Shoot Out: DC vs PS2 Games (Launch - 2000)

Discussion in 'Games' started by Haoshiro, Apr 18, 2006.

  1. Haoshiro macrumors 68000


    Feb 9, 2006
    USA, KS
    This thread is an offshoot of another thread. I didn't want to send it so far off subject so my response has found a new home here.

    This is a comparison of Dreamcast and PlayStation2 games, both the Launch Titles as well as all games by the End of 2000.

    It has been said the Dreamcast failed because of Games, specifically. While there are many reasons the DC failed, Games is not one of them. This comparison intends to prove that and spark healthy discussion on the topic from fans of both systems.

    NOTE: With the exception of the launch titles, the lists are not comprehensive. There were so many games out by end of 2000 (especially for DC) that I removed a bunch from the list. Most 2D fighters were cut, as were games that reviewed poorly.

    PS2 Launch Titles (10/26/2000)
    1. Armored Core 2
    2. Dead or Alive 2: Hardcore
    3. Dynasty Warriors 2
    4. ESPN Winter X Games Snowboarding
    5. Eternal Ring
    6. Evergrace
    7. FantaVision*
    8. Gungriffon Blaze
    9. Kessen
    10. Madden NFL 2001
    11. Midnight Club: Street Racing
    12. MotoGP
    13. NHL 2001
    14. Orphen: Scion of Sorcery
    15. Q-Ball: Billiards Master
    16. Ready 2 Rumble Boxing: Round 2
    17. Ridge Racer V
    18. Silent Scope
    19. Smuggler's Run
    20. SSX
    21. Street Fighter EX3
    22. Summoner
    23. Swing Away Golf
    24. Tekken Tag Tournament
    25. TimeSplitters
    26. Unreal Tournament
    27. Wild Wild Racing
    28. X-Squad

    * 1 First Part Title

    PS2 by End of 2000 (Excluding above lists)
    1. Sky Odyssey
    2. FIFA 2001: Major League Soccer
    3. Theme Park Roller Coaster

    DC Launch Titles (09/09/1999)
    1. AeroWings
    2. AirForce Delta
    3. Blue Stinger*
    4. Expendable
    5. Flag to Flag*
    6. House of the Dead 2*
    7. Hydro Thunder
    8. Monaco Grand Prix
    9. Mortal Kombat Gold
    10. NFL 2K*
    11. NFL Blitz 2000
    12. Pen Pen Tri-Icelon
    13. Power Stone
    14. Ready 2 Rumble Boxing
    15. Sonic Adventure*
    16. Soul Calibur
    17. TNN Motorsports Hardcore Heat
    18. Tokyo Xtreme Racer
    19. Trickstyle

    * 5 First-Party Launch Titles

    DC by PS2 Launch (10/26/2000)
    1. Armada
    2. Chu Chu Rocket
    3. Crazy Taxi
    4. Dead or Alive 2
    5. F1 World Grand Prix
    6. Ferrari F355 Challenge
    7. Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver
    8. Marvel vs. Capcom 2: New Age of Heroes
    9. Marvel vs. Capcom: Clash of Super Heroes
    10. MDK2
    11. Mr. Driller
    12. NBA 2K
    13. NBA Showtime: NBA on NBC
    14. NFL 2K1
    15. NHL 2K
    16. Power Stone 2
    17. Quake III: Arena
    18. Railroad Tycoon II
    19. Rayman 2: The Great Escape
    20. Re-Volt
    21. Resident Evil - CODE: Veronica
    22. Samba De Amigo
    23. San Francisco Rush 2049
    24. Seaman
    25. Sega Bass Fishing
    26. Sega GT
    27. Sega Rally 2: Sega Rally Championship
    28. Shadow Man
    29. Space Channel 5
    30. Test Drive V-Rally
    31. Tokyo Xtreme Racer 2
    32. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater
    33. Toy Commander
    34. Ultimate Fighting Championship
    35. Vigilante 8: Second Offense
    36. Virtua Fighter 3tb
    37. Virtua Tennis
    38. Wild Metal

