Yeah, that works better as an example to be honest.Fair point. I'm that case I'm substituting in Itagaki and Dead or Alive.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Why do Sega games usually end up flopping?
- Thread starter Past
- Start date
dr. apocalipsis
Banned
Back in the golden days, SEGA always had the bad press having to fight against the cute girls of Nintendo first, and Sony later.
Some of you talk about marketing, but fail to see the free press and positive buzz brand always lacked. Then, when they sent their last, still not burning, ships, to the Xbox docks, they sealed their fate as a third party. That's why Sonic still works, because it landed mostly into the Nintendo ecosystem and failed on any other incursion.
Most of the market is fed by those who turned their back on SEGA, and those who didn't are just a small nostalgic niche.
Some of you talk about marketing, but fail to see the free press and positive buzz brand always lacked. Then, when they sent their last, still not burning, ships, to the Xbox docks, they sealed their fate as a third party. That's why Sonic still works, because it landed mostly into the Nintendo ecosystem and failed on any other incursion.
Most of the market is fed by those who turned their back on SEGA, and those who didn't are just a small nostalgic niche.
Oh BS. At least in the States Sega successfully made Nintendo uncool and all the press was about how Sega was beating them. It's only late in the SNES lifespan that Nintendo turned it's image around for it here.
Hero of Legend
Member
Someone brought up before about how Sega after going 3rd-party literally put their stuff EVERYWHERE, rather than all in one place.
Now instead of suggesting they put everything on one console manufacturer, what if they sort of kept their original idea of keeping teams and IPs exclusive to each?
For instance, Sonic Team being exclusive to Nintendo? Or at least just IPs like Sonic and Super Monkey Ball on Nintendo, Yakuza on Sony (well it already is), etc.
It helps keep fanbases all in one basket but each IP is where it's most appropriate. Back in 2002, this wouldn't have been an issue, hell I honestly question how many would've disagreed with Sega going Nintendo-exclusive after being on a single hardware prior anyway.
I've seen a lot agree that Sega and Nintendo are (as one put it) first cousins. It always seemed like if Nintendo would ever join forces with any major company, it'd be Sega. And even today that is the case as Mario & Sonic is a thing and that's really the only major crossover Mario really does nowadays aside from Smash.
Speaking of which, did you know that when Sonic first came to Nintendo systems, a particular person was right there to give him a special greeting? It wasn't Iwata.
It was Kimishima.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/6972/kimishima-welcomes-sonic
It's because Sonic was visiting NoA and Kimishima was the President at the time. But that's still amazing, especially in retrospect now that he's Iwata's successor as President of Nintendo.
Now instead of suggesting they put everything on one console manufacturer, what if they sort of kept their original idea of keeping teams and IPs exclusive to each?
For instance, Sonic Team being exclusive to Nintendo? Or at least just IPs like Sonic and Super Monkey Ball on Nintendo, Yakuza on Sony (well it already is), etc.
It helps keep fanbases all in one basket but each IP is where it's most appropriate. Back in 2002, this wouldn't have been an issue, hell I honestly question how many would've disagreed with Sega going Nintendo-exclusive after being on a single hardware prior anyway.
I've seen a lot agree that Sega and Nintendo are (as one put it) first cousins. It always seemed like if Nintendo would ever join forces with any major company, it'd be Sega. And even today that is the case as Mario & Sonic is a thing and that's really the only major crossover Mario really does nowadays aside from Smash.
Speaking of which, did you know that when Sonic first came to Nintendo systems, a particular person was right there to give him a special greeting? It wasn't Iwata.
It was Kimishima.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/6972/kimishima-welcomes-sonic
It's because Sonic was visiting NoA and Kimishima was the President at the time. But that's still amazing, especially in retrospect now that he's Iwata's successor as President of Nintendo.
