Anyone here who doesnt like the Saturn ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sheath

As for 3D Racers, Sega Rally is one of the best of all time. The physics are exquisite. In Sega Rally, if you are sliding on asphalt, and hit dirt, things change accordingly.

---

You could argue that it has the most accessible, easiest, or even most fun (subjective) handling, but on the technical side the game's physics are ridiculously simple even compared to the original Colin Mcrae, let alone Colin Mcrae 2.0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sheath

You could say that Sega Rally doesn't have enough cars and tracks, which would also eliminate most PS1 racers

---

Most PS1 racing games do not have three or four tracks, having three or four tracks during the later half of that generation was completely unacceptable, and was an easy way to get an immediate mediocre score.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StarMist

I don't give a shit about story in racing games. If there were hidden tracks then I did miss something but nothing that could be done to the circuit I did see could make it interesting. Plus when the game's foundation doesn't draw one in why should anybody stick around for the unlockables?

---

Essentially you just played the game on Easy mode and then gave up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StarMist

There are not masses of arcade racers on the PS, PS racers mostly consist of loose sims and street racers.

---

Street racing is a sub genre of arcade racing. "Arcade Racers" are simply racing games with an emphasis on accessible fun and unrealistic handling (not my definition)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StarMist

Yes it would've been ripped in 1999 for the same reasons it was by some places in 1995, the graphics and smallness.

---

The graphics, and a 4 course length, and a 2-player mode are actually very good for late 1995, in fact I would go on record as saying that Sega Rally was the best home racing game available for 1995, was still amongst the top in 1996, and was still the best rally game until around 1997 at earliest, but things move on, and a lot of people analyzed and copied elements from Sega Rally, whilst improving the graphics and adding more content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StarMist

Phantasy Star 2? Really? Thanks for pointing that out. 3 and 4 fail in different ways, and though I do count the Shining Forces they still don't add up to a lot of gaming. Besides I did state it lacked, not sucked: different things. Surging Aura would be the joker card here. Yes there's also Super Hydlide for Western variety but on the whole those games everybody likes to bring in from left field suck (here I mean suck). I'd need at least another 2 extremely good or half a dozen enjoyable RPGs to make it fit my idea of being self sufficient.

---

Phantasy Star 2 is an all-time classic. It has beautiful music, interesting characters and huge dungeons to explore. I'd rank it up there with the 8 and 16-bit Final Fantasy games.

Don't forget Shining in the Darkness. It's a really fun RPG!

Quote:

---

My fault, despite my talk of NES and PS which should naturally have met halfway at 16 bit I was thinking more in terms of 32 bit style exploration. Also I was applying the term to games that haven't a genre ('adventure' is meaningless), fitting examples of which would be Ecco and Flashback; Landstalker whilst certainly exploratory is already covered by ARPG. And the Monster World series always slips my mind.

---

Why do you consider adventure to be meaningless? Beyond Oasis is a pretty solid exploratory game, even if it is an Action RPG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamevet

Why do you consider adventure to be meaningless? Beyond Oasis is a pretty solid exploratory game, even if it is an Action RPG.

---

'Adventure' is a catch-all like 'action' or 'sim' used by way of negative definition for whatever doesn't fit into another category. Not that everything must be neatly categorised: 'platformer' and 'RPG' don't say everything there is about a game. 'Exploration' for games like Flashback and Ecco would make for greater clarity. I might even apply it to Comix Zone which is very irrationally lumped into the brawler class.
@ Beyond Oasis: all ARPGs should be exploratory, any ARPG that lacks exploration is ill regarded.

^These genre labels are interesting. See, I've always thought of games in the Zelda vein, like Crusader of Centy and Beyond Oasis, to be adventure games and not really RPGs per se. But perhaps action RPG is a better term considering how broad adventure is. And these games do have some RPG elements.