    DC by End of 2000 (Excluding above lists)
    1. Cannon Spike
    2. Dave Mirra Freestyle BMX
    3. Grandia II
    4. Guilty Gear X
    5. Gunbird 2
    6. Jet Grind Radio
    7. Napple Tale: Arsia in Daydream
    8. NBA 2K1
    9. Red Dog
    10. Shenmue
    11. Skies of Arcadia
    12. Starlancer
    13. Test Drive Le Mans
    14. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2
    15. Vanishing Point

    Summary Totals:
    • PS2 Launch Titles: 28
    • PS2 Games by End of 2000: 31
    • DC Launch Titles: 19
    • DC Games by PS2 Launch: 57
    • DC Games by End of 2000: 72

    My observations:
    This really reminds me why I had such huge amounts of fun on the Dreamcast. It had a great library of games just by end of 2000 alone. It also had a lot of arcade style games that made the experience seem unique, at least to me.

    What people liked is subject to opinion, that is true. But I think it is pretty clear that comparing the games on both systems out by 2000 really shows Dreamcast had the strongest lineup. You'll also see a lot of games listed that did eventually go to PS2, but they hit first on DC.

    I bolded the games that are stand-outs in my opinion; does anyone think PS2 had the games DC did when it came out? Did the libraries even compete?

    Again, we are just talking games here, not comparing the hardware.

    People will definitely debate Madden 2K1 vs NFL 2K/2K1 and this really comes down to preference. 'I recall the debates on review sites and it pretty much end as: If you're used to Madden and that is what you know how to play, it will be hard to play NFL2K1 because it plays/controls so different. However, in the end if you take out the familiarity, NFL2K1 is an all around better game in most areas.'

    Tekken vs Soul Calibur - Both great games in my opinion but you, again, have to learn how to really play SC. There is some great counter/deflection moves and the more you play the more, I think, you see that the balance of both games is pretty equal. Kudos to Namco for two great fighters (IMHO).

    SSX vs Trickstyle - I'd have to say SSX wins, though I never got a lot of play time in. It was definitely easier to pick up and play, Trickstyle really took [me] some time to get used to and between my friends and I, I almost always lost!

    All the other games for DC on the list though... more impressive then I remembered. :)
  2. Dagless Suspended


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    All I remember was the PS2 having too many of these "serious" games, where the DC had some fishing game, Crazy Taxi and Sonic. I remember playing those at a mates house and it was bloody awesome. Way after the PS2 launch my mate picked one up, with a few multiplayer and competitive single player games. Nowhere near as fun.
    I picked a DC up about 2 years ago. It's sitting in my wardrobe, waiting till I buy an s-video cable for it. Have 3 regular controllers, 1 arcade stick (awesomes), a plethora of games including Rival Schools (YEA!) and SF2/3 something. Just cannot fault the DC. On a consumer level, or to me at least, it pushed all my buttons. Pity it died :(
  3. srobert macrumors 68020


    Jan 7, 2002
    Power Stone was so amazing on the Dreamcast… and chaotic. A Fighting game, up to 4 players, no split-screen, power-ups, weapons, huge+mobile+destructible environments, colorful characters, simple controls, etc…

    I'd love to see a new version on the next gen consoles. I loved Fokker (Falcon)

    Attached Files:

  4. supremedesigner macrumors 6502a


    Dec 9, 2005
    Gainesville, Fl

    Hydro Thunder was a BLAST!!! Except 2 players (bad choppy frames!) :mad:

    I was soo impressed about Shenmue! Same thing to Chu-Chu rocket but I LOVE PSO (Phanasty Star Online) the most!! The best game I've ever played on DC!! It was sooo much fun than PS2! :D
  5. Haoshiro thread starter macrumors 68000


    Feb 9, 2006
    USA, KS
    I'm with you on Power Stone... why did they never make a Power Stone 3 on PS2/GCN/Xbox? Come on Capcom, that game was great.

    I loved Shenmue as well, especially for the time it came out it was amazing. Someone has said that it sucked (beaches?) and they understood why Shenmue 2 bombed on Xbox. Well that is very off base. Yes it is a love/hate game, but the reason Shenmue 2 failed is because it did not come to Dreamcast in the USA. I knew many people that would have bought it, but they were happy with their DC and were not going to buy an Xbox. I think overall it was just dumb to release a sequel to a game like Shenmue on a platform where the original did not exist.

