The joint SEGA-SONY hardware system - Sega of America and Sony tried to team up

[MrSega]

Well the thing is that carts are still expensive though and Sega's plan was for the 32X to last well into 1998. And some of the shit he says he sounds liek he is outright lying. We offered the PSx and N64 hardware buy SoJ said no lol.

PSX hardware was garbage and System 64/Ultra 64 was only meant for Model 3.

The SEGA Neptune design could do everything 32X could and a whole lot more.

The add on was only a good idea on paper.

Saturn was already fine for console hardware. SEGA's mis-management botched it all up.

Which is why as far as I'm concerned, SOJ deserves little blame. The only thing their guilty of is mis-communication with SOA on Saturn.

[Tripredacus]

PSX hardware was garbage.

Sorry Pal, the PSX was way ahead of its time. Can play DVDs and be a DVR at the same time?

[parallaxscroll]

[URL="http://www.system16.com/hardware.php?id=709"]
The Saturn seems to be designed to handle Model 2 ports in every way except pure vertex/polygon processing, in every other way Saturn is comparable to Model 2. In fact, if the Saturn had a beefier VDP1 alone it would have bested the Model 2 handily.

I pretty much disagree.

Saturn was designed to be the ultimate 2D/sprite-pushing hardware. There were half-ass attempts to beef it up to the point where it was able cope with poor vertex/geometry/polygon processing & texture mapping.

VDP1 (as well as other components of Saturn) would've had to have been A LOT beefier to even get close to what Martin Marietta put into upgrading Model 1, into Model 2.

The Saturn was not even capable of 100% 1:1 ports of the flat shaded Model 1 games, even though Saturn was more powerful than Model 1 in *some* aspects.

Some of the best attempts on Saturn to recreate the Model 2 experience at home (VF2, Sega Rally, Daytona USA CCE/CE) were still not even remotely close to Model 2 in terms of visuals.

The best effort was indeed VF2. Yes it was very impressive, 60fps and even higher screen resolution than the Model 2 arcade. Even so, not only were the 3D backgrounds changed to 2D, and parts removed altogether, but even the character models lacked depth. They had a very flat-looking appearance. I don't mean texture wise, I mean geometry wise.

Look, even the much more powerful 3Dfx Voodoo Graphics (Voodoo 1) and PowerVR Series 1 cards (PCX1 / PCX2) were not capable of 1:1 exact ports of Sega Model 2 or Namco System 22 games.

Example, the unrelease PowerVR port of the arcade Rave Racer (not Ridge Racer or Rage Racer but the 3rd arcade game in the series) was only promised to run at 30fps (instead of 60fps) on Pentium 133 machine, and with significantly fewer polygons.

Model 2 was not merely a spec of 300,000 textured polys/sec. It was also the quality. True Z-buffered/depth buffered polys, perspective correct textures with some sort of filtering or blending applied (unlike Namco System 22 games). As well as reasonable ease of development, unlike Saturn.

I'm also not looking through rose-tinted glasses. I've played many a Model 2 game in various locations in recent (1-3) years. I've played some of the very best Saturn "3D" Saturn games recently as well. There is no comparison.
Sega Model 2 and Namco System 22 / System Super 22 simply SHIT on both Saturn and PS1 from a great height. Those arcade boards represented the high end during 1993-1995/96.

Both Saturn and PS1 were used as low-end arcade boards, in the form of ST-V/Titan and System 11 respectively. It was a high-low mix. High meaning Model 2 and System 22. Low meaning ST-V/Titan and System 11. It's not so much unlike what the U.S. Air Force did in the 1970s and 1980s. They had the high-end F-15 Eagle in limited numbers since they were so complex and expensive, and the low-end F-16 Fighting Falcon in large numbers since it was simple and inexpensive.
The U.S. Navy did much the same with the high-end F-14 Tomcat and low-end F/A-18 Hornet. The high-low mix.


Sorry for the rant. I'm not implying Model 2 and System 22 were God boards. They themselves were lower-end versions of GE Aeropace Compu-Scene and Evans & Sutherland military/commercial simulators costing millions of dollars.

Like Saturn and PS1, both Model 2 and System 22 had various strengths and weaknesses. Model 2 used a lower resolution and lacked gouraud shading. System 22 rendered somewhat fewer polygons and lacked any form of texture filtering or blending, so textures had a pixelated look, though not as bad as PS1 since System 22 games had a higher screen res and higher texture res.


