Sega's Big Fight

First, let's get one thing clear: I like Sega. I didn't used to, oh no. After a brief fling with an imported Mega Drive, I had a summer-long affair with the Super NES, but subsequently went back to my trusty PC Engine. The less said about the money I lost selling Saturn games the better too - I watched Sega with a mixture of pity and exasperation. But then the Dreamcast came. Once I set eyes on the it, I was Segas, to do with as they pleased. I imagine I'll move onto the PS2, GameCube or whatever comes along with some good games; I'm fickle that way. I go where the games are, which is a quality I actually quite admire.

But Sega's in a bit of a bind. Financially, they're hurting. The arcade industry worldwide is seeing some sort of phenomenal shakeout, with the two major players (Sega and Namco) hurting like never before - Namco having just posted their first yearly loss in over ten years. Sega's parent company, CRI, has gobs of cash, but there's no telling how long they're going to suffer the drain Sega puts on their resources. But all is not lost! Sega has a daring and - perhaps hindsight will show more than just a little - risky plan.

Sega's reinventing the industry on their own.

Or so they'd have you believe.

In a recent issue of Edge magazine, the heads of each of the nine Sega software divisions, recently set on their own to do more or less as they please, gave their immediate plans. Each one, in his own way, expressed a desire to do three things: Survive on their own, support the Dreamcast and their parent company (Sega still owns them), and bring people back to the games. They have decided the best way to win the hearts, minds and wallets of the public is to recreate the definition of the video game.

Sonic Team's Yuji Naka said "We want to continue to make videogames enjoyed by kids around the world." and continued "We would like to create a new style of videogame." This sentiment was echoed by all of the former AM department leaders. Amusement Vision's Toshihiro Nagoshi: "I would like to use all the technologies available to introduce new ways to play." Nine leaders of nine new companies, with their reputations, careers, and a good chunk of the industry's history at stake. Together they command over seven hundred people - all of whom are counting on this new, radical vision to carry them through.

But ask yourself: If you were in Sega's position, what would you do? Stick with the tried and true? Whip yourselves into a frenzy of following the leaders, cranking out what the masses apparently want? Well, yeah, probably. The public, however, is giving no clear indication of what it wants. Much like their recent waffling over an American president, the game-buying public isn't game-buying.

Sega's delivered all the goods - top notch games in nearly every category: Sports, racing, Quake and derivatives... They've got workable online games, internet access, a capable piece of hardware... But for the first time, having great games isn't equalling success. It used to be that if you stepped up to the plate with nothing but quality goods, people would buy it. That's not the case now - the original Playstation and the freaking GameBoy are the number one platforms, and it's certainly not because of the calibre of their games. The public isn't into the games then, we can assume. Only the hardest of the hardcore Sony zealots would argue the Playstation 2 launch has been an unrivalled success, so we can assume the public doesn't want sexy black boxes with esoteric processors and gobs of power.

So what do they want?

Sega's newly independent game divisions think they know. The company that has been written off by many, and that has the most to lose, is taking the biggest gamble in the history of the game industry. They've got plans, some secret, some not, to revitalize consumer interest. Naturally their short term goals are to flog as many Dreamcasts and Sega games as they can, but their long-term plans are very definite as well. Sega has taken it upon themselves to deliver the goods to an industry and buying public that seems completely disinterested.

Can they do it? Should a company bleeding money be the one to bring us the next big thing? Or should we look for Sega to flame out as fast as possible, so their talent can find jobs in other, perhaps better financed, companies who can properly deliver the goods?

Naively, I root for the Underdog. I also root for the best games. Now, it seems, against some very significant odds, I'm rooting for Sega.

I think you should too.

Lawrence.