Exploration in ARPGs/Zelda Clones is much softer than the exploration in games like Super Metroid, Ecco or Flashback. Landstalker probably has the highest amount of exploration out of all oldschool ARPGs/Zelda Clones.
Comix Zone does not have any exploration to speak of. Releasing the rat to auto-search for items is not exploration. Slightly branching paths are not exploration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thenewguy

You could argue that it has the most accessible, easiest, or even most fun (subjective) handling, but on the technical side the game's physics are ridiculously simple even compared to the original Colin Mcrae, let alone Colin Mcrae 2.0.

Most PS1 racing games do not have three or four tracks, having three or four tracks during the later half of that generation was completely unacceptable, and was an easy way to get an immediate mediocre score.

---

Yeah, I should have said criticizing Sega Rally for only having four tracks also eliminates plenty of well liked PS1 racers. As for the physics argument, I don't think any of these games are aiming at realism without trying to balance that with playability. Sega Rally's powerslide physics are some of the most realistic and intuitive I have ever seen in a racing game. I learned how to drive on dirt roads, and used to drive too fast and powerslide around them just for fun, Sega Rally controls virtually the same. The only unrealistic thing I can note is that the speeds the cars are going would cause the cars to roll a lot, and of course hitting walls would destroy the car. I suppose it might be more accurate to say that Sega Rally is just more intuitive than the McCrae games and V-Rally, but I find their controls not only less intuitive but clunky/quirky as well. I probably just need to spend more time playing them to get used to the quirks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thenewguy

The graphics, and a 4 course length, and a 2-player mode are actually very good for late 1995, in fact I would go on record as saying that Sega Rally was the best home racing game available for 1995, was still amongst the top in 1996, and was still the best rally game until around 1997 at earliest, but things move on, and a lot of people analyzed and copied elements from Sega Rally, whilst improving the graphics and adding more content.

---

This is only true if having more cars and tracks automatically makes a racing game better. If that were true then everybody would prefer Virtua Racing on Saturn to Virtua Racing Deluxe. Ridge Racer fans would LOVE High Velocity/King The Spirits if more cars and tracks mattered. It is a mentality created by the car RPG genre and is absolutely no different than RPG fans calling Beat-em ups "shallow". Sega Rally has almost an unlimited amount of replayability, not the least of which is because of the 2-player split screen, and remains one of the best 3D racers of all time for that reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by profholt82

^These genre labels are interesting. See, I've always thought of games in the Zelda vein, like Crusader of Centy and Beyond Oasis, to be adventure games and not really RPGs per se. But perhaps action RPG is a better term considering how broad adventure is. And these games do have some RPG elements.

---

The main differance between Action/RPGs, and Action/Adventure games, is one has a lv system(allowing for better/more in depth char development, and the other is item based(not much char development, and pretty much all the abilities/char upgrades are done through items). There are some very rare exceptions(like tombs & Treasure technically has a lv system, yet It's still an adventure game), but 's due to the implimentation of such, and how it effects the chat, like in Tombs & Treasures, you gain levels by finding items, but yea almost always, if it has a lv system, It's some kind of RPG.

Both terms, RPGs, and Adventure imply exploration, so that's not a defining aspect between the two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kamahl

Comix Zone does not have any exploration to speak of. Releasing the rat to auto-search for items is not exploration. Slightly branching paths are not exploration.

---

Not exploration per se, but genres are a technical definition and so only bear on the mechanical side. Similarly, as I've said before, Contra is not a run n gun because (in the NES games at least) running isn't a viable approach, one can only dash about very short distances, jump, and grovel to survive. Trying to run along as in Metal Slug means instant death. However the genre label suits it perfectly fine so long as it isn't taken as the genre's exemplar.
What Comix Zone shares with other exploration titles (which, again, I'm terming such to distinguish them from other genres, not to point out their nontechnical similarites to games in other genres) is its sidescrolling* screen to screen element. Sure there's no backtracking, yet as in games such as Flashback one does progress a screen at a time rather than upon continuously scrolling screen. (*Sidescrolling as in planar, in the platformer style, so as not to confuse 'screen to screen' with point and click games). Also the puzzles do count regardless whether they're beneath one's intelligence. DJ Boy is still a brawler despite its miserable three or four attacks and suckage in every other possible way.

