Look where Xbox 360 is at today and ask yourself that question again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christuserloeser
Look where Xbox 360 is at today and ask yourself that question again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christuserloeser
I didn't say it played bad, or good for that matter, it could a puzzle game for all we know.All I said was the art style was very generic, and I still think he should be making another F-Zero GX.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
Sega abandoned too many franchises that were solid. Where Nintendo still puts out Metroid, Mario, Zelda, etc... what happened to Golden Axe? Shinobi? The Shining series? Streets of Rage? Ecco? Why no more JRPG style Phantasy Star games? These and plenty more... some that Sega did themselves, some that Sega mere published... they just disappeared. Many of series didn't even warrant a Saturn and/or Dreamcast appearance.Quote:
Originally Posted by jerry coeurl
The only SEGA games I've purchased this gen have been Outrun and Afterburner Climax on XBLA. I don't consider Bayonetta, Vanquish, MadWorld, Alpha Protocol, etc as "SEGA" games since these were developed by external non-Sega studios.
This is true, but ecco, golden axe, and shinobi were all translated to more modern consoles. There is the terrible golden axe game for ps3, a pretty good shinobi game for ps2, ecco for ps2 of which I know nothing about, and there was 3d streets of rage in development for the dreamcast that wasn't released. so they didn't really drop those series as much as just screw them overQuote:
Originally Posted by TheFace
SEGA actually owns all those franchises. Bayonetta has Outrun segments and both Bayonetta and Vanquish have Space Harrier parts.Quote:
Originally Posted by havok666
And Nintendo farmed out series like Metroid, but that hasn't been a problem for them.
A game here or there doesn't count against the series being abandoned. Ecco was on DC but not Saturn (to my knowledge)... Shining Force has appeared here in there, but not in force and not with any notice. The Shinobi game was only on that system - not Saturn and DC... Golden Axe was, as you say, terrible.
Why didn't Sega have a launch or 2nd wave lineup of games like these for the Saturn and the Dreamcast? That's the problem. It's like they forgot.
SEGA biggest mistake was dropping out of the hardware industry. Their games suffered as a result.
I think a lot of close SEGA developers knew this and why a lot of them abandoned SEGA during the demise of the Dreamcast.
And continued propping up the Dreamcast whilst facing financial ruin, yes? Good luck selling that one to your shareholders.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamegenie
Of course, stock prices plummeted when they announced the discontinuation of the DC and it took quite a while to recover from that. (more so stock wise than otherwise -they managed to stabilize things financially with the arcade division's much better success than the previous generation -party due to their high cost/performance ratio compared to the model 1/2/3 hardware- on top of modest sales as a 3rd party)Quote:
Originally Posted by Elusive
It could definitely be argued that they way they dropped the Dramcast was a bad move though. At very least they could have supported it mainly in the US (pulled back to token support in other regions with very limited marketing but a reasonable amount of software support -at least for non translation-heavy stuff) while making provisions for a more controlled shift to 3rd party if necessary. (one thing the missed was a strong push into the PC market -they missed that for the Saturn days as well, no idea why they didn't start pushing most/all of their prominent arcade/home titles on PC from 1996 onward -they missed out on tons of Sega published stuff from the MD to CD to 32x to Saturn to Dreamcast both during and after the active lives of those systems -especially with the surge in PC gaming from the mid 90s through early 2000s)
Depending on how things went after emerging from the stifling PS2 hype, the DC might have had a very good change on the mass market against the GC and Xbox. (lowest price, strong back-library, very reasonable graphical performance -nominally better than the PS2, and ease of development facilitating cross platform PC/DC/GC/Xbox games thus increasing the attraction to 3rd parties and making even lower-priority ports likely of reasonably good quality graphics/gameplay -especially compared to PS2 contemporaries with the exception of games specifically designed for the PS2 with developers killing themselves on the difficult architecture)
RARE doesn't own the license, Nintendo does as with Donkey Kong Country and any other Nintendo published title/franchise regardless of being developed in-house or not. (with the exception of games licensed from third parties for release on a specific platform under the Nintendo label, but that's rather uncommon -at least compared to MS, Sony, or formerly Sega)Quote:
Originally Posted by Guntz
