-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
With Wii U all but dead now: What had the better life, The Dreamcast or Wii U?
- Thread starter Trojita
- Start date
WhiteWaterM00se
Member
There is no question Wii U had a couple of great games on it. But for a total body of work, Dreamcast was much better.
I and others started this previously, but you can't underestimate how revolutionary the 2k sports games were for the time. I still remember that commercial where Randy moss stretches out and catches a touchdown with one hand. The graphics for the time were velvet smooth, it was unreal to watch at the time. Especially coming off of N64 and PS One.
Dreamcast had online play. Which was crazy for then. I always felt Genesis was Sega's peak. But Dreamcast they came out firing on all cylinders, and never let up until they called it quits. Good for them. I don't think they ever got enough credit for that.
I and others started this previously, but you can't underestimate how revolutionary the 2k sports games were for the time. I still remember that commercial where Randy moss stretches out and catches a touchdown with one hand. The graphics for the time were velvet smooth, it was unreal to watch at the time. Especially coming off of N64 and PS One.
Dreamcast had online play. Which was crazy for then. I always felt Genesis was Sega's peak. But Dreamcast they came out firing on all cylinders, and never let up until they called it quits. Good for them. I don't think they ever got enough credit for that.
anothertech
Member
There's a huge difference in the way the end of these two consoles died/are dying which is quite telling.
The end of the Dreamcast was announced to the shock and outcry of fans across the globe, with an extremely short lifespan and an already huge list of diverse AAA games that are still looked upon fondly today.
The end of the WiiU was announced to the relief of fans across the globe, with a dreadfully longer lifespan than most were expecting/hoping (2017 instead of 2016) and AAA games just trickling in at the end of its life, most of which will not be remembered except as NX games I think (Zelda U will be an NX launch title, so WiiU won't be remembered for a proper Zelda release that wasn't just an HD remake)
Dreamcast had nothing to overshadow it as it was Segas last console. WiiU will be overshadowed by the NX, as it will likely play the best WiiU games at higher fidelity and then some.
WiiU will be more of a turbo graphics 64 offering I think, that few will remember, because everything it offers will be available elsewhere. Bayonetta2, Xeno, and Splatoon were the most of what it offered. NX will have mario and smash and Zelda in all of their iterations so none of the old will be needed.
WiiU has no answer to Shenmu, Virtua Fighter, and countless other offerings Dreamcast had in its short lifespan.
The end of the Dreamcast was announced to the shock and outcry of fans across the globe, with an extremely short lifespan and an already huge list of diverse AAA games that are still looked upon fondly today.
The end of the WiiU was announced to the relief of fans across the globe, with a dreadfully longer lifespan than most were expecting/hoping (2017 instead of 2016) and AAA games just trickling in at the end of its life, most of which will not be remembered except as NX games I think (Zelda U will be an NX launch title, so WiiU won't be remembered for a proper Zelda release that wasn't just an HD remake)
Dreamcast had nothing to overshadow it as it was Segas last console. WiiU will be overshadowed by the NX, as it will likely play the best WiiU games at higher fidelity and then some.
WiiU will be more of a turbo graphics 64 offering I think, that few will remember, because everything it offers will be available elsewhere. Bayonetta2, Xeno, and Splatoon were the most of what it offered. NX will have mario and smash and Zelda in all of their iterations so none of the old will be needed.
WiiU has no answer to Shenmu, Virtua Fighter, and countless other offerings Dreamcast had in its short lifespan.
PseudoViper
Member
I think both are great systems, the dreamcast is a classic. It's hard to compare the two.
That's like asking if old school rappers are better than new school rappers. You can't compare those are two different generations.
That's like asking if old school rappers are better than new school rappers. You can't compare those are two different generations.
Version 3.0
Member
This is a really tough question. I've had some good times with good games on both, but they're very different.
I suppose I'd say Wii U. It has more games that I enjoyed personally. I wouldn't call it a resounding victory, though.
I'm amused at the glowing responses on either side, though. These two systems absolutely deserved their "also-ran" status.
I suppose I'd say Wii U. It has more games that I enjoyed personally. I wouldn't call it a resounding victory, though.
I'm amused at the glowing responses on either side, though. These two systems absolutely deserved their "also-ran" status.
Your amused at DC getting glowing responses? What did it not do that you think it didn't deserve such a thing?
So when I try to rationalize things by saying that there are more quality games for Wii U when you factor in Wii and VC titles (something many will agree with), that doesn't count, because it's all "opinions".
But then when you go by the numbers claiming that most people will only name 10 good Wii U games and they'll be always be the same 10, which is supposedly "proof" of a "lack of variety", that's ok? Because what you did there is pretty much trying to validate your own opinion with seemingly objective data (more people seemingly agree with your stance). You're allowed to do that, but I'm not, lol. Awesome.
I mean, you can't even say it, right? That if you would count all the good Wii U games (those 10-15 everyone agrees upon, according to you) and add all the best of Wii and other retro consoles to them, you'd get a whole lot more titles than the DC ever had?