Another classification I dislike is 'rail shooter'. These games usually allow quite generous freedom of movement. Rail shooters are Chaos Control, Lodestar, and that bonus game at the Golden Saucer Station of FF7.

@ Sega Rally et al = I investigated the Colin Mcrae games. Apparently they have 80+ tracks. Are these individual or are they modules, ie 'tracks' 1 through 5 consisting of sections of a single track 6? If individual that would be impressive, though for me their quality remains to be seen. On the other hand so enormous a number of tracks impairs the appeal of a rally game which is time trial racing. Too many tracks to master.

I see what you mean, yeah brawler isn't the most appropriate genre for Comix Zone either. It's pretty unique.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by profholt82

^These genre labels are interesting. See, I've always thought of games in the Zelda vein, like Crusader of Centy and Beyond Oasis, to be adventure games and not really RPGs per se. But perhaps action RPG is a better term considering how broad adventure is. And these games do have some RPG elements.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zoltor

The main differance between Action/RPGs, and Action/Adventure games, is one has a lv system(allowing for better/more in depth char development, and the other is item based(not much char development, and pretty much all the abilities/char upgrades are done through items). There are some very rare exceptions(like tombs & Treasure technically has a lv system, yet It's still an adventure game), but 's due to the implimentation of such, and how it effects the chat, like in Tombs & Treasures, you gain levels by finding items, but yea almost always, if it has a lv system, It's some kind of RPG.

Both terms, RPGs, and Adventure imply exploration, so that's not a defining aspect between the two.

---

Some non-RPGs have level/experience elements too though, but many of those aspects are parts of totally action-oriented games too. (like expanding hp/health capacity, upgrading strength/magic/armor/etc -aside from buying/finding/earning specific items)

There's a fine line between action-RPG and a true adventure game (and some adventure games or action-adventure games do have RPG-like elements too, even actual level based skills in some cases), but to me, a true adventure game is defined by the emphasis on exploration, puzzle solving, finding quest items, and flexible realtime combat in open 2D or 3D space (aside from boss/miniboss battles -though in some cases you can retreat from those too).

So the 3D Zelda games, Tomb Raider, and Metroid Prime would all be 3D action-adventure games. While text or point&click or roaming graphic adventure games (namely on PCs) are certainly adventure games, but usually not action-adventure. (by roaming, I mean more like the Lucas/Sierra games where you control the player rather than using text or mouse commands -there's hybrids of all those too)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sheath

I enjoy them okay, I played through all of the Soul Reaver games multiple times, I've played through Wing Commander on Sega CD and Colony Wars on PS1 once. Most other non-RPG story games can get my interest for a while but most of them wouldn't make a decent novel. What I really don't like is when a platform emphasizes story over gameplay. The Playstations and now Xboxes and in some respect the SNES do this. They all take a mediocre beat-em up or 3D adventure game, add in Noir/Urban Theme/Modern Warfare, and the kiddos go nuts for the game.

---

For me, the quality of the story istelf isn't as important as the overall premise and (especially) having engaging characters to get you more into the game. (be it campy, creepy, serious, etc, any other mood/tone)

I prefer games that actually portray the characters in realtime (like in radio chatter in flight sims), but character development in cutscenes can be interesting too. (doing both is much better IMO)
Though some games use cutscenes to great effect too. (Silent Hill jumps to mind -especially 2 and 3)

The point isn't to make you feel like you're playing out a movie, but being immersed in the game/universe. (like a really good book or -less often IMO- a really good movie -or TV show- that has you involved with the characters)