Anyway, I think I made my point.

Sheath, please don't think I'm directing this at you personally. I'm not. I'm just sort of thinking out loud. Stating my take on Model 2 (and System 22) vs Saturn (and PS1).

[parallaxscroll]

PSX hardware was garbage and System 64/Ultra 64 was only meant for Model 3.

What the heck?

What's a "System 64" ? Nevermind, but Nintendo and SGI's "Project Reality", the Ultra 64 / Nintendo 64, was not even remotely close to Sega/Lockheed Martin's twin Real3D/Pro-1000 based Model 3 board.

Model 3 was something like, an order of magnitude (10 times) more powerful than Nintendo 64.

Nintendo 64 polygon performance with textures, shading, z-buffering, alpha-blending, fog, lighting, texture filtering, mip-mapping, anti-aliasing, etc. applied: 160,000/sec.
Framerates? anything from 60fps to 30fps to 20fps and sometimes less.

Model 3 polygon performance with textures, shading, z-buffering, alpha-blending, lighting, fog, texture filtering, mip-mapping, anti-aliasing and all other features applied: anywhere from 1,000,000 to 1,500,000/sec.
Framerates? Butter-smooth, constant, consistant 60fps all the time, no matter what is happening on the screen. Model 3 could be locked at 60fps, or 30fps, but all Model 3 games were locked at 60fps.

Even the 3DO/Matsushita M2, which was around 2 to 3 times more powerful than Nintendo 64, wasn't even close to the Model 3 board.
The M2 could handle somewhere around 300,000 to 500,000 textured, shaded, lit polys/sec with all features/effects applied.

Even Sega's mighty Dreamcast (with *conservatively* anywhere from 3 to 6 times more power than 3DO M2) while more powerful and better than Model 3 in many ways,
was not capable of reproducing Model 3 Step 2.0 / 2.1 games 100% 1:1 exact. I highly doubt for example that Dreamcast was capable of a perfect port of Daytona USA 2.
Yes, EVEN though Dreamcast had some games that well surpassed Model 3 games in most areas. i.e. Model 3 arcade VF3 vs Dreamcast Dead or Alive 2.



I think the first consoles that were capable of 1:1 ports of the later Model 3 games (if programmed for properly) would be the GameCube/Wii and original Xbox.

BTW, the GameCube was around 4 times as powerful as Dreamcast (according to Yuji Naka in an interview about Phantasy Star Online) and GameCube was dozens of times more powerful than Nintendo 64.

[sheath]

Right, and I wasn't implying that the Saturn was designed to handle ports of Model 2 Arcade games at all. I am convinced though that when they designed the 3D capabilities of the Saturn, being able to adapt Model 2 games was much more important to the process than "matching the PS1" as everybody likes to claim these days.

[A Black Falcon]

Agreed on all points.

I also reiterate that Sonic Xtreme's biggest problem was that it started development on 32X , and imagine the hell STI was going through having to port their baby to completely different hardware with a totally different architecture and design. Having to shift all resources to another platform is problematic especially if you don't know how to probably design for it.

This was a RED flag right here that should have told STI the project was DOOMED. Xtreme should have been axed in 1995. Peter Morewic's Sonic Pool project had the potential to become something neat had STI understood that this Project had better shot of making it off the drawing board because it was developed from the ground up on Saturn hardware.

As I said recently, I think you're quite wrong on X-Treme, and that it'd have been fine had Sega of Japan not interfered by forcing them to abandon the "levels" engine. Sonic Pool looks quite interesting as well, but X-Treme was farther along, and looked good...

But of course what Sega really needed was to not release the 32X, so that everyone involved could start on Saturn games sooner. Maybe a couple of Sonic Saturn games then, one maybe from the Chaotix team (unless they did a Genesis game instead), and hopefully something from STI, if management didn't kill it that time?

[Thunderblaze16]

As I read threw this thread, something just kept coming to my mind.

Why in hell do you guys still take anything MrSega says to consideration if it just leads up to pointless arguing?

[MrSega]

As I said recently, I think you're quite wrong on X-Treme, and that it'd have been fine had Sega of Japan not interfered by forcing them to abandon the "levels" engine. Sonic Pool looks quite interesting as well, but X-Treme was farther along, and looked good...