    Shenmue was to be a very connected trilogy, you need to play the first to properly enjoy the second... Really 1/2/3 were planned to be a single game, so that is telling right there.

    Outrigger... anyone play that? It was a good multiplayer shooter (FPS/TPS). Also... Quake 3 Arena, online, with DC Keyboard+Mouse, very cool...
  6. MRU Suspended


    Aug 23, 2005
  7. srobert macrumors 68020


    Jan 7, 2002
    Could be interesting if they put a strong accent on the Multiplayer element. PSP is the only current-gen console I don't already own. (Not enough games that fit my tastes). This could be one. I'll wait for the reviews. Q4 2006? :( Some of the backgrounds in the screenshots look poorly detailed. Was it like this on the Dreamcast?
  8. Dagless Suspended


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    Power Stone was great! Held its own until Smash Bros Melee arrived.

    Thing is, 99% of my DC games were in Japanese but were really simple to learn. I picked up bits from some old Japanese GB games from many, many years ago so I know "New Game" "Multiplayer" etc.
    I remember another game like Power Stone on the PS1, except you were robotic insects. In the demo we have you could be one of 3 critters. Similar gameplay. Probably never see it ever again too.
  9. XNine macrumors 68040


    Apr 7, 2005
    Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?
    Well, Armored Core 2 was a great game, as was DOA 2, Street Fighter EX 3, and RidgeRacer V. Though, this is a pretty one sided arguement. A console that was out over a YEAR before the PS 2 SHOULD have more games. Given that PS 2 had 31 games in 2 months is impressive.

    Let's not forget the later titles like MGS 2/3, ZOE 1/2, Onimusha, Twisted Metal Black, and many others.

    I owned a Dreamcast for 3 days. Bought it used, sold it after kicking Powerstone's ass and not being impressed with much else.

    I wish there were more sequals to Rival Schools available for the PS 2. I loved that game on the original PSX.
  10. Dagless Suspended


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    Aye I always secretly wanted a Rival Schools sequel to hit the current Japanese consoles. It's madness is unparalleled.
  11. beachesandmusic macrumors newbie

    Apr 11, 2006
    So you're comparing the second year of Dreamcast (remember, it was launched in 1998 in Japan) to not even a year's worth of life for the PS2? How is that fair? Why don't we compare two years worth of life with the PS2 then?

    The Dreamcast DID fail because of the games. I'll go into what games were bad later, but you can see here that at the end of 2004, the Dreamcast only had one million selling game. While 8 of the top 10 Xbox games were million sellers or more.

    Reviews don't mean anything. If they did, then Shenmue should be regarded as a mediocre game by all. But they don't. Reviews are written by people on the payroll of ad revenue. Ad's are purchased and paid for by who? The game companies. You write a review that gets more people to your site, or magazine, and you get more advertising money. Reviewers lost their credibility when they gave Zelda: Ocarina of Time a perfect score.

    Considering you're comparing a system that had been available for 2 years in most parts of the world to another system that had only been out a number of months in most parts of the world, it's no surprise that the Dreamcast had MORE games. If you want to compare the first two years of life of the PS2 to the two years of life that the Dreamcast had, then you'd have to factor in Grand Theft Auto 3, Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, Gran Turismo 3, Ratchet and Clank, Final Fantasy X, MGS 2, SOCOM, and quite a few other games.

    Gran Turismo 3 alone went on to sell more games than ALL of the games on that list I linked to, COMBINED.

    It's probably safe to say that Gran Turismo 3 and Grand Theft Auto 3, all available within the first year of the PS2's life, went on to sell more than all Dreamcast games combined.

    Furthermore, if you look at that list, the games that DID sell well ended up being on other consoles, except the first Shenmue, Sega Bass Fishing, and the sports titles, which later ended up being on multiple consoles. None of the games that are so highly regarded among the fans, except Shenmue, made it to the top seller list. A clear sign that the Dreamcast failed because of the lack of good games.