Many of my favorite games do just that, get me really involved with the game itself. (good fast-paced action games do that in another way -raw adrenaline and sheer focus on intense on-screen action, but some games even do both -like fast-paced action games with an interesting story and engaging characters -again like some of the classic space sims, and some FPSs for that matter . . . or more so for more hybrid adventure-oriented games with FPS elements; and sometimes it's not about the characters either, but the overall environment and world and perhaps uncovering long-abandoned evidence or such and building on a plot more in solitude -those kinds of games often tended to creep me out personally, even if not horror themed -including Myst but Metroid Prime would even fall into this category, and they can be really good too, but I personally prefer games with more NPC interaction -and perhaps more light-hearted, or at least with some lighter elements even with dark/serious or truly tragic elements mixed in -death of a comrade/loved-one, loss of one's home, etc, etc -X-Wing Alliance does that quite well IMO, several of the Wing Commander games do too, among others -I can speak more directly about XWA though, since I've played that through from start to finish)

Good, fun, simple arcade-style games can be great too though, and some genres/subgenres really don't benefit from a story. (like most puzzle games or racing games -though some sort of premise can be interesting without going into a full story)

And, for me at least, it seems like I tend to play mostly the simpler/faster-paced "fun" sorts of games when I'm with friends (since most multiplayer genres fit that description -especially for retro gaming . . . and the multiplayer modes of games that do have more complexity still tend to cut much of that out -aside from main-game co-op campaigns), but for single-player stuff I often prefer the deeper/more complex types of games. (there's also the exception of back-seat gaming, and in that case I've definitely spent a ton of time watching friends/family play through complex/story-based games -especially watching my dad as a kid playing PC adventure games, the SNES and N64 Zelda games, Silent Hill 2 and 3, among others)




Then again, I should note that (ever since I was a little kid) I've spent a lot more time reading novels/short stories and watching TV shows (and to lesser extent movies) than I have playing video games, and do enjoy a good drama (though preferably with sci-fi/fantasy/supernatural elements . . . some of the crime/medical/technical themed dramas or comedy-dramas are cool too though).
And that includes some pretty campy ones as well as some really well made ones too. (and some cult-classic stuff that may fit either or both of those categories depending on perspective) I've been watching quite a bit of that stuff since I was a little kid (in addition to various cartoons on broadcast TV -never had cable- though a few of the good 90s cartoons were pretty complex story-wise too), and it wasn't/isn't just current stuff either, I've always been exposed to older TV shows and movies a lot (if not more so than modern/current stuff), including watching pretty much the entire original Doctor Who series. (albeit not all at once -PBS was showing mostly the 70s and 80s ones in the early 90s, but they later shifted back to the very start and went through the entire series -save the lost/missing episodes- and we ended up taping some of that to watch later too)

So that all probably has something to do with my interest in story-based games too.

I think the Sega Saturn didn't appeal to the masses for several reasons.

The Saturn launch was a disaster. If memory serves me correctly the Saturn launched in May 1995 for $399.00 with a gimped Virtua Fighter for a pack in. The launch titles were a shoddy port of Daytona USA, Panzer Dragoon (incredible game BTW), and Clockwork Knight. I actually got one at launch and bought Panzer Dragoon. I didnt like how Daytona USA was rushed out by Sega. Sega basically squeezed a Sega Model 2 game into a Saturn, and they hoped no one would notice. I never even bought it because compared to the arcade version is was a broken game. Bug! was an awful excuse for a "place holder" mascot. The jumping physics were a nightmare and the basic controls were horrendous. The fake 3D was a joke.