Please, please stop dragging in other platforms. Your Windows phone is analogy is baseless. It's not even a console. Completely different market too.
So, again... because a larger number of a subset (neoGAFers who somehow joined this thread) of people posted "Hands down Dreamcast" ... you feel like that validates your opinion.
Of course you disagree, but then you do drag in other platforms outside of the Wii U's lifetime to downplay the Wii U's assets whenever you see fit. Because "those old games fall into two camps, and I don't care for them".
But devaluing DC's lineup based on later ports... no, that's just wrong.
So you're totalling opinions in this thread to validate your own opinion. But I can't total opinions to demonstrate how the Wii U has more games that are considered great by the general public.
No, me saying that the 15-20 good/great Wii U games you have in mind likely overlap with pretty much everyone else's isn't "proof" of a lack of variety... it's just an observation, though one I do think is pretty consistent.
And yes, I do think that every great Wii U game, plus every great Wii game, plus every great game available via VC is a larger number of great games than the Dreamcast has/had. I still think the Wii U is a much, much worse console than the Dreamcast was however... because those great Dreamcast games were fucking amazing for that time, and there were so many of them that I had neither the funds nor time to even play them all. There was barely a single day during that period where I wouldn't have played the Dreamcast for multiple hours, and trying to produce an exhaustive list of all the games I enjoyed on it would be a nightmare to compile. My Wii U on the other hand, I would need to actually turn on to check when I had last played something on it (though I'm pretty confident it'd be FAST Racing Neo for a few days upon its launch). This isn't because I simply don't play games much anymore... I just don't play the Wii U much, because there's little that warrants it. This is taking into account everything that can be played on the console. If Super Mario Galaxy was a brand new game that I'd never played, then I'd have jumped on my Wii U to play it. It isn't though, and so isn't treated as though it is.
And yes, whilst I think it's perfectly fine to consider multiplatform, past generation games as offering less during a console's life, I do also think that ruling out future ports also makes sense. You know why?... Because between 1999 (or 1998 if you like) and early 2001 (aka the Dreamcast's lifespan, as specified in the thread title) those Gamecube, Xbox, PS2 or XBLA, PSN, PC ports didn't exist. One last time... the thread isn't talking about each console as it stands today. That only applies to the Wii U. The Wii U may very well see many of its games ported to later consoles... but just as that means nothing today it also meant nothing to the Dreamcast prior to its death. That's the difference...
foobarry81
Member
So, we're still during the Wii U's life. If someone without another console were to buy a Wii U right now, they would have access to an amazing library, including Super Mario Galaxy?
More so, you would probably recommend a friend, who would buy a Wii U right now, to also get a good deal of Wii and VC games, correct?
Skies of Arcadia Legends was in the works during the DC's life. Ikaruga was actually released on DC in 2002 and got a GC port in 2003.
It's not as clear cut as you make it seem.
More so, you would probably recommend a friend, who would buy a Wii U right now, to also get a good deal of Wii and VC games, correct?
Skies of Arcadia Legends was in the works during the DC's life. Ikaruga was actually released on DC in 2002 and got a GC port in 2003.
It's not as clear cut as you make it seem.
Version 3.0
Member
The Dreamcast wasn't remotely prepared to compete in that generation of consoles. It used CDs when the competition was moving to DVDs. It had a controller with far fewer buttons than the existing market leader at the time, and its forthcoming competition (even the Gamecube). Its memory cards were, IIRC, 1/64th the size of a PS2 card, only twice the size of a PS1 card. It had poor 3rd party support.
These are all things that the Gamecube was (rightly) criticized for, but worse in every instance on the Dreamcast. But it gets a pass.
So yeah, it amuses me how revered it is, particularly the view that it was unfairly killed by the PS2, or that it would've been able to compete if SEGA wasn't broke.
Please note, I'm not knocking anyone for enjoying games. I have far worse systems on my shelf that I enjoyed, like the Jaguar, for example. But I don't pretend they were good consoles that should've been more successful.
They would have access to a lot of great games, old and new... though I would hesitate (or more honestly, deny) to label it an amazing library. When I mentioned Mario Galaxy, I didn't mean in the context of me simply not having played it... I meant it actually not having existed until this generation (as a Wii U game). If someone is buying the console regardless (so, there were actually enough Wii U games to have already sold them on it), then sure... I may suggest they try out Mario Galaxy too if I think they'll like it, much like I recommended a friend to try Streets of Rage 2 on her 360. But then, that's what I mean by it being additive to the library already being worthwhile for someone. It would have effectively zero role in justifying that system itself, as they wouldn't require one for that purpose. So it's something that would be considered, but carry almost no weight if someone asks me "should I get a Wii U, Xbox One or PS4?". The Wii U would be the last console of the three I'd recommend every time.
