Current Events > It's kinda weird that Microsoft has been making consoles as long as Sega did

(+) Yeah! (+)

Xbox came out in 2001, so like 17 years ago

Sega made consoles from 1983 (and that was the SG-1000 which no one bought and stopped production in less than a year iirc) to 2001, so 18 not 17

still, really, really close
---

Now think about how long Nintendo have been doing it.

Now think about the fact that despite that, their consoles are consistently the weakest console of their generation, and have been that way since at least GameCube, if not longer.
---

Fortunately enough, MS had other irons in the fire, so they can afford to keep in the game, even if the profits aren't super stellar.

We need plenty of competition, so that the top dog doesn't get complacent.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Now think about how long Nintendo have been doing it.

Now think about the fact that despite that, their consoles are consistently the weakest console of their generation, and have been that way since at least GameCube, if not longer.

Gamecube was stronger than the PS2
---

DarkTransient posted...

Now think about how long Nintendo have been doing it.

Now think about the fact that despite that, their consoles are consistently the weakest console of their generation, and have been that way since at least GameCube, if not longer.

GC was more powerful than the PS2 and the N64 was more powerful than the PS1
---

Blue_Inigo posted...

DarkTransient posted...

Now think about how long Nintendo have been doing it.

Now think about the fact that despite that, their consoles are consistently the weakest console of their generation, and have been that way since at least GameCube, if not longer.

Gamecube was stronger than the PS2

This. The Wii was the weakest, and it's been that way since.
---

so, consistently weakest for the last 10-ish years?

their handhelds were always weaker than the competition, too, but their consoles haven't necessarily been (I think 'average compared to other consoles of the generation' fits for NES and SNES at least, though comparing the SNES to the TG16 and Genesis is kind of weird because they do different things better or worse depending on what you're looking for)

imo it isn't surprising at all that the most successful company isn't the one making the strongest/most powerful consoles, though. that's basically never been the case since I've been alive
---

the master system was more powerful than the NES

the SNES is arguably weaker than both the TG16 and the Genesis, though it distributes the work between different parts of its hardware which makes it easier to expand its capabilities through adding things into your cartridge (e.g., starfox) and the hardware can scale and rotate sprites natively. Both the TG16 and Genesis have more capable processors, though.

the PSX was worse than the N64
the PS2 was the worst of its generation

not sure how the consoles compare after that exactly but the Wii obviously smashed the competition

I don't know as much about home consoles before the NES, though
---

imo, sega's big flaw was that it was never really able to stop being an arcade company first

even the dreamcast is a modified arcade board

arcades were very dead by 1999
---

I made this topic because I just bought a Dreamcast btw

hahaha I am bad with money
---

I still have my Dreamcast. I loved that system.
---

King Rial posted...

I still have my Dreamcast. I loved that system.

I never owned one. I hate Sega as a kid because I thought sonic was a really boring platformer and that was all the thought I put into it lol
---

It's weird, the Dreamcast apparently sold fewer units than the master system.

I never knew anyone who had a master system, and don't know anyone who talks about it online.

Dreamcast, I knew several people and lots of people still talk about it
---

I can't believe 2001 was 30 years ago
---

Balrog0 posted...

It's weird, the Dreamcast apparently sold fewer units than the master system.

I never knew anyone who had a master system, and don't know anyone who talks about it online.

Dreamcast, I knew several people and lots of people still talk about it

Probably that swan song factor.

I never bought one but I rented one a few times. It was really neat. Sonic Adventure and SoulCalibur were mindblowing.

I also remember a racing game with tornadoes and shit lol
---

@Darmik Hydro Thunder Fam
---

It helps that Microsoft has only developed 3 different dedicated consoles

as opposed to Sega dumping all their money into half-assed failures every other year
---

Scotty_Rogers posted...

@Darmik Hydro Thunder Fam

Looking it up it was Speed Devils

Good times
---

And remember MS actually helped Sega with their final console. Windows was installed in the Dreamcast. It seems they were planning on entering the console market for a while.
---

creativerealms posted...

And remember MS actually helped Sega on their final console. It seems they were planning on entering the console market for a while.

There was a pretty big internal debate within Microsoft at the time. There was a team within Microsoft arguing that the Xbox was a waste of time because they were working with Sega.

They were working on a few different things at the time and a few teams were competing with each other. The Xbox team won in the end.
---

DarkTransient posted...

weakest console of their generation, and have been that way since at least GameCube,

Lol
---

Darmik posted...

creativerealms posted...

And remember MS actually helped Sega on their final console. It seems they were planning on entering the console market for a while.