Same for various RARE developed games that were commissions for others. (like several Acclaim/LJN games on the NES)
Opposed to Perfect Dark, Banjo, and several other RARE IPs. (I think Battle Toads is still owned by RARE too ;))
The classic controls are preferred: there's no melee attack with the wiimote/chuck control oddly enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guntz
Classic controller pro works OK, but I think the gamecube controls are a good bit better. (I absolutely hare the normal classic controller -uncomfortable with an inconvenient layout- but I'm not positive the GC controls map out preverably compared to the CC pro -I don't own it and didn't have a GC controller to play it with when I was at a friend's place)
It feels more like a modern warfare II rip-off than a goldeneye remake though. (it's an OK game, but nothing mindblowing)
At very least it's got local multiplayer: that's the main reason I lost all interest in The Conduit. (not sure if it's got co-op, but at least 4 player vs local -co op is awesome though and one of the better features of FPSs from this generation and the last -and a handful of 5th gen games)
If you liked Unleashed's day time levels, then you'll probably line Colors. However, if you were disappointed by the day levels and/or actually preferred the werehog stages (let alone some of the previous 3D Sonic games -SA1/2 especially), it very well may end up a disappointment. (albeit probably not as big as the on-rails Wii games :p )Quote:
Originally Posted by Christuserloeser
That's the reason my brother is totally disinterested: hated the day levels but liked the night ones OK (I know Tiido likes the werehog stages too ;) -I forget if ie prefers them to the day levels though). And I for one don't care for either aspect of the game but love SA1 and 2, like Heroes OK on the GC (a bit annoying at times but a reasonable 3D platformer), and like Shadow a fair bit more than Heroes (seems more like a proper -albeit less polished- successor to SA2), but I don't like what Unleashed did with the day levels. (the werehog stages have annoyign camera angles at times too and the gameplay is OK, but feels a bit odd -sort of like an odd hybrid of knuckles and ristar with an added beat-em-up element made into 3D)
Heh, I get to use this quote again:Quote:
Don't you think there were reasons why they didn't want to merge with Microsoft when the opportunity presented itself a decade ago ?
How would Microsoft be a better parent company than Sammy ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chilly Willy
It's a shame Nintendo couldn't fight off MS's takeover of RARE. (or beat them to the punch by buying the controlling share in RARE stock -which they were less than 2% away from as it was)
RARE is a big part of why the N64 did as well as it did (along with some fairly tactful US marketing and Nintendo's own titles and a few other 2nd parties -3rd party support was admittedly mediocre compared to Sony or PC games).
It makes you wonder what impact having RARE onboard for the GC could have had. (OTOH, many significant members of RARE had already left in the Nintendo 2nd party days -including the Free Radical guys)
It also makes you wonder if CORE could have been a bit like that for Sega had Sega bought a controlling share in that company before it got bought-out. (imagine if the Tomb Raider games were Sega exclusives, among others ;)) They, somewhat like Game Arts, were already boarderline 2nd party with Sega in the 4th gen, so that's not unthinkable.
I keep up with all of the news in the gaming industry, but I do not buy any newer game systems.
I am not surprised that people dislike many of SEGA's actions lately, but I am constantly startled to learn that many people do not like the company at all anymore, especially coming from people who actually liked them before and do not lie about playing a Genesis when it came out.
While it is easier to point to a publisher like 2K or even as of late, EA for a constant stream of quality games, the fact remains that SEGA does still make a lot of fantastic titles. AM2 is the most obvious one, but many other exist, Kogen pointed out Yakuza, which is easily one of their best going and my personal favorite RPG series of all time. Saying Bayonetta should not count because SEGA only published the game is weird, especially when a lot of SEGA people worked on the textures, music, physics and overall production of the game, as with all of PG's titles. They also entirely own the IP and can do anything they want with it.
While I think their mobile games are really starting to become a wonderful niche for them, SEGA's arcade division is still their best overall, but that is because SEGA has always been and always will be an arcade developer first and foremost. I understand it is hard for many of you to see most of these games, but to just curse away the entire company is ignorant.
I've got to catch up on this forum rep business, because every time I see someone whinging about how Sonic Heroes means no more Sega or something, my head hurts. Thumbs-up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sega Uranus