As for the DC's life. It was discontinued March 2001. Pier Solar released for it last year, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been dead this entire time. Skies of Arcadia Legends may well have been in development for Gamecube beforehand (and various PS2 ports, must certainly have been in order to release when they did), but the porting basically happened once Sega had "called it". Skies didn't hit Gamecube in Japan until the following December, and the rest of the world until 2003, over two years after the Dreamcast was pronounced dead. It's pretty clear cut. The DC was long done by 2003.
To be honest I'd probably compare the Wii U to the Saturn more than the Dreamcast.
Coming off the back of a wildly successful console, Mega Drive -> Saturn, Wii -> Wii U.
Lack of 'big' names. No new Metroid, no new Zelda (The one next year really doesn't count, let's face it that's an NX game first and Wii U second), no new Starfox besides a questionable/debatable quality remake of a 3 gen old game, no new F-Zero in 2 gens even though there seems to be fan demand for it.
Next console quite possibly a make or break for them in the console market.
Coming off the back of a wildly successful console, Mega Drive -> Saturn, Wii -> Wii U.
Lack of 'big' names. No new Metroid, no new Zelda (The one next year really doesn't count, let's face it that's an NX game first and Wii U second), no new Starfox besides a questionable/debatable quality remake of a 3 gen old game, no new F-Zero in 2 gens even though there seems to be fan demand for it.
Next console quite possibly a make or break for them in the console market.
Dreamcast was prime Sega, even the Sonic games were fun and showed what the system could do. It faired well with its competitors graphically speaking, although the ps2 had metal gear solid 2 which was a huge exclusive at the time. Wii U hasn't really made the same impact. The dreamcast had a TON of new IP, such as the 2ksports games, shenmue, the first soul-caliber game, crazy taxi (it looked like the arcade version which was a huge deal at the time), jet set series, marvel vs capcom, and so many more games. The Wii U has a lot of great titles, but not many we haven't seen before.
foobarry81
Member
And yet again dragging other platforms in there for no good reason, lol.
This whole "additive" thing of yours is just you trying to downplay how expansive the Wii U library actually is and how much quality there is... again. Fact of the matter is that if you were to buy a console now, one that is actually available in stores right now, during the Wii U's lifespan, that the Wii U offers you a wealth of games, many of which are excellent. More than the DC ever had to offer during its lifespan and even well after it died.
Also, like I mentioned earlier, for a newcomer that is also interested in playing SNES games like Super Metroid, Super Castlevania IV or Earthbound for the first time, it would actually be a sane thing to buy a Wii U now and get those games, rather than try and get the original system and software. Downplaying the ability to get those games at affordable prices as "additive" is rather disingenuous. Because you really do get access to a glorious part of gaming history.
But we get it: you don't like Nintendo, none of their games are amazing, blah di blah, SEGA rules.
For the record: I do like (old) SEGA too. I actually have over 85 games for their platforms combined.
Sumio Mondo
Member
Aye. Pretty much. Dreamcast was my first real "wow" at graphics during that generation, at least until the MGS2 trailer came out...
BadAss2961
Member
Dreamcast even dawned the 2K series of sports games. Unrivaled at the time.
What "generation" are you referring to? Dreamcast came out in 98, when the 5th gen was still going on. In that manner, it blew out both the PS1 and N64 in terms of technological innovation, and essentially drove the unit to become the defacto unit for premium versions of most titles far beyond the consoles and even arcades at the time, and beat the 6th gen consoles to the punch in that regard.
Dreamcast didn't use CD roms, it used GD roms which housed far more space, but were easily rippable.
The VMU's were forward thinking that had far more novelty than the Wii U does in regards to its tablet controller, and the size of the memory cards really matters little for the size of the games, nor does the button count, so i'm not exactly sure where your coming from with that in general.
Dreamcast had good third party support compared to both GC in the west and Xbox in the east, did not have a handle, used a CD format that actually resembled what everyone else was using, and Sega genuinely tried with the partnerships they did have to foster strong relationships which they did.
And so your argument for Dreamcast not being a good console in general with great games is...it had fewer buttons than consoles that came year after it launched. I don't want to say your making horrible arguments, but your making horrible arguments.
And I have had way, way more than 85 Nintendo games over all their platforms combined. I don't hate Nintendo... I just don't rate the Wii U (or N64) highly, because I find their game libraries lacking. I already acknowledge that in raw number terms the Wii U has access to a large number of quality games... but they don't change the end result that the console doesn't offer me much, I barely ever use it, and as a result I wouldn't recommend it to other people. Of course given all that, I'm not going to say it's been better than a console that I feel was damn near flawless throughout its lifespan.,, and I'll say the same for the next console or handheld that I feel has a lackluster line-up.