I disagree as in the beginning thats what was seemingly happening anyway. Sonic Team went to Gamecube and Smilebit to Xbox initially for example. The problem I have with this approach is that it assumes there is no crossover in fans of their IPs. Like I said before its like Nintendo going 3rd party and assuming no Zelda fans buy Mario so lets put them on different consoles. They could actually end up losing sales on Mario over their first party days as they would be missing out on the Zelda hardcore who as a priority bought the new Zelda exclusive system instead.Someone brought up before about how Sega after going 3rd-party literally put their stuff EVERYWHERE, rather than all in one place.
Now instead of suggesting they put everything on one console manufacturer, what if they sort of kept their original idea of keeping teams and IPs exclusive to each?
For instance, Sonic Team being exclusive to Nintendo? Or at least just IPs like Sonic and Super Monkey Ball on Nintendo, Yakuza on Sony (well it already is), etc.
It helps keep fanbases all in one basket but each IP is where it's most appropriate. Back in 2002, this wouldn't have been an issue, hell I honestly question how many would've disagreed with Sega going Nintendo-exclusive after being on a single hardware prior anyway.
I've seen a lot agree that Sega and Nintendo are (as one put it) first cousins. It always seemed like if Nintendo would ever join forces with any major company, it'd be Sega. And even today that is the case as Mario & Sonic is a thing and that's really the only major crossover Mario really does nowadays aside from Smash.
Speaking of, did you know that when Sonic first came to Nintendo systems, a particular person was right there to give him a special greeting? It wasn't Iwata.
It was Kimishima.
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/6972/kimishima-welcomes-sonic
Making formally single format Sega fans have to buy multiple consoles was a really bad move. I wanted to play Virtua Fighter, Panzer Dragoon and Super Monkey Ball. I needed to own 3 systems to do it, how many people would go to the lengths I did to play them all? They carved up the existing fanbase rather then building on it.
I do like shipment numbers because it gives an unified figure worldwide and because it isn't an estimate but a precise number (rounded).
Of course I'm not dismissing sell-through estimates.
Another reason I do like shipment numbers is because I'm very interested in '80 and '90 gaming which is a period of time when sell-through estimates were very unreliable.
The reason Sonic Heroes is the third best selling Sonic game (again I'm talking shipment data and combining PS2 and GC version) is because the game was available on PS2 too.
Sonic Heroes performed well on GC but did twice as much on PS2.
Arc Christelle
Member
Btw everyone Fighting Games are Arcade Games first and foremost. Any good FG worth its salt is originally designed for Arcade intents. [Including Gundam VS and Pokken]
Yessir, it's reasons like that why I believe Sega are still innovators at heart. Atleast when it comes to their in-house stuff. Shenmue was one of the most robust games Sega has ever crafted. This is because of the combination of gameplay focused design based around interaction which was inherited by Shenmue (Also the reason why both Sega and Nintendo are dear to my heart).
Capcom used to be up there for me too. Then 2009-Now happened. Although I think SFV is an improvement over IV atleast.
As for Sonic. I prefer the arcade driven style of the Unleashed/Generations games because of the adrenaline inducing feel that is rarely found in other platformers including Mario, that feeds off of my perfectionist habits. (Although it's a bummer that Generations was less demanding than Unleashed in terms of end ranking) Lost World happened, and though it's not initially what I wanted, I think the game still displays that Sonic Team can develop a competent game that's fully functional and playable unlike Heroes-06 era (Say what you will about SA1/2, although I'm in the camp of SA2>SA1). End of the day, as long as the game is good and fun, I'm down. Especially if it's fast.
I think we're at a point with Sega where the problem is no longer their games but their damn Suits. The businessmen running Sega show lack of faith in their own IPs and tend to make extremely poor business decisions in terms of marketing and release. For God knows why, I'm still kinda burnt from the fact that Yakuza 1+2 HD is Japan only. I was really looking forward to it.