But of course what Sega really needed was to not release the 32X, so that everyone involved could start on Saturn games sooner. Maybe a couple of Sonic Saturn games then, one maybe from the Chaotix team (unless they did a Genesis game instead), and hopefully something from STI, if management didn't kill it that time?

Exactly. It's more proof that the 32X should have never,ever existed.


The point that I was making is that by 1995, the damage had already been done with the 32X debacle. The idea of not starting any Saturn projects from the ground up very certainly was a bad one. Xtreme was already done for. The fact that STI had to beg SOJ for a level engine instead of being able to design on from the ground up is testament to how painful and convoluted the project had gotten.

@sheath. I agree and have pointed out that Saturn's hardware was customized to run Model 2 games. What part of PSX's severe technical limitations and inferior hardware to Saturn do people not understand?

[parallaxscroll]

Right, and I wasn't implying that the Saturn was designed to handle ports of Model 2 Arcade games at all. I am convinced though that when they designed the 3D capabilities of the Saturn, being able to adapt Model 2 games was much more important to the process than "matching the PS1" as everybody likes to claim these days.

Ah, I kinda missed your point. Totally agree there.

[stu]

So Sega turned down

1. Sony's hardware in the early 90s
2. Silicon Graphics' MIPS CPU + early version of the RCP (Reality Co-Processor) in 1993, that would Nintendo use.
3. 3DO's M2 around late 1995. While M2 didn't live upto the hype, it was much better than PS1, and around two to three times as strong as N64

4. 3Dfx Voodoo 2 or Banshee variant in SoA's version of Dreamcast.

You can also (kinda) add the original 3DO chipset to that list. According to "The Ultimate History of Video Games" by Steven L Kent, Michael Katz (former CEO of Sega of America) is quoted on page 484 as saying that RJ Mical and Dave Needle presented him with the concept of paying them $2 million and giving them 2 years to develop the next "ulitmate revolutionary" video game system, according to Katz he was all for it and was ready to pay them the money, however he had to agree any deal with Sega of Japan and according to Katz the SOJ management turned them down when they presented their ideas to them. Interesting stuff.

As I said recently, I think you're quite wrong on X-Treme, and that it'd have been fine had Sega of Japan not interfered by forcing them to abandon the "levels" engine. Sonic Pool looks quite interesting as well, but X-Treme was farther along, and looked good...

But of course what Sega really needed was to not release the 32X, so that everyone involved could start on Saturn games sooner. Maybe a couple of Sonic Saturn games then, one maybe from the Chaotix team (unless they did a Genesis game instead), and hopefully something from STI, if management didn't kill it that time?

To be quite frank, you'd be better off double checking most of what MrSega posts, considering his hilariously poor grasp of Sega history. I'm quite sure you know this but Christian Senn has a website dedicated to the development of Sonic Xtreme and covers most of it's development timeline in a FAQ on there.

http://www.senntient.com/projects/xtreme/FAQ.html

As I read threw this thread, something just kept coming to my mind.

Why in hell do you guys still take anything MrSega says to consideration if it just leads up to pointless arguing?

Quite true, but MrSega comes up with such an epic quality of bullshit that its almost worth the arguments!

[Barone]

Why in hell do you guys still take anything MrSega says to consideration if it just leads up to pointless arguing?

Rep given.

[A Black Falcon]

Exactly. It's more proof that the 32X should have never,ever existed.

This is certainly true.

The point that I was making is that by 1995, the damage had already been done with the 32X debacle. The idea of not starting any Saturn projects from the ground up very certainly was a bad one. Xtreme was already done for. The fact that STI had to beg SOJ for a level engine instead of being able to design on from the ground up is testament to how painful and convoluted the project had gotten.

MrSega, I know you like to get Sega history completely wrong, but seriously, read about the project again. STI didn't have to "beg SOJ for a level engine" until AFTER SOJ had already doomed the project through mismanagement by forcing them to abandon their original, quite functional, levels engine. Get rid of that really stupid decision, and you'd get rid of the need for STI to be asking anyone for a new engine, and the game probably finishes in 1996 as well.

@sheath. I agree and have pointed out that Saturn's hardware was customized to run Model 2 games. What part of PSX's severe technical limitations and inferior hardware to Saturn do people not understand?

Uh, the PS1's easy hardware transparencies give it a major technical advantage over the Saturn, and the fact that it uses triangles also proved to be a big plus, because nothing that used quads caught on.