There was a pretty big internal debate within Microsoft at the time. There was a team within Microsoft arguing that the Xbox was a waste of time because they were working with Sega.

They were working on a few different things at the time and a few teams were competing with each other. The Xbox team won in the end.

Interesting. I didn't realize they were working on the X-box while helping Sega.
---

So both Sony and Microsoft are in the console market partially because other console devs hired them to help?
---

Balrog0 posted...

So both Sony and Microsoft are in the console market partially because other console devs hired them to help?

That's right the PlayStation started life as Nintendo's answer to Sega CD didn't it? Yeah it sure seems that way.
---

Balrog0 posted...

So both Sony and Microsoft are in the console market partially because other console devs hired them to help?

Microsoft primarily approved the Xbox because of how Sony was hyping up the PS2. They were considered a threat.

I don't think Sega mattered that much overall to them. They were trying out a few different things around that time and all these different teams were competing. The original idea for the Xbox was a gaming PC with a quick boot up time.

Bill Gates seem to have given the go ahead for the actual Xbox in early 2000. I think the Dreamcast was still okay then.
---

Huh

This is actually more surprising as a metric of how long SEGA made consoles than how long MS has been making them.
---

DarkTransient posted...

Now think about how long Nintendo have been doing it.

Now think about the fact that despite that, their consoles are consistently the weakest console of their generation, and have been that way since at least GameCube, if not longer.

With only a few exceptions, repurposing older hardware has been Nintendo's primary design philosophy since they rebuilt all their unsold Radascope cabinets into Donkey Kong. It's what works best for them.
---

Darmik posted...

Microsoft primarily approved the Xbox because of how Sony was hyping up the PS2. They were considered a threat.

Well they were also trying to push more market share for Direct X which is where the console gets it's name. The "Direct X Box"
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Darmik posted...

Microsoft primarily approved the Xbox because of how Sony was hyping up the PS2. They were considered a threat.

Well they were also trying to push more market share for Direct X which is where the console gets it's name. The "Direct X Box"

Ah, interesting. So, what do you guys think about that? Is that Microsoft reading the tea leaves of Sega's demise, or just not giving a shit about anything cuz bill gates money?

DevsBro posted...

Huh

This is actually more surprising as a metric of how long SEGA made consoles than how long MS has been making them.

Lmao fair point my friend
---

Man the grafx on these DC games are actually still really awful. I remember it being a big step up from the N64 and some games that's true, but mostly it kinda isn't

It's like an NES compared to the TG16 of the GameCube
---

Balrog0 posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

Darmik posted...

Microsoft primarily approved the Xbox because of how Sony was hyping up the PS2. They were considered a threat.

Well they were also trying to push more market share for Direct X which is where the console gets it's name. The "Direct X Box"

Ah, interesting. So, what do you guys think about that? Is that Microsoft reading the tea leaves of Sega's demise, or just not giving a shit about anything cuz bill gates money?

The tea leaves of Sega's demise is because one guy wanted to make black tea and started to brew some black tea but another guy thought black tea was shit so he took out the steeping leaves and put in green tea, then another guy thought tea wouldn't steep unless it was boiling so he boiled the teapot after the 2nd guy left, then a 4th guy comes along and is like "shit you know what would be good in here? MILK" and he put milk in it and then everyone beat the shit out of him and fired him and while that was going on a 5th guy comes along and he's all "man this iced tea is delicious" as he's cooled off the teabomination and put ice in it.

Microsoft's philosophy is a different one. They're looking at what Google and Facebook are doing regarding telemetry and marketing analytics and changing their console and platform to adapt to that to make a good chunk of money that way where as companies like Sony still predominantly just try to get you to buy more and more of their shit meanwhile Microsoft's making money off you even if you didn't buy anything but the console.
---

Balrog0 posted...

Ah, interesting. So, what do you guys think about that? Is that Microsoft reading the tea leaves of Sega's demise, or just not giving a shit about anything cuz bill gates money?

It was a mix of a few different things that all eventually lead to Xbox. This article goes into it pretty well.

http://www.shacknews.com/article/95635/how-the-original-xbox-team-convinced-insulted-bill-gates-to-green-light-a-console

Fries explained that there were two teams trying to sell Gatesthen chairman and chief software architect, a position the Microsoft co-founder created for himselfand CEO Steve Ballmer on creating a game console. Fries headed one team, and put together a proposal for, in essence, a PC in a box. It would run on Windows and contain a hard disk drive to minimize loading times.

