have you ever tried to convice anyone that saturn is better than playstation? what kinda interesting points have come up? ive dont it before on dalnet, and its kinda fun, since they always turn out to be wrong.
I have no PS and I'll never buy one, I just want to tell each console has its pros and cons.
I prefer 2D, RPG and fighting games, that's why I got a Saturn. If I were into 3D and sport/driving games, I'd buy a PS.
Shining Force III, Marvel SH vs SF, Psychik Killer Taromaru, Die Hard Arcade, Guardian Heroes, D&D Collection and of course Mr Bones ! are Saturn exclusive games that make it worth get a Saturn. Period. But I don't know any PS exclusive, so I won't critisize Sony.
Syphon Filter, Metal Gear Solid, WWF Smackdown! are a couple of games that had a lot of popularity which were PS specific.
I wouldn't say it's a 2D system (although it truly excelled at that), rather, it's a 3D system that never saw it's fullest potential. For instance, Virtua Fighter 2. Every time I play it I'm amazed by a) how great it looks and
how much untapped potential that black box had.
All things considered, had SOJ decided not to be difficult and went with the single processor, the Saturn could have really taken off (or at least last longer than it did, or get better ports of games, etc.). Some of the greatest games were left overseas, and those who aren't inclined to look probably never would have known what the Saturn has to offer.
This connects with one of my pet peeves: people insisting that Saturn was designed as a purely 2D console, with 3D "tacked on at the last second". The Saturn's architecture is quite clearly designed to handle 3D, and the idea that an extra VDP was thrown in just to do 3D is laughable, since Saturn would have no hardware sprite capability at all without the VDP1 (which also does polygons), not to mention that the folks who made Panzer Dragoon probably would have had to work about 48 hours a day to make the launch date...
The reason for the difficult architecture of the Sat is that if Sega had gone the original route, Sony would've dominated from the begining (yes even in Japan, even with VF). Nakayama had gotten the specs of the PSX and compared it with Sat, and the PSX was superior in almost everyway (except 2D of course). The PSX was designed purely for 3D in mind, 'cause the damn, picky public wanted 3D. Sega knew that 3D hardware like Model 1 was expensive at the time so they went with the 2D route. Sega had to put in all the extra stuff in order to compete with Sony. In the end... Sat was able to compete with Sony pretty evenly, along with surpassing them at times (VF2, NiGHTS anyone?
) Also, the reason Sony was so easy to develop for in the first place, was the for PSX games, you had to learn to progam in C. That was it. With the Sat, you had to learn the hardware, and learn how to harness it to the full potential.
I'm just curious... where did you hear this? According to SegaBase, the "proto-Saturn" was built for 3D (Model 1 derivative), just substantially weaker than PSX, and they didn't "add extra stuff", they basically scrapped the whole thing and rebuilt it from scratch...
edit: eh... maybe I misread it. Need to go through it again...
Well I bought a playstation off of my friend about a week ago for 20 bucks and when looking for a game to buy, I found that other than metal gear solid there really isn't that i want to play. All I do is play THPS 2 on the damn thing.. can't wait to get my CSotN back from my brother.
Anywho. I'm happy with the replay value of nights... I only wish that I had an a/v cable for the switcher.... (the coax on the tv in the living room broke long ago.
Anyway yeah, I don't see why those sonyheads like the damn thing, the loading times are horror... but at least i now have time to use a toothpick.
Both PSX and Saturn have their strong points. I own both and I think Saturn wins in this battle. I've had a playstation for awhile and there have been great games that I played forever. Metal Gear , CastleVania, and The FF series.
Saturn in my opinion had the better games but of course people are drawn to *better* graphics. The gameplay is all that matters in the end and Saturn and all sega systems I think had the best games. Phantasy Star (2 was the best) I believe are a better series then Final Fantasy. Guardian Heros, I don't think there is a scrolling beat' em up that can even touch that game. Saturn games I could play forever. Their replay values are much greater then PSX's games in my opinion.
Seems that Sega just picked the wrong time to release their systems and always got shafted for it. Even though now they did the smart thing by making games for all systems so now anyone who owns a video game system(besides if they only have old school) will be influenced by Sega games. Maybe if Sega makes a new system in a few years it will be a success if peolpe relize that all the great games on the new system are sega games.
I own a DC, Saturn, PSX and PS2.. I don't see the need for all the animosity really. Sega really have only themselves to blame for their 'failures', Sony is a pretty easy scapegoat. Look at the value you got if you bought a Playstation, they're still making games for it now and where's the Saturn been for years? Nintendo, Sega and PS titles all have very different feels I think, making all of them worthwhile in their own way. Sony has Chrono Cross, Xenogears, SotN, FF7 etc. and now the PS2 is getting well into it's stride with good titles pretty much every month.