But hey... at least the Wii U offered enough for me to actually purchase one right? No amount of PS1 classics had me buying a Vita (and before you snap again at my mere mention of another platform... there isn't some hidden rule that you're not allowed to mention other machines' names as a comparison point). That's the first major console/portable I've outright skipped since the original NES.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
I came to post this, more or less.
ps: it's Soul Calibur, people. After all these years it's still Soul Calibur. /old man yells at kids
foobarry81
Member
I didn't ask if you would recommend buying a Wii U. I suggested that you would likely recommend a friend buying Wii and Virtual Console games, provided they had already bought a Wii U.
Because they are part of the Wii U library and if you haven't played those games before, they offer a wealth of great gaming content.
I'm honestly not interested in how often you use your Wii U. But if I'm trying to objectively look at what the Wii U has to offer, I'm seeing a long list of great games that are available on the platform. Nintendo has fed the Wii U with an awesome selection of new games and games from their rich history in the games industry.
The DC library is no match for that. At all.
How do you not get this? If you're going to compare Dreamcast and Wii U, it's pointless to drag in other platforms. That's really all I was saying, but you really don't seem to get that part.
Maybe an example will help: "you know, DC sucks compared to Wii U, because the internet connectivity on DC sucks. It's way better on original XBOX." Get it now? See how dragging the XBOX in there is irrelevant?
petran79
Banned
NP!
With the demise of arcade games, unfortunately one serious element has been forgotten: gaming without the option to take a break or look for advice.
You are on your own, testing your reflexes and stamina. Such games require strategic thinking on the fly. Also gaming outside your home, without even the chance to sit comfortably and quietly, adds significantly to stress and fatigue
I remember finishing some Dreamcast arcade ports, but the joy I felt when I played or finished the original arcade was much greater. It felt like an accomplishment, much greater than any home console game.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
A few things:
- It used GD-ROMs, double-capacity CD's. Not quite the same thing. You might as well say the 360 wasn't ready b/c it used DVDs instead of Blu-Ray discs.
- The market leader (PS1)'s standard controller only had a dpad, four face buttons, four shoulder buttons, a Start button, and Select button. Most games hadn't used the shoulder buttons in very meaningful ways, btw.
- The memory card size wasn't a particular hindrance. You'd have to consider what compression routines are used in saving data. In all likelihood Dreamcast did it differently from PS2 which did it differently from Gamecube which did it differently from Xbox.
Also, considering the style of games that proliferated on Dreamcast, it wouldn't have needed super-massive memory cards, and if someone was really needy for memory there were always harddrives and the zip disk unit (if that ever came out). You could also save data to servers online.
- If DC had poor 3rd party support (it didn't; just because some of your particular devs may not have been present doesn't mean other devs weren't present), then that doesn't do the Wii U any favors, now does it?
Off the top of my head, I know for a fact that Ubisoft, Rockstar, Capcom, SNK, Treasure, Namco, Taito, Psykio, Eidos, Neversoft, Shiny, iD Software, Epic, Bandai, Tecmo, Love-De-Lic, Warp, Arc System Works, NCS, Midway, Acclaim and others supported the platform.
Again, you may not know or care about many of them, but that doesn't mean the support wasn't there.
- I don't see Gamecube getting lambasted for its memory cards; it was called out because it essentially took DVDs and halved the capacity. Dreamcast took CDs and doubled the capacity. There's a difference. One adds, the other removes. More capacity is a good thing, not less, and Gamecube removed perfectly fine capacity because reasons.
As for the 3rd party part, Gamecube had great 3rd party support from 2001 to 2003, I feel. I actually feel it's kind of underrated in that respect. However, from 2004 onward the support really tapered off, and you were just left with Sega, Capcom, maybe Namco (I'm not sure), EA, Ubisoft and a few others. But in terms of significant efforts, only Sega, Capcom and maybe a couple others really bothered after that.
- Lastly, the truth is we don't know how it would've fared if Sega decided it was better to allocate their money to Dreamcast versus 3rd party development (if they went broke, they literally would have stopped releasing games, or will you try to act as though they did nothing in 6th gen after retiring Dreamcast?).
It certainly would not have slayed PS2 but it's also likely that the Xbox would not have stepped in, and that Microsoft would have put more support behind Dreamcast as a result. Which certainly would've helped. That would have greatly benefited Sega and ironically also greatly benefited Nintendo as well.
kunonabi
Member
This isn't remotely true unless you're including the VC.
Let's look at this in terms of genres that could possibly appeal to someone buying a console and looking to play new games for it:
Fighting games - DC
Racing games - DC
Sports games - DC
Wrestling games - DC
music games - DC
puzzle games - DC
SHMUPS - DC
Simulation/strategy - DC
Horror games - about equal*
RPGS - about equal*(although imports would put the DC ahead)
FPS - not sure, Wii U might win this one
Action games - Wii U
Platformers - Wii U
Party games - Wii U
*Quantity vs Quality
Those are just the big ones off the top of my head. Any other genre you add is going to come out DC. Sure, the Wii U has some games in those genres that are top of the class and sometimes better than the best DC efforts but you're looking at maybe 1 or 2 per genre for the most part. For a 4-5 year lifespan that isn't good enough. If you're console owner looking to play current games on your investment you're going to have a rough time with the Wii U as far as having consistent releases to play. If those releases for one reason or another don't interest you then you're pretty much screwed since you don't have many options.