You can also (kinda) add the original 3DO chipset to that list. According to "The Ultimate History of Video Games" by Steven L Kent, Michael Katz (former CEO of Sega of America) is quoted on page 484 as saying that RJ Mical and Dave Needle presented him with the concept of paying them $2 million and giving them 2 years to develop the next "ulitmate revolutionary" video game system, according to Katz he was all for it and was ready to pay them the money, however he had to agree any deal with Sega of Japan and according to Katz the SOJ management turned them down when they presented their ideas to them. Interesting stuff.

Passing on the 3DO chip was a good idea, honestly. That chip was too badly dated to be competitive past the N64 launch.

To be quite frank, you'd be better off double checking most of what MrSega posts, considering his hilariously poor grasp of Sega history. I'm quite sure you know this but Christian Senn has a website dedicated to the development of Sonic Xtreme and covers most of it's development timeline in a FAQ on there.

http://www.senntient.com/projects/xtreme/FAQ.html




Quite true, but MrSega comes up with such an epic quality of bullshit that its almost worth the arguments!

It is somewhat impressive how badly wrong his version of Sega (and videogame) history often is... but he's not wrong about everything, just many things. He should read that FAQ though, and try to remember it. So should anyone else asking about X-Treme; there have been some questions about it recently.

[MrSega]

@A Black Falcon. The original" Fish eye 2D" engine for 32X had been abandoned because it was a serious hassle for STI to port the coded ROM and level binaries over to Saturn. Converting game ROMs from cartridges to CD ROM especially if the hardware was completely different.

SOJ had little faith in Xtreme for a reason. It was not a Japanese project and wasn't 3D. SEGA needed a killer app 3D game. Xtreme wasn't it.

Pool certainly was.


Even had Naka let STI use the Nights engine, it still wouldn't have made much of a difference marketing-wise. The game still would have looked inferior to Mario 64 and Crash Bandicoot. Sonic Pool was the answer and Peter Morewic knew that. STI just didn't agree with him.

[Vector2013]

There is a good debate thread for "if the 32x should exist or not" in another section in case you guys are interested, since I saw it come up a lot in this thread.

http://www.sega-16.com/forum/showthr...X-exist/page19

Interview.

http://info.sonicretro.org/Mike_Wall...ne_19,_2007%29

"Sega-16: Was there ever a chance of Xtreme coming out on the 32X? If it had been released on the infamous mushroom, do you think it could have saved or at least extended its life span?

Mike Wallis: Releasing Xtreme for the 32X wasn't even a consideration, to my knowledge. The 32X wasn't performing to Sega's expectations, and with that came a shift in software development, ultimately to the Saturn. Xtreme remained in limbo for a few months during that time as internal debates and technology assessments were done on the V08.

It was actually quite surprising to see just how quickly the 32X was abandoned by Sega as a whole. Once marketing failed to continue to support it, that house came tumbling down. "

But.

"Sega-16: There's been great confusion over the origins of Sonic Xtreme. Artist Chris Senn recently told us that the game had its origins on the Genesis, where it was moved to the 32X before settling on the Saturn. Many people believe it was the evolution of a game outlined by designer Mike Kosaka entitled "Sonic on Mars." Moreover, Peter Morawiec told us that he and Adrian Stephens were convinced by Sega to open a satellite STI office in Burbank, CA to work on a Sonic game that wasn't Xtreme. Was this Sonic on Mars?

Mike Wallis: I don't know anything about Xtreme being on the Genesis. Perhaps it was originally conceived that way, but it was before my time at STI. When I joined STI in November of '94, Xtreme (not called this at that time, by the way) was slated for the 32X. I don't believe it was referred to as Sonic on Mars but rather Sonic Mars because internally the 32X platform was code named the "Mars." In essence, it was Sonic The Hedgehog for the Mars gaming platform, or for short, Sonic Mars."

[stu]

Passing on the 3DO chip was a good idea, honestly. That chip was too badly dated to be competitive past the N64 launch.

Well if it turned out essentially the same chip that the Mical/Needle team turned out for 3DO ready for a 1993 launch then I would agree. However since Sega would likely of had the chipset in development for an additional year and probably with a different and possibly better CPU I wonder if it would of helped Sega out vs the Playstation (a more integrated chipset design and possibly a more streamlined development system?) Who knows? Like I said though a lot of interesting stuff.