    I played the NFL 2k series every year until the last. NFL 2K5 was the first of the series that was actually worth buying. It finally played good, despite terrible bugs, and it was finally fun to play.

    Soul Calibur is also highly overrated. As I said in my other post, it's only so highly regarded because it's a Dreamcast game. Look what happened when Soul Calibur 2 came out. Everyone was so hyped up, thanks to the few Dreamcast fanboys who loved the game and overhyped it throughout the years. Then SC2 came out and everyone saw that the game really wasn't that good. Even though it was better than the original, it just wasn't as "great" as it was said to be. Tekken is definitely better. Both games are button mashers, but a match between two skilled players in Tekken is a lot more fun than Soul Calibur.

    That's completely false. Crazy Taxi was released to the PS2 and look how well it sold. The Xbox not being the "original platform" had nothing to do with Shenmue's failure. IF that were the case, then many sequels over the generations would have failed after moving to new platforms. Shenmue 2 failed because it was a boring game. The first game was boring and the second game as just as boring. Shenmue is one of the few games I can honestly say is worse than FFX. FFX beat it in every way, and it was a first generation game, compared to Shenmue being a 2nd generation game.

    Shenmue 2, Jet Set Radio, and many other Sega games have sold poorly on the systems they were released because they were just bad games. It's as simple as that.
  12. Dagless Suspended


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    Maybe the reviewers really liked it? I'd rate it as my fave game of all time. I'm sure many others would too.

    Mate, you're just starting off here and you're already sounding like a bit... I won't say but you make everything sound like nobody has an opinion. That reviewers lost credibility because they absolutely loved a game? That nobody played DC games?
  13. XNine macrumors 68040


    Apr 7, 2005
    Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?

    Sorry, but he's right. Reviewers get paid to say what they say. If the don't get paid well, then they won't review well.

    And he's right again that This comparison is completely unfair. A realist after my own heart, it seems.
  14. Haoshiro thread starter macrumors 68000


    Feb 9, 2006
    USA, KS
    Correct, and there is a reason for my comparison. I am comparing both systems offerings for a time period. This is comparing what the Dreamcast had by the time the PS2 came out.

    PS2 sold like mad; does anyone deny that? I don't. The lists show that, despite having far less good games, the PS2 sold. It was successful in spite of the quality and quantity of games; and in turn it's success brought it even more games.

    You are quick to toss out that any Dreamcast user is a "fanboy" yet you repeatedly use blatant fanboy terminology in your posts; such as claiming something is or isn't good or bad based solely on your own opinions yet stating it as a general fact, rather then simply the opinions they are.

    What? This is some confused logic if I've seen any. First you say my comparison lists are flawed then you present numbers that compare a system that had been dead for two years to one that was still active?

    And look at these numbers you listed:
    Dreamcast = 4 Million (4.5 Million North America)
    Xbox = 12 Million (13.2 Million North America)

    The Xbox had 3 times more hardware sales! This means more users! This means more software sales! So obviously there is going to be more "million sellers", there were millions more users!

    This is the same thing with PS2 that you must be failing to factor. PS2 has more users then even the Xbox has (speaking strictly USA, even), so this obviously is going to equate to more "blockbuster" titles.

    Sales though, mean little to me. I love a little game called Beyond Good & Evil, great game. But it bombed in retail. Many many titles are like this. It doesn't matter how good they are if they don't get the marketing they need. Shelf space in retail outlets is limited, they cater to the well known and publicized brands. As a long time PC gamer I have found many games that bested the "big names" in < $5 bins. Popularity is such a horrible thing to base quality on, you do realize this... right?

    Now you're really starting to make yourself sound like a troll. Sure, I'm sure that plenty of reviewers have gotten "paid off" but saying every review out their is corrupted by ad agencies is just silly. Besides, I'm sure plenty (if not most) of those million sellers you acclaim did indeed get great reviews. Popularity is almost a worse gauge then reviews, but you seem to love that stat.