The Wii U was my console of choice this gen and it's been worth every penny. However, if I didn't own a 3DS, a PS3 backlog, and an exceptionally varied tastes in games I wouldn't be playing much of anything for long stretches of time. The other problem is to really get the most out of the Nintendo's output on the Wii U you have to take the time to 100% them and get into the meat of how well they were designed. For gamers that don't really do that kind of thing it's an even worse investment.
I mean if the discussion is about being an owner during the system's lifespan there is no way Dreamcast doesn't win. If you want to talk purely about the available games, services, etc. buying one of the two this moment than you can make the argument for the Wii U.
Theognosis
Member
Unlike others who are treating the Dreamcast in isolation, I always view the "life" of a console relative to its contemporaries or in the context of its generation. The Dreamcast was up against the Gamecube and the juggernaut that is the Playstation 2. It also fought against the PC with Counter-Strike 1.6, Brood War, Quake 3 Arena and Rainbow Six (I played them ALL at that time). With the exception of Daytona 2001 which was eventually outclassed by Daytona USA on PS3, almost all the games that I loved on the DC were eventually beaten by games on the PS2, GC, XB or PC in the SAME generation. As much as I adore the system, I just lost my desire to keep my DC and sold it along with all my games for it.
On the other hand, the Wii U offered something totally new. I adore it for what it is: a relic of the past with its emphasis on game mechanics (instead of story) and local multiplayer. The games on the Wii U are unlike those found on competing systems, namely PS4, XB1 and PC/Steam. In this regard, the Wii U wins.
On the other hand, the Wii U offered something totally new. I adore it for what it is: a relic of the past with its emphasis on game mechanics (instead of story) and local multiplayer. The games on the Wii U are unlike those found on competing systems, namely PS4, XB1 and PC/Steam. In this regard, the Wii U wins.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
^You are holding Dreamcast's Daytona port against that for a system released several years later, that no person at the time could have reasonably foresaw being released? Will you hold Wii U to the same standards if, say, Splatoon, 3D World, W101, Bayonetta 2 etc. get NX remasters? Because that is the only way you can keep this fair, going by your barometer.
Also I highly question some of the ways you say Wii U games are unlike those on other platforms, especially Steam. You will arguably find more inventive games on Steam than Wii U, easily. Dreams on PS4 atm is more exhilarating and imaginative than most of the 1st/2nd party on Wii U, and for me personally, more appealing than any of them. And for as polished as a lot of Nintendo's games are up there, they're no less guilty of the sequel workhorse syndrome than COD, GTA, Madden etc. But Nintendo's games seem to get a pass because they're dressed in bright Spring colors? No, I'm able to see things aside from that, even if I can appreciate that presentation at the exact same time.
Also I highly question some of the ways you say Wii U games are unlike those on other platforms, especially Steam. You will arguably find more inventive games on Steam than Wii U, easily. Dreams on PS4 atm is more exhilarating and imaginative than most of the 1st/2nd party on Wii U, and for me personally, more appealing than any of them. And for as polished as a lot of Nintendo's games are up there, they're no less guilty of the sequel workhorse syndrome than COD, GTA, Madden etc. But Nintendo's games seem to get a pass because they're dressed in bright Spring colors? No, I'm able to see things aside from that, even if I can appreciate that presentation at the exact same time.
About 9.1 million were shipped in about 3.5 fiscal years you mean. Visit the retro sales-age thread, it's pretty enlightening regarding how Dreamcast actually performed. Hint: it was badly.
foobarry81
Member
I'm actually including Wii and Virtual Console. Simply because these games are there, readily available. Why on earth would you NOT include them?
There, end of your whole argument... ;-)
If you're an owner of a Wii U right now, you have access to a plethora of games from Nintendo's rich history in the games industry, with some of the best games ever made on there. I don't see why you would deny their availability.
If you were an owner of the DC during its lifespan, you had access to roughly 2 years of the games industry, and only work from those devs that did something on the DC.
Arthr2ShdsJcksn
Banned
I'd take Phantasy Star Online over anything the Wii U has put out to date. Also, it was the last time I ever cared about football games (2K1), and playing quake online was a lot of fun too. Soul Caliber 1 > Smash Bros Wii U, and it had Power Stone. I think I'll always prefer the Dreamcast. Mario on the WiiU > Sonic on anything though.
Don't really care what you asked me. If I feel like quantifying my answer with something you didn't ask, then I can do so. In the case of Mario Galaxy, I may recommend it to someone that already owns the console. There are very, very Wii or VC games where this would be the case however. I'm not going to recommend someone play the original F-Zero today simply because I enjoyed it back on the SNES. The number of games overall that I would recommend someone to buy would still be low, and would still be skewed towards actual Wii U games. It would be far less than I was recommending people to check out on the Dreamcast during its life. Because I simply viewed those games as being more worth someone's time to play at that point in time. Nowadays, I'm unlikely to recommend someone try out specific Dreamcast games even when they're available on a platform they currently own.