Yessir, it's reasons like that why I believe Sega are still innovators at heart. Atleast when it comes to their in-house stuff. Shenmue was one of the most robust games Sega has ever crafted. This is because of the combination of gameplay focused design based around interaction which was inherited by Shenmue (Also the reason why both Sega and Nintendo are dear to my heart).
Capcom used to be up there for me too. Then 2009-Now happened. Although I think SFV is an improvement over IV atleast.
As for Sonic. I prefer the arcade driven style of the Unleashed/Generations games because of the adrenaline inducing feel that is rarely found in other platformers including Mario, that feeds off of my perfectionist habits. (Although it's a bummer that Generations was less demanding than Unleashed in terms of end ranking) Lost World happened, and though it's not initially what I wanted, I think the game still displays that Sonic Team can develop a competent game that's fully functional and playable unlike Heroes-06 era (Say what you will about SA1/2, although I'm in the camp of SA2>SA1). End of the day, as long as the game is good and fun, I'm down. Especially if it's fast.
I think we're at a point with Sega where the problem is no longer their games but their damn Suits. The businessmen running Sega show lack of faith in their own IPs and tend to make extremely poor business decisions in terms of marketing and release. For God knows why, I'm still kinda burnt from the fact that Yakuza 1+2 HD is Japan only. I was really looking forward to it.
Its one of those sad cases where the reason I loved the company is part of the reason that they failed in the marketplace.
Even if it wasn't great business sense I certainly prefer the Sega that let Sonic Team go off and make Nights and Burning Rangers rather then being chained to trying again and again to make Sonic work because he's more of a guaranteed seller.
geordiemp
Member
Because they are not and not enough people are interested, period.
Just because allot of very vocal Bayonetta fans rave about it does not make the game appealing to the many people buying games every month.
Games that sell well stupidly well tend to have 'options' to play with friends online in some manner as well as a good solo experience, such as COD or GTA....Heck even bloodbore had coop = they understand the market. Even Dragon age had online and 4 player coop dungeons. Some pubs get it, some dont.
There are exceptions like Witcher 3 but that is one big ass game. I dont know if any of the games you listed could be enjoyed with friends online in some context.
Now I imagine if Bayo was a bit 'bigger', changed some of the mechanics to allow coop (no freeze time), was a general release to the wider public and had a coop on line option with good networking, some crazy horde mode like Mass Effect 3 or something then it would maybe break the mould in my opinion. It would cater to more people.
It's true that not many people are interested (at least comparatively to other publishers)... but the rest of your post pretty much argues that a modern day Mozart would be shit in comparison to Skrillex, and that maybe if they added a good "drop" like everyone else is doing, and the market has proven they want, then they'd be more successful... or at least make each tack loop so the album is twice the length.
I mean, it a valid suggestion in regards to getting them better numbers.... but isn't very helpful overall as then the sort of audience that'd have asked the question in the first place would simply not be catered to at all.
geordiemp
Member
I remember Ninja Gaiden 3 or sigma 2, cant remember which, had a coop mode (not that well implemented as it was too laggy).
But the SP experience was not tarnished, at all. Just because 2 players can team up in a gaiden coop mode if done right, with hordes based on select levels does not have to diminish the game for the single player does it ?
It doesn't have to, but it very frequently will.. because you can't just simply drop another player into most games without either the co-op sucking, or the singleplayer sucking. In Bayonetta's case for example, your suggestion was to rip out one of the game's core mechanics in order to accommodate it. In Ninja Gaiden's case it was simply an additional aspect thrown on top of a game that was clearly made and tailored for a singleplayer. Funnily enough, the addition of a co-op mode didn't exactly cause the game to perform significantly better than prior Ninja Gaiden games that lacked it... so it's not even like it solved any problems. Hell, it's not even strongly agreed to be the definitive version of the game (Sigma 2).