    I have been a game collector for a long time. Owning systems from the Odyssey2, 2600, SMS and SNES to the PSX, DC, GCN, and Xbox with many in between. I've played more games then is healthy and if there is one thing I know it's that many gamers opinions of a game is purely subjective to their tastes. Ocarina of Time ranks high on my Top 10 of all time. This has nothing to do with hype either. I've played through it many times. Heck, when I first bought it and my N64 my entire family watched me play for seven hours straight. These are people that aren't gamers and it entertained them simply to watch. Oh, and wasn't it Popular and a Million seller? Doesn't that mean it's good based on your measurements?

    Those games did finally come; but the fact remains that PS2 had a huge install base before that happened. The system was already a success, again, in spite of the games being there or not.

    Sales again? PS2 had a much larger install base. Larger install base = more game sales. They could be good games, they could be bad games, regardless of that if there are more systems in homes there will be more sales.

    It seems pretty obvious that your clear signs are muddled in misunderstandings of your data. Things such as Sales, based on bad comparisons that include such things as a system such as the PS2 that did well from the start, before hardly any noteworthy games even existed for it. (Selling on eBay for $600-$1200 around launch time).

    More opinion based on your preferences (unless you haven't actually played through them, in which case even preferences doesn't seem to be needed to make such claims).

    You completely missed the point on Shenmue 2 and this shows you didn't play it, although that was obvious already. Shenmue was intended to be a single game. The scope was way to large though, so they cut the game into three pieces. These pieces weren't so much sequels as they were continuations of the same game. All three were, together, a single cohesive game. Shenmue 2, the middle section, was released alone on the Xbox. That is like taking a game like FFX and cutting the middle out and putting it on another system. That doesn't even make sense, and it was a ridiculous decision. It's not like a sequel like Gran Turismo 3 that was it's own game. Shenmue 2 was the middle of one game, that had been cut into 3 pieces.

    Have you heard of market saturation? Flooding a market with something causes things to get drowned. This is why may companies plan releases of titles so the sales of one doesn't kill the other. Many of the DC games that came to PS2 were not only year old ports, but they were also hitting shelves that were saturated in tons of PS2 games. This has killed many good games and made worse games be successful because of marketing bringing them to the surface.

    There is another huge issue you have completely overlooked that affected the DC very very badly: Piracy. My guess you have no idea how prolific Dreamcast piracy was. It was bad and became very popular very fast. It was easy to do once it was figured out... you didn't even need a mod chip, and later, not even a boot loader. Piracy on DC went crazy, and the sales drop was very noticable.
  15. Haoshiro thread starter macrumors 68000


    Feb 9, 2006
    USA, KS
    Oh, and some sales for you... since you like those.

    An extra comment too, just as you say reviewers are paid for good reviews, so are companies paid to avoid the competition. Square for example, EA anyone? No... surely Sony wouldn't pay companies to be exclusive, surely the companies had only solid facts as to why their products would sell better on system "X"; it had nothing to do with money being dumped at them for exclusivity! ;)
  16. DougTheImpaler macrumors 6502a

    Feb 28, 2006
    Central Illinois
    Software sales on the DC really Victor Ireland's words (president of the late Working Designs)..."sucked". People weren't buying more than 2 or 3 games on the DC, and that's part of why SEGA was still struggling two years removed from the Saturn (which didn't live long enough to see solid sales of its best games, like Panzer Dragoon Saga, Magic Knight Rayearth, Dragon Force, and Shining Force III, for example) and it's why by the time I'd had my Dreamcast all of two weeks, the price had been dropped from $199 to $99 and SEGA was getting out of the hardware biz.

    I was an extraordinary SEGA fanboi growing up, having a SG-1000, Master System, Genesis/CD/32x, and Saturn as my only consoles until I got a PSX in 1998. I loved the systems and the games and it's painful to relive the Dreamcast, because it's such a great system - even today. Last weekend, my wife's brothers and I were playing Unreal Tournament 3-way on the system. I still think Soul Calibur was the best game in the series. Sigh.
  17. Dagless Suspended


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    I don't get this, I know a few professional review writers. alright not on the internet but for newspapers. And I'm pretty sure the industry don't pay them. They're on the newspapers payroll as far as I'm aware. I don't think there's any conspiracy telling reviewers what to say. Ocarina of Time was said by many reviewers to be the best game of all time, echoed by millions of players. Smugglers Run was bashed by reviewers, also echoed by the players. So I don't get what this conspiracy is. We're not seeing 100% games left right and bloomin centre are we?
  18. Haoshiro thread starter macrumors 68000


    Feb 9, 2006
    USA, KS
    Plus it's fairly easy to tell if the reviewer actually played through the game or is giving praise/etc without merit.