Discuss This


Sega's Big Fight
By Lawrence

GameSX.com AtariLabs Home AtariLabs Forums		First, let's get one thing clear: I like Sega. I didn't used to, oh no. After a brief fling with an imported Mega Drive, I had a summer-long affair with the Super NES, but subsequently went back to my trusty PC Engine. The less said about the money I lost selling Saturn games the better too - I watched Sega with a mixture of pity and exasperation. But then the Dreamcast came. Once I set eyes on the it, I was Segas, to do with as they pleased. I imagine I'll move onto the PS2, GameCube or whatever comes along with some good games; I'm fickle that way. I go where the games are, which is a quality I actually quite admire. But Sega's in a bit of a bind. Financially, they're hurting. The arcade industry worldwide is seeing some sort of phenomenal shakeout, with the two major players (Sega and Namco) hurting like never before - Namco having just posted their first yearly loss in over ten years. Sega's parent company, CRI, has gobs of cash, but there's no telling how long they're going to suffer the drain Sega puts on their resources. But all is not lost! Sega has a daring and - perhaps hindsight will show more than just a little - risky plan. Sega's reinventing the industry on their own. Or so they'd have you believe. In a recent issue of Edge magazine, the heads of each of the nine Sega software divisions, recently set on their own to do more or less as they please, gave their immediate plans. Each one, in his own way, expressed a desire to do three things: Survive on their own, support the Dreamcast and their parent company (Sega still owns them), and bring people back to the games. They have decided the best way to win the hearts, minds and wallets of the public is to recreate the definition of the video game. Sonic Team's Yuji Naka said "We want to continue to make videogames enjoyed by kids around the world." and continued "We would like to create a new style of videogame." This sentiment was echoed by all of the former AM department leaders. Amusement Vision's Toshihiro Nagoshi: "I would like to use all the technologies available to introduce new ways to play." Nine leaders of nine new companies, with their reputations, careers, and a good chunk of the industry's history at stake. Together they command over seven hundred people - all of whom are counting on this new, radical vision to carry them through. But ask yourself: If you were in Sega's position, what would you do? Stick with the tried and true? Whip yourselves into a frenzy of following the leaders, cranking out what the masses apparently want? Well, yeah, probably. The public, however, is giving no clear indication of what it wants. Much like their recent waffling over an American president, the game-buying public isn't game-buying. Sega's delivered all the goods - top notch games in nearly every category: Sports, racing, Quake and derivatives... They've got workable online games, internet access, a capable piece of hardware... But for the first time, having great games isn't equalling success. It used to be that if you stepped up to the plate with nothing but quality goods, people would buy it. That's not the case now - the original Playstation and the freaking GameBoy are the number one platforms, and it's certainly not because of the calibre of their games. The public isn't into the games then, we can assume. Only the hardest of the hardcore Sony zealots would argue the Playstation 2 launch has been an unrivalled success, so we can assume the public doesn't want sexy black boxes with esoteric processors and gobs of power. So what do they want? Sega's newly independent game divisions think they know. The company that has been written off by many, and that has the most to lose, is taking the biggest gamble in the history of the game industry. They've got plans, some secret, some not, to revitalize consumer interest. Naturally their short term goals are to flog as many Dreamcasts and Sega games as they can, but their long-term plans are very definite as well. Sega has taken it upon themselves to deliver the goods to an industry and buying public that seems completely disinterested. Can they do it? Should a company bleeding money be the one to bring us the next big thing? Or should we look for Sega to flame out as fast as possible, so their talent can find jobs in other, perhaps better financed, companies who can properly deliver the goods? Naively, I root for the Underdog. I also root for the best games. Now, it seems, against some very significant odds, I'm rooting for Sega. I think you should too. Lawrence. Discuss This

		All contents (c)2k1 AtariLabs.com unless otherwise noted. AtariLabs.com assumes absolutely no responsiblility for any damage incurred in activities related to information provided or implied by AtariLabs.com. All trademarks copyright their respective companies. AtariLabs is in no way affiliated with Atari Games Corp. or whatever's left of Hasbro, who own Atari Inc.