There's no such thing as "free", when it comes to games development. If a game is going to add additional modes and features, there's going to be a compromise somewhere. Either the game becomes sufficiently more expensive to develop (in which case the bar for not being a "flop" is raised), or it comes at the expense of something that would have been in a purely single player version of the game. In some cases I feel this is a worthwhile trade-off (I'd like Wolfensteins multiplayer back kthx), and in other cases they probably just shouldn't bother (I doubt many people care about the lack of MP in Rise of the Tomb Raider, and probably appreciate the increased single player content instead). Games like CoD and GTA can basically have their cake and eat it. They're fucking huge, and budget is essentially no problem... and they were fucking huge even before they had multiplayer modes worth a damn. Meanwhile something like Anarchy Reigns (which yes, I know had a lot of other things going against it) sure as hell weren't going to suddenly be heavily adopted simply because it struck a balance between single and multiplayer.
It's not even like Sega are completely oblivious to this either. They're happy to create Phantasy Star Online, and whilst those games have single player aspects, they're certainly not the same sort of game you'd get if you removed the need for it to function online. Many people would really like their Phantasy Star V instead. The same can be said for the differences between something like Final Fantasy MMOs versus the mainline series. There are very few games that are unchanged by catering for online players, and many of those that are simply have pretty useless online modes that nobody gives a shit about. Usually, you just don't know what the game would have been if it wasn't being designed to include that checklist point in order to make it sell more.
Don't take it wrongly here. I live Previous Sega output for sure.
I mean, i got one of DS best rpg called Infinite Space, Vanquish, Binary Domain, Feel the magic mini game, Rhythm Thief and many other games.
It is just the fact that most of those game had small market kills Sega into the Sega we know now.
CrispyBoar
Banned
I don't think that's the reason. It all has to do with their terrible marketing.
SuperAngelo64
Banned
Fuck the west!
5 more days until PSO2 episode 4 releases!
5 more days until PSO2 episode 4 releases!
IrishNinja
Member
amen
what a poor post - sega put out some of their finest post-dreamcast work last gen
i hear this a lot, but Sega's decision to let their teams decide which platform to work on was actually very forward-thinking
The Artisan
Member
I thought yakuza was a best seller in japan?
And what would that be exactly? Judging by the Sega begging threads recently there are many fans wanting completely different things.
The Artisan
Member
for the third time now, aren't the yakuza games best sellers in japan?
You know, stuff like PSO2 in the west, Shenmue 3, a game which has been requested for years and is now only a thing because of external funding and other things in general which Sega has ignored.
Sure. I don't think anyone here is arguing that 100% of Sega games flop or they wouldn't continue to be in business.
Depends on how you define best sellers?
Silent Chief
Member
Sega doesn't control third party devs. It's probably more a case of the devs going to Sega after being turned down by everybody else.
If you're a dev making an RPG, you probably want Square-Enix to publish, but you will probably not get a good deal, if they are interested at all.
Silent Chief
Member
Top 50 for the year?
Succinct Verbosity
Member
I think people underestimate just how limited Sega's international presence is. Outside of Total War and Football Manager Sega can't really afford a huge marketing machine outside of Japan.
Silent Chief
Member
I remember fighting mobs in the mall to secure Valkyria Chronicles.
Release dates are overplayed. Everything sells better in the fall. If you have 6 games you don't release them all in November, but coming out in May isn't going to save a niche title.
Silent Chief
Member
I wouldn't even pick those up for free.
There is no such things as a Sega user base.
The Artisan
Member
so why would it be fair to say they aren't giving the fans what they want?
if anything, that would only apply to not receiving simultaneous release dates for these games in the west.
just to put it blunt, consistently selling well with the rest of the software every year of release...always charting on media.create, I think that is the japanese equivalent of npd yeah?
10. top 10, bro.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Another48Hours
Banned
Outside Japan, Sega games have almost always flopped.
It has nothing to do with bad taste etc.
I mean many hear like Binary Domain but how does that really compare to Gears, Lost Planet, Army of Two, Vanquish, Uncharted, etc?