    And while Reviews definitely influence Sales (therefore making Sales figures even less reliable, right?), many people read reviews after they have already bought a game. They may not have had a chance to play it yet and are at work wanting to find out more about the game, or they may have finished the game and want other people's opinion of there new favorite game.

    I myself have bought handfuls of "bargain bin" titles and went home and looked them up for reviews. Scores can be argued with but often the actual review article is detailed enough to tell if the person is marketing or has actually played the game and have an opinion.

    I would venture to say that most review sites avoid accepting bribes from companies as much as possible... if the fact they were getting paid for good reviews got out, they would be ruined.
  19. Jovian9 macrumors 68000


    Feb 19, 2003
    Planet Zebes
    No facts here, strictly opinion from someone who used to own both:
    -I absolutely loved the DC. It was hard to part with. The only reason I got rid of it was to help fund the iMac G4 when they were first released. The games were awesome. So much fun.
    -I did not like and still do not like the PS2. To me it was an inferior system compared to the Xbox, DC, and GC. I hate the controllers. I GAVE mine away to my nephews b/c I never played it.
  20. turbopants macrumors regular

    Feb 11, 2006
    I was out of the video game scene when these two consoles came out, but by the time the Dreamcast was discontinued, I had a great time stocking up on great $10 titles. The DC quickly became a favorite, as I got hooked on Jet Grind Radio, Virtua Tennis, and Sega Marine Fishing. Still love the system.
  21. Dagless Suspended


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    I'm sorry, you're all wrong. the DC didn't sell at all and nobody bought the games. those who bought games are liars. Those who liked the games are liars because reviewers didn't like them.

  22. Haoshiro thread starter macrumors 68000


    Feb 9, 2006
    USA, KS
    Dang it! You're right... if only I had known sooner I could have avoid being deceived into thinking I did own the system AND had fun playing the games! Gah! How could I have been so blind!? :eek:

    Thank you jimmi... you have... enlightened me!

  23. XNine macrumors 68040


    Apr 7, 2005
    Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?
    The point isn't whether either console had good games, the point is that this comparison is completely biased as it gives the Dreamcast more credibility simply because of the amount of games on the console at the end of 2000, which had nearly two years of life on the PS2 when it launched.

    Now, if you want to compare number of games at launch PERIOD, and not giving Dreamcast a rediculous advantage, then I'd say the PS 2 wins, hands down.
  24. beachesandmusic macrumors newbie

    Apr 11, 2006
    I know, I'm sounding like a fanboy. But honestly, I don't care. I know how the internet works. If you go against what the handful of outspoken fanboys think, then YOU are the fanboy. I honestly don't care if a small number of people don't like me because I speak the truth.

    The funny thing is, if I came here and kept quiet until I wasn't a "newbie" and had a higher ranked custom title, this argument wouldn't happen because then I would be a "respected poster." But since I'm a newbie, I get flamed for being a fanboy.

    I like Zelda: OoT, but theres no denying that the game is not the best game of all time, but merely the most overrated game of all time.

    But you're comparing two years of life of one console, to mere months of another. If you want a fair comparison, you have to compare the first two years of life of the PS2 as well.

    Hey, I posted a link to sales to prove that the games I said are bad did sell bad. You can't argue with sales, buddy. If a game is good, it will sell.

    You, on the other hand, insist on comparing two years worth of Dreamcast sales to months worth of PS2 sales. For you, it's perfectly okay to compare 10 million consoles sold (worldwide) and years worth of software library build up to something that has only been available for a couple of months.

    See? You're talking about "confused logic", but for you it's perfectly fine for the Dreamcast to have years under it's belt and a built-up software library, but it's not okay for anyother console. Whenever I've pointed out that other system's games had sold more, you use the "they have more users" argument. But you're perfectly fine comparing the Dreamcast, with two years of history, to the PS2 which had months. MONTHS. Can we stop being hypocrites now?

