Best Sega franchise/series

[Baloo]

If it was(and yes, it probally was), it was only because Sega was being run by a bunch of morons.

Shenmue was a flop. The game cost so much to produce that every Dreamcast owner at the time would have had to buy two copies of the game for them to break even. The problem with Shenmue was not sales, but the fact that the game was just way too expensive to produce, like most hollywood movies.

[Crackdown]

Has to be the SOR games for me!!!

[sheath]

Shenmue was a flop. The game cost so much to produce that every Dreamcast owner at the time would have had to buy two copies of the game for them to break even. The problem with Shenmue was not sales, but the fact that the game was just way too expensive to produce, like most hollywood movies.

That is why it needed to be syndicated almost annually, but people needed to keep buying the annual updates like they do, oh, EA, Activision, Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo franchises.

[Bastardcat]

Shemue is probably the most Homer-goggled game next to FFVII.
It hasn't aged well, and it brought back a plague that should have died with laserdisc FMV arcade games.

[Zoltor]

Shenmue was a flop. The game cost so much to produce that every Dreamcast owner at the time would have had to buy two copies of the game for them to break even. The problem with Shenmue was not sales, but the fact that the game was just way too expensive to produce, like most hollywood movies.

Yea sure, it probally did cost a lot(that game was so beyond It's time, It's hard to believe the DC could do such, not to mention actually fit on a few CDs), that's why It's important to build a fanbase(so you can sell other Shenmue merchandise to make up the money, like wall scrolls, skill scroll props, exc).

If I recall, surprisingly enough, there was an advertisement on TV for it(not enough though, and it could've been better. It should've been plastered on the TV, and the commercial needed a narrator that could go into detail on the game's features/high points, that were being showed in the commercial).

[Bastardcat]

I hear people clamoring for a Part 3, but we all know what is going to happen if it ever gets made. It will fall short of people's impossibly high expectations(DNF anyone?), and get labeled as the disappointment of the decade.

[Zoltor]

I hear people clamoring for a Part 3, but we all know what is going to happen if it ever gets made. It will fall short of people's impossibly high expectations(DNF anyone?), and get labeled as the disappointment of the decade.

No doubt, because very few company care about quality anymore, and they only care about getting stuff out on the shelves, so it would be almost surely rushed.

[Bastardcat]

Not just that, but even if they did everything right, the fans would still tear it apart. Inflated expectations are a game developer's worst enemy. Its why so many games that are good get absolutely ripped to shreds, because thanks to review sites, the most vocal of the gaming public considers anything below a 9.5 out of 10 to be utter shit.
In short:

[Zoltor]

Not just that, but even if they did everything right, the fans would still tear it apart. Inflated expectations are a game developer's worst enemy. Its why so many games that are good get absolutely ripped to shreds, because thanks to review sites, the most vocal of the gaming public considers anything below a 9.5 out of 10 to be utter shit.
In short:

Oh that's new, haven't noticed that(but from the Sega fan community, I wouldn't be surprised). 8-8.9 is very good, anything higher is a greatness rating, anything legitimately(be on the look out for unjustly rated game, do your research) lower then 8.0 is probally not worth playing in this day, and age(there's way too many awesome games in existance to just settle for good or in other words meh games).

Needless to say, 8.0 is far way from a 9.0 quality game, nevermind a 9.5 yikes.

[Bastardcat]

The percentage system is used incorrectly, because they equate it to the way they did grades in school. Anything below a C is considered awful. A 5.0 should be considered an average game's score, not a 7.0

[NeoZeedeater]

Shemue is probably the most Homer-goggled game next to FFVII.
It hasn't aged well, and it brought back a plague that should have died with laserdisc FMV arcade games.

It did popularize QTEs unfortunately but I think the game has aged fine. It has a ton of flaws so I understand it's not for everyone but they're the same flaws it always had. If someone loved the game then but hates it now, I think it's more that their taste has changed.

As for best franchise, that's a tough one and I'll think on it a bit. I like Sonic 1 and CD more than any other Sega game but if we're going by an entire franchise, I might pick Shinobi for variety and quality across multiple systems and generations. I still don't think the PS2 games are that great, though.

[Zoltor]

The percentage system is used incorrectly, because they equate it to the way they did grades in school. Anything below a C is considered awful. A 5.0 should be considered an average game's score, not a 7.0

It's not just mentality, It's fact if a gave "averages" anything under 7, It's a really bad game.

The rating system works fine, only people hung up on number games, claim It's flawed, this Isn't math class, quality doesn't need to be spread out through the numbers.

One thing is for sure, it works a hell of a lot better the the 5 number rating system, becauase the 1-10 system lets you tell "how" good or bad a game is, where the 5 number rating system is super vague(so much so, that a crappy game could easily get a decent score, just because there are much worse games out there.

[Bastardcat]

I like how reviewers like CGR do things. No numbers, or letter grades anywhere. You got a good in depth review, and they aren't afraid to buck against popular opinion.

[Zoltor]

I like how reviewers like CGR do things. No numbers, or letter grades anywhere. You got a good in depth review, and they aren't afraid to buck against popular opinion.

Yes most gamers do that as well(aka non professional review, while 1 or 2 reviews are usually unjust, the average is "usually" close to spot on), but it doesn't hurt to put a number next to it, to point out the overall quality of the game/what the reviewer thinks it is after all things are considered.

[Bastardcat]

On the contrary, I think a number does hurt, because in most cases that is all people pay attention to. They don't care to know why the presentation got an 8.5, while graphics got a 7.0.