The PS1 launched on 9/9/95 for $299.00 and launched with Battle Arena Toshinden, ESPN Extreme Games, Kileak - The DNA Imperative, NBA Jam Tournament Edition, Power Serve 3D Tennis, Rayman, Ridge Racer, The Raiden Project, Total Eclipse Turbo. Sony really pushed for almost every game to be in polygonal and 3D. Sony had the better 3D hardware, and that was very attractive to most gamers. Most gamers I knew back then were highly impressed by Sony's offerings. Sony came out swinging with games like Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, Final Fantasy 7. By the time Sega managed to get Resident Evil and Tomb raider for the Saturn, it was already too late. A substantial amount of of Sega gamers had already jumped ship for Sony. Sega tried to rally back with aggressive advertising and bringing back the Sega scream. The arcade age was dying fast and Sega was far too dependent on the arcade games. Virtua Fighter 2, Sega Rally, and The House of the Dead (another shoddy arcade port) were not effective. Tekken and Tekken 2 were actually perfect arcade ports, unlike VF2. No one even cared about Fighting Vipers or Fighter Megamix.

And then there is the N64. I remember being at a Toys R Us once and they three Kiosks. One for Mario 64, Nights and crash Bandicoot. Everyone was lining up to play Mario 64. No one even touched Nights.

And then there was money. Sega was handling 6 other systems at the same time. Sega just could not financially afford to compete properly.

The Saturn had so many great and exciting games. Too bad most of them were release in Japan only.

I really love my Saturn. A few notable gems that I own and recommend...

Policenauts
Panzer Dragoon Saga
Dungeons and Dragons Collection.
Guardian Heroes
Galactic Attack
Skeleton Warriors
Duke Nukem 3D
Iron Storm
Albert Odyssey
Marvel Superheroes vs SF
Panzer Dragoon Zwei
Shinning The Holy Ark
Shinobi Legions
Quake

And the list goes on and on....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lan Di

I think the Sega Saturn didn't appeal to the masses for several reasons.

The Saturn launch was a disaster. If memory serves me correctly the Saturn launched in May 1995 for $399.00 with a gimped Virtua Fighter for a pack in. The launch titles were a shoddy port of Daytona USA, Panzer Dragoon (incredible game BTW), and Clockwork Knight. I actually got one at launch and bought Panzer Dragoon. I didnt like how Daytona USA was rushed out by Sega. Sega basically squeezed a Sega Model 2 game into a Saturn, and they hoped no one would notice. I never even bought it because compared to the arcade version is was a broken game. Bug! was an awful excuse for a "place holder" mascot. The jumping physics were a nightmare and the basic controls were horrendous. The fake 3D was a joke.

---

Agreed, Daytona really was gimped, it certainly played like the real deal but sadly as it has always been first impressions mean everything, an attract demo of Daytona USA running side by side with Ridge Racer and you'd believe which was the better machine. Sega in a lot of ways played straight into Sony's hand, not just with the early launch (which no doubt rushed the development of the key western launch titles) but with a title begging to be compared with the nearest competition. Perhaps Sega would have done better not just with a later release date, but also with titles that didn't bare direct comparison with Sony's titles. Your essentially emphasising that you offer something different to the competition, Panzer Dragoon could have been that title, but it lacked polish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lan Di

The PS1 launched on 9/9/95 for $299.00 and launched with Battle Arena Toshinden, ESPN Extreme Games, Kileak - The DNA Imperative, NBA Jam Tournament Edition, Power Serve 3D Tennis, Rayman, Ridge Racer, The Raiden Project, Total Eclipse Turbo. Sony really pushed for almost every game to be in polygonal and 3D. Sony had the better 3D hardware, and that was very attractive to most gamers.

---

Historically Sega's launch title seemed really like a false start, just over the horizon at the end of the year was some of the Saturn's highlights that really to me subjectively stated that the Saturn was really here, but the market rarely affords a second chance, despite the mindshare VF2, Virtua Cop and Sega Rally won back for Sega.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lan Di

gamers I knew back then were highly impressed by Sony's offerings. Sony came out swinging with games like Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, Final Fantasy 7. By the time Sega managed to get Resident Evil and Tomb raider for the Saturn, it was already too late. A substantial amount of of Sega gamers had already jumped ship for Sony. Sega tried to rally back with aggressive advertising and bringing back the Sega scream. The arcade age was dying fast and Sega was far too dependent on the arcade games. Virtua Fighter 2, Sega Rally, and The House of the Dead (another shoddy arcade port) were not effective. Tekken and Tekken 2 were actually perfect arcade ports, unlike VF2. No one even cared about Fighting Vipers or Fighter Megamix.