    If the Dreamcast was SOO good, as you say it was, then these hardware number sales would be completely different. Not to mention, with 4 million systems available in the US, it HAD the potential for many more million sellers. But you know what? The games weren't good. By the time Gran Turismo 3 was released, the PS2 had over 10 million sold worldwide. But that game still managed to sell enough, at that time, where almost 1 in 2, maybe 3, people had it. That's what a good game does. IT SELLS. Regardless of how many people do or don't have the system. Look at Super Mario 64 too. For the first years of N64s life, Super Mario 64 sold almost 1 copy for every system sold. Good games sell. There's no confused logic there. It's just how life works.

    Again, it's perfectly okay for you to compare a system with two years of history to one that only has only been available in the entire world for a matter of months? Hypocrisy at it's finest.

    This argument may have worked in the past, but that's simply not the case anymore. Beyond Good & Evil is also an overrated game. It failed on multiple levels.

    But you know what? We live in an age where almost everyone has some sort of internet access. Any person who is mildly interested in videogames at least has an old computer and a NetZero connection. Anybody, even before the time of the Dreamcast, can get online in some way and read information about games. Even if they don't have huge advertising budgets, which is hard to believe that would make a difference because I honestly see very few videogame ads on network TV and most cable channels, a person can get online and go to a place like or even one of the huge ad-sponsored sites like Gamespot and read about all the games they could ever want. Word of mouth has more of an affect on media than anything else. Look at all of these big budget movies that failed. They had millions of dollars in advertising budgets, but they failed. Why? Because people went to them, they were terrible, and they told their friends.

    People can't use this advertising thing anymore. Not in the internet age. Even a moderately old system makes it ridiculously easy to get online and find out any information you want. If a game is good, it will sell. It's that simple.

    :rolleyes: Whatever. See? This is how the internet works. If you don't go with the few outspoken fanboys, you get called names.

    No, it's not silly. Ads pay reviewers paychecks. Game companies buy the ads. It's as simple as putting 2 and 2 together and getting 4.

    So a game can only be good if it does terrible? I guess that means ET for the 2600 was the best game of all time! Look, you're not making any sense. A game becomes popular due to word of mouth. No amount of advertising is going to make a bad game sell good. Word of mouth does. Good reviews didn't make Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, San Andreas, or GT3 sell over 13 million copies. The quality of the game did that.

    That definitely has to do with hype, because OoT wasn't a very good game. I remember someone being totally taken in by OoT's "Greatness". Then after they beat it they couldn't stand the game, or the people who liked it. That was quite funny.
  25. beachesandmusic macrumors newbie

    Apr 11, 2006
    Did your family have much of a choice? Seems to me like you played it on the "main TV" in the house and they didn't have much of a choice! hahaha. Zelda 64 sold well, mainly because the N64 was having a huge drought of games. How many other games did the N64 have in 1998? You had such classics as South Park and Yoshi's Story released that year. Nintendo64 gamers had nothing else to play. I was one of the first people in my city to get a Nintendo64 in October. By the summer of 1997, I had given up on the platform because the games were few and far between, and it was pretty obvious that Nintendo had lost touch with their consumers. One of my non-gaming friends described Zelda 64 as Mario 64, but with a sword.

    I know I'll get ripped on for telling the truth about Zelda, but hey, that's how it is. Zelda: Ocarina of Time was not a very good game. It was good, however, it is entirely overrated. Everything about it was overrated. The style of gameplay, the story, even the graphics. I don't understand how a game that has you walking and doing nothing for 90% of the game can be so highly rated. When you do come across an enemy, you simply press Z and slash away until it dies. Overall, the game was considerably easier than even the Game Boy version. You say you played it for 7 hours straight.. that should have taken you almost to the end of the game in one sitting.

    The game didn't do anything new either. Auto-targetting, the day/night system, just about everything Zelda did had already been done before. The only "new" thing was the auto-jump, and that was just stupid.

    For the record, the Water Temple was NOT difficult. It was just as easy as any other "dungeon" in the game.