There's no "objectively looking" at what the platform offers, and certainly no objectively comparing it to a platform in the past. Every game you believe to be a great game available to Wii U, is subjectively a great game. Subjectivity is all you have, and the best you can do here if attempt to offer justification for your subjectivity. As I said before, even the exact same game (or even improved versions of it) aren't necessarily regarded the same way at different points in time. So yes, I can say that X amount of Dreamcast games, is better than Y amount of Wii U games + A amount of Wii games + B amount of VC games... even Y+A+B > X, because that only give you a number of games, not how great any of them are at that point in time.
And I can "drag in" whatever console I feel... because you're arguing a point that should be universal in order for it to make any sense. If you're able to "objectively" evaluate on console based on the idea that old games make the library strong, then I should be able to apply that to any console and it hold true. But it doesn't, because it's not objective. You're only trying to claim objectivity, because you don't like the opinions that other people hold, that don't match what you believe the result should be (in your opinion).
Theognosis
Member
I already said that Daytona 2001 was an exception. You still want to dwell on that???
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
You mentioned it but still mentioned the PS3 port, but it's pittance in the larger scope of things. Fwiw I appreciate you trying to rationalize your opinions more, even if we more or less disagree. At least that makes the discussion more engaging.
Well, acutally... they're basically all the exception... because...
We're not considering the Dreamcast in isolation. We're considering it based on the years it was actually alive. It did not live right up until the release of the Xbox 360... hell, it didn't even live up to the release of the original Xbox. We're having this topic right now, because time on the Wii U is being "called" now. We're not waiting to see how long the other platforms of this generation last before looking back. It's 1999(1998)-2001 versus 2012-2016 respectively. So those later ports? Non-factor. Just like any potential future Wii U ports are right now.
SenkiDala
Member
Dreamcast without hesitation. I'm a huge fan of Nintendo, I've got all their consoles (including the Wii U) day one, since the N64, same for the handeld, but for me it's just not comparable.
I mean... Shenmue, MSR, Blue Stinger (yeah I loved it), Skies of Arcadia, Grandia 2, Sonic Adventures, Virtua Fighter 3TB, Jet Set Radio, Code Veronica, ReVolt, Soulcalibur, House of the Dead 2, Zombie Revenge, Power Stone, Chu Chu Rocket, Ikaruga, Street 3rd Strike, Rez, F355, Quake 3 Arena, PSO, Crazy Taxi, Head Hunter...
Sorry but to me, the Wii U library didn't even reach 5% of the appeal of this Dreamcast list.
I'm a HUGE fan of Xenoblade (it's my favorite game of the Wii/PS3/360 generation) and Chronicles X is AWESOME, I loved Bayonetta 2, the remakes of the 2 Zeldas (but they are just remakes...), Yoshi, DKCTR, MK8 but... Yeah it's just not comparable.
I mean... Shenmue, MSR, Blue Stinger (yeah I loved it), Skies of Arcadia, Grandia 2, Sonic Adventures, Virtua Fighter 3TB, Jet Set Radio, Code Veronica, ReVolt, Soulcalibur, House of the Dead 2, Zombie Revenge, Power Stone, Chu Chu Rocket, Ikaruga, Street 3rd Strike, Rez, F355, Quake 3 Arena, PSO, Crazy Taxi, Head Hunter...
Sorry but to me, the Wii U library didn't even reach 5% of the appeal of this Dreamcast list.
I'm a HUGE fan of Xenoblade (it's my favorite game of the Wii/PS3/360 generation) and Chronicles X is AWESOME, I loved Bayonetta 2, the remakes of the 2 Zeldas (but they are just remakes...), Yoshi, DKCTR, MK8 but... Yeah it's just not comparable.
Theognosis
Member
There was no mention of the scope in the OP plus the fact that the Wii U is not dead yet. But given that restriction and assuming that the Wii U dies this year, the Dreamcast wins overall IMHO. But the best game belongs to the WIi U with Mario Kart 8.
foobarry81
Member
Sure, you can say whatever. Actually, that's pretty much what you've been doing. ;-)
When you're comparing two things, it should be about how the individual aspects of those two things compare to each other, not about how they compare to something else unrelated.
But drag in all you like; it will only make your arguments look weak and frankly a bit silly.
Hmm, I guess that's kinda true. The OP only implies the scope with the title "Wii U, all but dead" and "What had the better life?" (past tense). The latest I'd define the Wii U's window would be 2012-2017 though, if Zelda is taken as the calling time. If the Wii U's life isn't considered ended, then the discussion can't really progress, as we can't see the future. We can't tell how many years the PS4 and XB1 will drag the gen out (especially with updated specs), or how many Wii U games may get a do-over on NX if it takes off, etc. Considering a console's life in isolation makes sense imo, because the generation overlap isn't always very clean. Trying to stretch the Saturn's life out to the end of that generation for example doesn't work very well, when you consider that the Dreamcast got discontinued before the N64 did.