It's a good game and fun but if remove the lens you realize why it, and other Sega games don't usually do amazing numbers.
It has nothing to do with bad taste etc.
I mean many hear like Binary Domain but how does that really compare to Gears, Lost Planet, Army of Two, Vanquish, Uncharted, etc?
It's a good game and fun but if remove the lens you realize why it, and other Sega games don't usually do amazing numbers.
Arc Christelle
Member
Elaborate.
Another48Hours
Banned
Uh I did in that same post.
They don't do well because the pale in appeal or/and content to the competition.
Look at the comparisons above.
Arc Christelle
Member
Nah my man, you said some vague statements without any supporting evidence (subjective or objective) to back your argument.
That's why I quoted you because I was like, "What am I supposed to see and how if the games are fun and good?"
Like look at the comparisons and tell me how I was supposed to get your point.
Another48Hours
Banned
Seems obvious what the point is, if bd doesn't gave what gravitate people toward gears, uncharted, army of two, vanquish etc.
It's a good example because you can really see hw BD despite some of the entertaining things it does pales in comparison to the above.
This can apply to not all but a lot of Sega's other games. Sega games may have some advertising and marketing to contribute to the floppage, but lets also look at the games themselves along with competing ips.
BD was likely never going to do to well even with double the marketing effort.
Shadoken
Member
I think its not really fair to call these games a flop , Sega rarely even make AAA games. Vanquish isn't really a full AAA game , it has great gameplay but its really short on content. Your average gamer doesnt really explore Gameplay as much as they want to explore Story,MP..etc.
Yakuza is AAA but its so targetted towards Japanese audience , I dont see how people expect it to sell millions here. Bayonetta did 2m right? Thats a lot considering its a new IP , with a shoddy PS3 port. Even with the Metal Gear name , Rising did similar numbers.
Most of their other games are pretty low budget and target a specific niche audience. It sells pretty well given the budget.
Yakuza is AAA but its so targetted towards Japanese audience , I dont see how people expect it to sell millions here. Bayonetta did 2m right? Thats a lot considering its a new IP , with a shoddy PS3 port. Even with the Metal Gear name , Rising did similar numbers.
Most of their other games are pretty low budget and target a specific niche audience. It sells pretty well given the budget.
Hero of Legend
Member
Another48Hours
Banned
Compared to Binary Domain?
Another48Hours
Banned
Uh no they aren't your using a poor budget excuse for Sega and it doesn't make sense. Btw rising wasn't Sega.
Sega usually has mid tier budgeted games, andbudget has nothing to do with game sales so that logic is flawed regardless.
Maybe not compared to Binary Domain, but certainly in comparison to the other examples you gave. There's far more of a gap between Vanquish and Gears/Uncharted than there is Binary Domain and Vanquish. It's not simply a matter of "is this game any good"?
I don't think we ever got worldwide sales figures, but in Japan at least, Vanquish is probably the worst selling Japanese developed third person shooter of the known lot. It only sold 77k and was outsold by Lost Planet, Binary Domain, The 3rd Birthday, etc. Yes, even Lost Planet exclusively on the 360 in Japan outsold Vanquish on the PS3. It was bad.
I would say up until Yakuza 5, it was certainly a bestseller series. But in the last two years we've seen Ishin and 0, both viewed more as spinoffs, selling much less. This year they're releasing a remake of the first game, which might not do so hot either. It'll be another year at least until we see if the series still has staying power when they finally released Yakuza 6.
Yeesh, how did they manage to fuck that up so badly?
Did they fuck up? Maybe people just don't buy Mikami games which aren't RE. PN03 and Godhand cratered too.
Maybe Vanquish outsold the Super Famicom release of Goof Troop...
The first question that came to mind was whether there's any demand for that kind of game in Japan, but sales numbers that low gave me the impression this was, at least partially, Sega's fault. I might totally off base here, but God Hand and PN03 look a lot less conventional than Vanquish.