    That still doesn't make sense. For you, it's perfectly okay to compare two years worth of history to just a few months. If you want the comparison to be fair, then you HAVE to compre the first two years of the PS2 as well.

    Sales prove that the system and the games were good. If they weren't, then they wouldn't have sold. Proof: Dreamcast, Saturn, and to an extent, the N64.

    More "noteworthy" games were available for the PS2 at launch than the Dreamcast. The PS2 would have failed if it had not had good games. Many people bought the PS2 knowing that Gran Turismo and GTA were on the horizon. How many times do I have to say this? The PS2 sold because of the games. The Dreamcast DIDN'T sell because of the games.

    Translation: "snip everything that pretty much shows I'm wrong".

    These are just fanboy excuses. It doesn't matter if it was "meant to be one game", which makes no sense either. GTA: San Andreas has roughly 80 hours worth of gameplay in it. Any of the Final Fantasy games could be played for over 100 hours. So why does Shenmue have to be broken up? Sounds more like an excuse from Sega, and Dreamcast fans, for Shenmue being so boring. "It'll get better! We promise! It was just so big that we had to split it up!" Right :rolleyes: If San Andreas, which sold well over 13 million copies, can be over 80 hours, then Shenmue could be released as one game.

    You're right, it doesn't make sense. It was just an excuse by Sega for the game being so terrible. Their way of saying "we promise it will get better". But it didn't, did it? Shenmue 2 is no more part of a single game as R&C 2 is part of a single game broken into pieces.

    Oh BS. Many GOOD games have been released among other GOOD games and they have sold JUST fine. Ratchet and Clank went on to sell millions, despite being released within days of Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. Infact, SOCOM, GTA, and R&C all came out in a very short period of time and they all sold very well. When it comes to games and DVDs, theres no such thing as market saturation. What's good sells. Look at MP3 players. There's literally hundreds of models to choose from. But the good ones all sell just fine.

    You can't use this "market saturation" or "advertising" argument in this day and age. As I said before, it's very easy for anyone and their brother to get online and find out all of the information they could ever want. If there is something they want, or something they might like, it's very easy for them to get online and read about it. Their friends can find outa bout it and spread the word, theres hundreds of forums for them to visit and see what people are saying. In the year 2006, it's virtually impossible for a good game to not sell well. If a game is good, it will sell. It's that simple. The games Sega made during that time were not good and did not sell. The good games, like Crazy Taxi, did sell. It's that simple.

    Oh puh-leeze. Give me a break here. This is just another excuse. Piracy did not kill the Dreamcast. In 1999, and 2000, very few people had CD burners. Most people didn't have broadband connections either. Someone with a CD burner and a highspeed line in 1999 and 2000 was a very rare person. Technology has changed a lot and fast in the last few years, but I think you seem to forget just what it was like in 1999 and 2000. Most people would not have had the hardware, software, or even the knowledge to pirate a Dreamcast game then. This is just another excuse for the Dreamcast failing.

    Going by this logic, the DVD industry and PS2 game sales should not exist in the way they do today. Even the Xbox and GameCube. Most PCs and Macs are sold with a DVD burner these days. You can get high quality discs for as little as 40 cents a disc. If piracy was truly such a problem, DVD sales would drop significantly. With the Xbox, people can pay just a little bit of money to have their system modded with a modchip and huge HDD. The PS2 and GameCube don't need modchips either, and 8cm DVD-Rs (for the GameCube) are easily available. If everyone was a dirty little pirate, like you say, then the PS2, GC, Xbox, and DVD sales would all be suffering. Face it, the Dreamcast failed because it was a bad system with bad games.

    Oh, the Dreamcast beat the N64. That's real good :rolleyes: If I'm not mistaken, the PS2 came out and pretty much stomped all of those little records.

    rofl oh. my. god. And you're saying I act like a troll? Sony never had any part in Square's finances until the Final Fantasy movie bombed, and Sony bailed them out by buying stock. But Sony did not become a controlling power in the company, which resulted in Final Fantasy games, including FF6, beiing released for the GBA and GC, as well as FF11 possibly being ported for the 360. Seriously man, if anyone here is the true fanboy now, it is definitely you.

Share This Page