When you're comparing two unquantified things, it makes perfect sense to bring in any other things that may help quantify them due to similarities. So "would you recommend someone by old game for console X" can be better answered if I've done something along those lines for console Y, where I can state any considerations that don't apply to recommending brand new releases. Or if asking whether I value the library of console X more because it has access to old games, I can better answer that if I've actually disregarded console Y entirely in the past, despite it having similar access to past games. Sorry if you don't like me doing so... but it makes sense, and so I won't stop doing it when I feel it's warranted.
marcbret87
Member
The main drawing point of the Dreamcast was the fact the that it blew the rest of the consoles out of the water when it was released. The fact that some games had online features like Phantasy Star Online, Quake III, Chu Chu Rocket or the sports games or the WMU was a welcome addition and ahead of its time indeed, but it was not the Dreamcast defining feature. The Wii U only had the second screen, because it was barely more powerful than PS3/360, so in that case I think that is a point against Wii U.
And about BC... Well, I think those of us who really value BC are those who have owned the previous platforms. Games like Super Metroid or Zelda a LInk to the Past are awesome, but I sincerely doubt that a kid who now buys his first console is going to be much endeared to play a game with "old" graphics which was released before he/she was born.
In general, I think the Dreamcast had a short life but one filled with tonnes of games. Even now when I look online I keep finding more and more games I did not know about. For the Wii U the catalogue is not so large. .
foobarry81
Member
Neither the DC nor the Wii U are "unquantified" at this point. The specs are known, the price is known, the amount of games is known, the number of consoles sold is known, games have been rated by reviewers and by the general public ...
Also may I remind you that earlier you said it was all opinions, that one couldn't and shouldn't quantify. (Well, I couldn't for my arguments, but you could when you saw fit.) So and now you're going to "help quantify them due to similarities", lol.
You're just making things up to ... I don't know... justify the lack of logic in your arguments, I guess?
I'm buying games and platforms now that I never owned as a kid. I must be doing it wrong.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
9 million my ass. Not even half of that.
The amount of games are known... but the worth of each game (especially the worth of a 20+ year old game available on numerous other platforms) isn't "known". It's subjective.
Hell, the specs and prices are known (if not exactly directly comparable due to differing time periods...), but how good the specs are for the time is subjective, and how well the console justifies the price is subjective. You even alluded to that yourself, here:
The answer to these questions? It depends. You often see people cite the Dreamcast as the most pronounced jump the recall in gaming (in the "2D to 3D vs SD to HD" thread, PS1/N64 to Dreamcast was a surprisingly common secret option C). Many games on it are better as a result of it being so overpowered in contrast to the other consoles on the market at the time. Games like Dead Rising, or Battlefield 3 were automatically made worse by hardware unsuited to drive them. How do you "objectively" quantify the Wii U's spec being closer to those of the aging Xbox 360 or PS3 at release? How do you objectively quantify if the Wii U at $299/$350 is more worth than the $199 Dreamcast at launch? You can't... it's a personal valuation... not something you can run through a calculator to fuel your argument here. If the Wii U had the specs of an XB1 in 2012, then I would have immediately started buying multiplat games for it rather than the 360/PS3... so the same number of games would have carried more worth. It wasn't though, so I didn't.
So your saying less than 4.5 million people in the entire world bought a Dreamcast during its lifetime? What nonsense.
Nobody has to come up with dumb arguments to support their platform of choice, it should be fairly straight forward
foobarry81
Member
It's not subjective. Retro games have actual, real prices in the eShop (or PlayStation Store for that matter). Someone out there decided what they are worth.
The subjective part is whether you want to pay that amount or not. But the worth is not unquantified.
How good the specs are for the time is mostly irrelevant. Because of the short lifespan of the DC, there are probably few games that tapped the most out of its technical capabilities. Typically developers need at least a year or more to really get the best out of the hardware. In some cases it hardly gets utilized at all.
So that makes the whole specs discussion and how they're supposedly valued for their time highly relative. That the DC blew other consoles out of the water at the time from a graphical point of view, really only resulted in some fanboys wetting their panties at the time. It doesn't make the DC a better console, and it didn't necessarily resulted in better games. Especially when said specs are underutilized.
None of this comes even close to answering the questions asked....
"But does that actually lead to better games? Does a more powerful graphics card necessarily result in better games?"
