The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Which console is the best?
Everyone asks this question, but there can only be one answer... none of them are!
Each of the next generation consoles has its own strengths and weaknesses and for the most part, the success of a console is often not relative to the quality of it. I don't think that this is fair.
The Dreamcast was the first of the next generation consoles. It tried, it failed. The main reason for this is that SEGA did not have Joe consumer on their side.
After huge success with the Megadrive, SEGA promised something new... the world's first 32-bit console. At this point, SEGA were the company of choice in America and Europe although in Japan they weren't so popular. Then, with the public excited and pre-ordering Saturns, SEGA made a huge mistake.
Eager to keep the Megadrive going for as long as possible, SEGA delayed the Saturn and released the Mega CD and 32X. This did not go down well. Then SONY arrived on the scene offering screenshots of 'true 3D technology.'
SEGA made the same mistake with the Dreamcast while, although not extending the Saturn's life, they came up with some quirky adverts with no in-game screenshots at all. Once again, SONY delivered the goods. Or did they?
The Dreamcast, now dead, was a great console but failed due to SEGA's own stupidity. SONY have money coming in from DVD players and the like as well as PS2 and so can afford to advertise. In a way, the N64 might have done better with more advertising, and NINTENDO may have gone the way of SEGA, had they not had the GB to fall back on.
Some people feel that PS2 has not fully lived up to its hype. GC may go the way of DC/N64. X-Box may make a fatal error. Each console has its own merits, but ultimately, people will take sales figures as a sign of quality, and that aint right!
Everyone asks this question, but there can only be one answer... none of them are!
Each of the next generation consoles has its own strengths and weaknesses and for the most part, the success of a console is often not relative to the quality of it. I don't think that this is fair.
The Dreamcast was the first of the next generation consoles. It tried, it failed. The main reason for this is that SEGA did not have Joe consumer on their side.
After huge success with the Megadrive, SEGA promised something new... the world's first 32-bit console. At this point, SEGA were the company of choice in America and Europe although in Japan they weren't so popular. Then, with the public excited and pre-ordering Saturns, SEGA made a huge mistake.
Eager to keep the Megadrive going for as long as possible, SEGA delayed the Saturn and released the Mega CD and 32X. This did not go down well. Then SONY arrived on the scene offering screenshots of 'true 3D technology.'
SEGA made the same mistake with the Dreamcast while, although not extending the Saturn's life, they came up with some quirky adverts with no in-game screenshots at all. Once again, SONY delivered the goods. Or did they?
The Dreamcast, now dead, was a great console but failed due to SEGA's own stupidity. SONY have money coming in from DVD players and the like as well as PS2 and so can afford to advertise. In a way, the N64 might have done better with more advertising, and NINTENDO may have gone the way of SEGA, had they not had the GB to fall back on.
Some people feel that PS2 has not fully lived up to its hype. GC may go the way of DC/N64. X-Box may make a fatal error. Each console has its own merits, but ultimately, people will take sales figures as a sign of quality, and that aint right!
Which console is the best?
Everyone asks this question, but there can only be one answer... none of them are!
Each of the next generation consoles has its own strengths and weaknesses and for the most part, the success of a console is often not relative to the quality of it. I don't think that this is fair.
The Dreamcast was the first of the next generation consoles. It tried, it failed. The main reason for this is that SEGA did not have Joe consumer on their side.
After huge success with the Megadrive, SEGA promised something new... the world's first 32-bit console. At this point, SEGA were the company of choice in America and Europe although in Japan they weren't so popular. Then, with the public excited and pre-ordering Saturns, SEGA made a huge mistake.
Eager to keep the Megadrive going for as long as possible, SEGA delayed the Saturn and released the Mega CD and 32X. This did not go down well. Then SONY arrived on the scene offering screenshots of 'true 3D technology.'
SEGA made the same mistake with the Dreamcast while, although not extending the Saturn's life, they came up with some quirky adverts with no in-game screenshots at all. Once again, SONY delivered the goods. Or did they?
The Dreamcast, now dead, was a great console but failed due to SEGA's own stupidity. SONY have money coming in from DVD players and the like as well as PS2 and so can afford to advertise. In a way, the N64 might have done better with more advertising, and NINTENDO may have gone the way of SEGA, had they not had the GB to fall back on.
Some people feel that PS2 has not fully lived up to its hype. GC may go the way of DC/N64. X-Box may make a fatal error. Each console has its own merits, but ultimately, people will take sales figures as a sign of quality, and that aint right!
Everyone asks this question, but there can only be one answer... none of them are!
Each of the next generation consoles has its own strengths and weaknesses and for the most part, the success of a console is often not relative to the quality of it. I don't think that this is fair.
The Dreamcast was the first of the next generation consoles. It tried, it failed. The main reason for this is that SEGA did not have Joe consumer on their side.
After huge success with the Megadrive, SEGA promised something new... the world's first 32-bit console. At this point, SEGA were the company of choice in America and Europe although in Japan they weren't so popular. Then, with the public excited and pre-ordering Saturns, SEGA made a huge mistake.
Eager to keep the Megadrive going for as long as possible, SEGA delayed the Saturn and released the Mega CD and 32X. This did not go down well. Then SONY arrived on the scene offering screenshots of 'true 3D technology.'
SEGA made the same mistake with the Dreamcast while, although not extending the Saturn's life, they came up with some quirky adverts with no in-game screenshots at all. Once again, SONY delivered the goods. Or did they?
The Dreamcast, now dead, was a great console but failed due to SEGA's own stupidity. SONY have money coming in from DVD players and the like as well as PS2 and so can afford to advertise. In a way, the N64 might have done better with more advertising, and NINTENDO may have gone the way of SEGA, had they not had the GB to fall back on.
Some people feel that PS2 has not fully lived up to its hype. GC may go the way of DC/N64. X-Box may make a fatal error. Each console has its own merits, but ultimately, people will take sales figures as a sign of quality, and that aint right!