---

I don't really agree with this statement, you seemed to have made up your own narrative history, mixing up events, skipping some and making your own timeline, I won't doubt that Sony really wowed audiences and eventually won over the press and the mainstream as the console to hedge your bets on. Most titles early on for both systems relied heavily on arcade titles, or arcade like experiences, there where of course niche titles and the first tentative steps toward longer more ambitious adventure titles in 96', overall both systems had a good mix of titles and covered a lot of bases early on.

As an aside The House of the Dead, agreed was a pretty terrible conversion but it came late in the consoles lifetime, it shouldn't really be mentioned in the same breath as Sega Rally or VF2, games Sega's AM divisions put a lot of effort into. Tomb Raider was release earlier in the UK by a month, and released on the same day in the US as the playstation version. Agreed, Resident Evil was late and didn't play to the consoles strengths. Final Fantasy 7 is a whole other issue and was really the moment the PSX took off and pushed past the Saturn in Japan, and was massively successful in the west.

Where Sony was successful was tapping in current cultural trends, in the UK and Europe they were perhaps the first company to give the region its own Identity, I can't comment on the USA but from what I can gather, they also there appropriated there image. This was no longer imported American bastardisations of Japanese titles, with a pallet swap and some terrible mid-80's fantasy Comic art on the front, dumped at 50hz (crass generalisations aside) games like Tomb Raider hit in the mid-90's when Britain was in the middle of a regurgitated sense of 60's style cool Brittania cultural pride, Lara Croft was a mascot for British game development, likewise Wipeout tapped into club culture and matched fashion sensibilities. Sony really worked hard to tie titles in with mass culture, but also make gaming much more tailored to each region.

VF2, Sega Rally, and Virtua Cop or the big "3" gave a major spike in popularity early on for the Saturn, Sega Rally became the fastest selling CD game software in the UK upon its release and was a big chance for Sega to rebuild PR, 96' was fraught with problems however due to dwindling cash reserves, regarding your next quote Nights was intended to have a massive advertising push, but it did not materialise. Nintendo on the other hand had very few titles to release but also had Mario 64 to really focus on, something to differentiate from the competition. Nights could have been a sleeper hit but it was never going to be against the hyperbole behind Nintendo's premier mascot not least with its "revolutionary" switch to free-roaming 3D gameplay, apparently the future according to the press.

Nights was a great game but it wasn't the right game to push the Saturn. That said heavier advertisement would have really helped, and helped the Saturn in general, most of Sega's adverts during the Saturn's period where IMO atrocious and by all accounts from everyone on this board who have either seen what little was aired, made little dent in peoples consciousness. ANd thats the people who did see them, a great majority didn't. I think there is something bigger at play though, similarity in the USA where the Saturn was plagued with distribution problems, very few people over (casual gamers) here remember the Saturn, due to a mix of diminishing sales but also poor marketing.

Quote:

---

And then there is the N64. I remember being at a Toys R Us once and they three Kiosks. One for Mario 64, Nights and crash Bandicoot. Everyone was lining up to play Mario 64. No one even touched Nights.

---

Quote:

---

And then there was money. Sega was handling 6 other systems at the same time. Sega just could not financially afford to compete properly.

The Saturn had so many great and exciting games. Too bad most of them were release in Japan only.

I really love my Saturn. A few notable gems that I own and recommend...

---

I do agree, Sega's finance situation was precarious and Arcade Revenue was drying up, especially when Sega was gearing up and needed that money. But Sega could have handled the situation much better, the fought fierce competition in the mid-90's but there biggest issue was being weakened by poor managerial decisions, everything counted. I've often thought Sega where often a bit too bullish with direct competition with Sony, but those comparisons where inevitable, Sony even admitted in the book: "The Revolutionaries at Sony" that they consistently pushed the press to make comparisons between the two platforms, again Sega needed a better handle on the press and there own PR however.