In case you hadn't noticed: these are rhetorical questions. The answer is 'no'. You don't need better specs to make better games. At least not anymore (in the 8 and 16-bit era there were just things you couldn't pull off with the hardware yet). Better specs nowadays are mostly for better looking games.
kunonabi
Member
So essentially your argument is the Wii U wins because it's lucky enough to have a Wii inside? That sure says a lot about the Wii U library. If you're a retro gamer and interested in older games it's better package for sure. However If someone doesn't a damn about that stuff(or already bought that stuff when they owned a Wii) then you have a pretty expensive paperweight for much of its lifespan. You have to think in terms of serving different audiences not just the super enthusiasts.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Within two years? No. They didn't hit 4.5 million.
There was actually a short period of time where the Dreamcast was the best console you could buy, it came after the PS1 and N64 but before the PS2, GCN and Xbox so it was the best. Wii U can never lay claim to this.
I can count on one hand (infact 2 fingers) the awesome games I played on Wii U: Pikmin 3 & Mario Kart 8, lol.
VMU was garbage but I really liked the controller.
What difference does any of this stuff make? Dreamcast had awesome games, that's all it needed. The Dreamcast is the ONLY retro console I still play to this day and I own them all. Do you think I care if it only had cds when I can play Under Defeat and Ikaruga on it?
I can count on one hand (infact 2 fingers) the awesome games I played on Wii U: Pikmin 3 & Mario Kart 8, lol.
VMU was garbage but I really liked the controller.
What difference does any of this stuff make? Dreamcast had awesome games, that's all it needed. The Dreamcast is the ONLY retro console I still play to this day and I own them all. Do you think I care if it only had cds when I can play Under Defeat and Ikaruga on it?
foobarry81
Member
I didn't say that, but I'm not going to repeat what I said a couple of pages back. Feel free to go read the rest though.
The question in this thread is how the DCs and the Wii U's life spans compare. So I'm not sure why you look at the Wii...? And even if you do, previous Wii owners will find value in the Wii U, because they can actually replay their games, unlike Saturn owners with a DC.
However, for people who didn't own a Wii, which is 7 billion people worldwide minus 100 million Wii owners... those people have the entire Wii library at their disposal on top of the Wii U library during the Wii U's lifespan. And on top of that they have all those VC games.
DC owners have/had... 30-something great DC games, if we're being generous.
Also, as it turns out (looking at the install bases of both consoles) both Wii U and DC turned out to be ONLY for "super enthusiasts".
The amount people are willing to pay does define a game's worth though. If people aren't willing to pay for it, then it's not worth that much, even if the seller is asking for the amount. I could put up a game on Steam and list it for $1000. You probably wouldn't buy it, because you consider it not to be worth that (rightly so). In the case of the used SNES games you mentioned earlier, their worth is a result of the amounts people are willing to pay to own them. If nobody wants it, the cart can often be had for cheap, if some people want it really, really badly, then it may sell for hundreds. The seller can set the price, but they can't establish its worth... they can only do their best to predict the worth others will assign to it, and price according. Often they get this horribly wrong and the game tanks as a result. In the case of digital stuff on the VC, Nintendo likely doesn't even care. The number of copies sold likely of little concern, both because it's essentially free money, for rom dumps, and probably not large enough amounts of money to even fuss over.
Specs aren't irrelevant. Along with access to new games, they're pretty much the driving factor in purchasing a new console. The Dreamcast didn't need developers to get the most out of it, in order for the specs to be meaningful... it was so much more powerful than the PS1/N64 that it didn't even matter. Even wonky ports like Virtua Fighter 3tb were far beyond the capabilities of the other consoles (and why VF3 never hit the Saturn as originally intended). Plus, it's not like the graphical offerings on the console didn't improve over time anyway. Dead or Alive 2, Shenmue and Metropolis Street Racer provided noticeable jumps later in the console's short life. So, this is simply you "downplaying" the worth of great hardware, because it doesn't favor the console you're pushing.
You may have intended for those questions to be rhetorical... but they really aren't. I already listed 2 games that were compromised at the gameplay level as a result of requiring higher specs. Games can definitely be better on more powerful hardware... that doesn't mean a different game can't be just as good on weaker hardware, but that doesn't hold true for every game. What Gran Turismo5 does, could not have been done on a PS2. Project Cars for Wii U was canned because they couldn't get it to run appreciably (the XB1 barely handles it). Crysis certainly isn't happening on anything in Gen 6... It's true that additional specs are mostly used for better looking games nowadays, but there are exceptions.. and there are games where the better graphics are core to the gameplay, such as the previously mentioned GT5, or something like Doom 3. Moreover, this certainly wasn't the case back when the Dreamcast arrived, where stuff like Virtua Fighter 3's undulation, and the physics based animation it required made porting to a previous gen console basically impossible... not to mention the shit that later appeared in Dead or Alive 2's stages. Gran Theft Auto 3 hadn't even happened yet.. and you're trying to push the idea that the specs of the consoles weren't affecting the quality of the games?
So yea... more powerful hardware does sometimes make a game better. Especially in comparison to the same game running on weaker hardware. If the Wii U were more powerful, it'd likely have a better line-up of games, because porting to it wouldn't be such a huge undertaking, that resulted in the game being a shadow of its former self.