... There's an ever increasing number of people basically computer literate since childhood alongside increasing access to developer tools and new potential sources of funding. The AAAs have to play it safe, they clone their old games but improve control, graphics etc. They could never make Minecraft, Kerbal etc.

 

[Silva]

Gaming has become pretty much like Hollywood in that aspect, release tentpoles to keep the beast going with very little margin of error. Keep releasing sequels and reboots/remakes of previous films more or less yearly, with the slightly artsy oscar/GOTY bait title here and there.