If anything recently I've been thinking, I actually believe Sega's issue with the Saturn was not that it had too little time, from that presupposed moment they saw Sony's tech specs in late 93' to the apparent Saturn redesign, but that they had too much time. A shorter-time frame prior to Sony hitting the market would have meant perhaps they would have considered more options before any release of the Saturn.

Stronger late gen-genesis/megadrive revenues could have been focused on until the Saturn was either farmed out or made bug free. The big 3 of late 95/early96' is emblematic of the Sega Saturn, great titles too late when it really mattered, after the presses opinions had begun forming. Exasperated by Sega rushing, with a console that really needed time and care to develop for.

The Sega Saturn is really a terrible metaphor (ahem) for a a glacial Swedish drama, to develop for it you've got to loosen up and take your time, Sega's management however was a Hollywood studio getting hold of said Swedish script and trying to rewrite and green-light it as a mee-too mid-90's copycat disaster movie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TVC 15

I don't really agree with this statement, you seemed to have made up your own narrative history, mixing up events, skipping some and making your own timeline, I won't doubt that Sony really wowed audiences and eventually won over the press and the mainstream as the console to hedge your bets on. Most titles early on for both systems relied heavily on arcade titles, or arcade like experiences, there where of course niche titles and the first tentative steps toward longer more ambitious adventure titles in 96', overall both systems had a good mix of titles and covered a lot of bases early on.

---

Well according to your profile you are from the UK. Things were quite different in the US. Saturn owners never got any respect here. The Playstation brand was a juggernaut. The two Tekken games were perfect arcade ports, as well as Mortal Kombat 3. Sega got the Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 as an exclusive and that helped Sega, but again, it was a 2-D game. The Saturn never had that luxury with perfectly ported 3-D polygonal arcade games, correct me if I'm wrong. The Saturn had perfect arcade ports of 2-D games but most were never released outside of Japan. The mid 90s was the beginning of the end for the arcade business for the US. Many arcades in my area were closing down and were extinct by 2000. Sony knew this and concentrated on 3-D polygonal games knowing that it could out perform the Saturn capabilities. You are correct about Tomb Raider being released on both systems at the same time. An error on my part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TVC 15

Sony even admitted in the book: "The Revolutionaries at Sony" that they consistently pushed the press to make comparisons between the two platforms, again Sega needed a better handle on the press and there own PR however.

---

I would not doubt that. Sega did the same by comparing Sonic to Super Mario World and that worked in Sega's favor. The Saturn's FMV and 3-D was piss poor compared to Sony's capabilities, and the press exploited that. By the time Sega started to master 3-D (Panzer Dragoon Saga and Burning Rangers) it was too late.

However I will say this. I believe Quake and Duke Nuken 3D looked and played better on the Saturn. Policenauts for the Saturn ran at 30fps and Playstation version ran at 15fps, but neither released outside of Japan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lan Di

The Saturn's FMV and 3-D was piss poor compared to Sony's capabilities, and the press exploited that.

---

Not really, if the games use a lot of quads and scaled sprites then the saturn can actually put quite a few more polygons onscreen than the PS1. Working with quads is a lot tougher than triangles though, and most developers just put 2 points in the same position, making the quad a triangle. This of course gave the PS1 a big advantage. Transparencies were another area where the PS1 was a lot better. Even for 2D stuff the easier to work with transparencies meant that direct PS1 ports of 2D games would end up shitty on the saturn, like what happened with symphony of the night. There's no reason for that game not to have transparencies on par with the PS1 through the VDP2.

Agreed. Symphony of the night was horrible on the Saturn. It was a lazy port with mediocre extra levels. Princess Crown is a perfect example of 2D platforming action adventure done right on the Saturn.