The other team, led by designer Seamus Blackley, pitched a box modeled after Sega's Dreamcast, on the basis that "at the time, Dreamcast was king. Influence," Blackley wrote on Twitter upon revealing his original concept sketches for the Xbox.

Gates threw in with Fries' team. He liked the idea of building a game console that served as a Trojan horse: a game machine to the untrained eye, but under the hood, another Windows platform. Gates allotted one year for the Xbox team to put a business plan together and get the ball rolling. The strategy underwent some modifications.

"Then we spend a year going over what it's actually going to take, the [second] team shuts down and joins us, and we become more like them, but at some point we drop Windows. We want this closed thing that runs games really well," Fries explained (via NeoGAF).

There was just one problem. Fries and his teammates, including Blackley and fellow Xbox co-creator J Allard, forgot to inform Gates that Windows would no longer comprise the beating heart of Microsoft's console. At a meeting scheduled for 4:00 pm on Valentine's Day, Gates blew his top.

"So we go into the meeting and four o'clock Valentine's Day," Fries said. "Bill walks in, he's holding a PowerPoint deck and yells, 'This is the blanking insult to everything I've done at this company' and that was the start, so we all looked at [Xbox director and designer J Allard] because we knew Bill's mad about the no Windows thing, because we forgot to 'pre-disaster' him, so J is in shock for a minute and Bill yells at me and shuts me down and Robbie steps up and Bill shuts him down anyway, and then Ballmer goes through and says we're gonna lose a lot of money and he's beating us up about that."

An hour passes. Two hours. Fries and the others steal glances at their watches. It's nearing six o'clock on the most romantic day of the year, and Gates is still unleashing hellfire and brimstone. To Fries' amazement, one of the other attendees raises a hand. Gates pauses in mid-tirade and calls on him.

"'What about Sony?' and he says, 'Sony is slowly invading the living room with a processor here software there, they could be a threat to Microsoft.'"

Gates and Ballmer stared at each other. "Yeah," Gates said. "What about Sony?"

Gates turned to the Xbox team and promised to give them everything they needed to create their console, Windows or no Windows. Ballmer echoed the chairman's vow.

"And I turn to Robbie and say, 'That was the weirdest meeting I've ever been in,'" Fries said.

I think that summarizes everything that lead up to it.

The article doesn't mention it but there were even powerpoint presentations about the threat Sony was making towards the company with the PS2. People don't really mention this these days but Sony was hyping up the PS2 as a computer replacement before launch.
---

Very interesting
---

Darmik posted...

[snip]

I'm finding it very hard and very hilarious to imagine a nice guy like Bill Gates going on a two-hour angry tirade.
---

Solar_Crimson posted...

Darmik posted...

[snip]

I'm finding it very hard and very hilarious to imagine a nice guy like Bill Gates going on a two-hour angry tirade.

I read a book all about Microsoft during the 90's that lead to the Xbox and it sounds like a crazy ass place to work during the time. A lot of aggression, sabotage and screaming matches. A bunch of geniuses calling each other morons.
---

I was here before the Xbox launched, when it was announced even. The consensus around gamefaqs was that it would fail.
---

creativerealms posted...

I was here before the Xbox launched, when it was announced even. The consensus around gamefaqs was that it would fail.

I don't blame anyone who would think that.

Hell without Halo maybe it would have.
---

Darmik posted...

creativerealms posted...

I was here before the Xbox launched, when it was announced even. The consensus around gamefaqs was that it would fail.

I don't blame anyone who would think that.

Hell without Halo maybe it would have.

I don't think Halo would have been enough. It wasn't until Halo 2 that people begin to see real value in Xbox.

It's also basically because of Halo 2 that the 360 sold so well.
---

Darmik posted...

creativerealms posted...

I was here before the Xbox launched, when it was announced even. The consensus around gamefaqs was that it would fail.

I don't blame anyone who would think that.

Hell without Halo maybe it would have.

If it did fail, I wonder what would have become of Rare? Would Microsoft keep them to work on PC games? Would another company swoop in and snatch them up? Or would they float around in corporate limbo? I doubt Nintendo would have reacquired them, since they were unwilling to keep them in the first place.
---

Why didn't Nintendo want to keep rare, anyway?
---

Balrog0 posted...

Why didn't Nintendo want to keep rare, anyway?

One theory I read was that Nintendo foresaw their output quality dropping after some key members left (including the founders, I believe), and sold their shares back to Rare. Microsoft then bought them in full (whereas Nintendo only had like 49%, Microsoft got 100%).

Another one I read was that Rare put themselves up for sale, expecting Nintendo to buy them due to their relationship at the time. However, Nintendo never did, and Microsoft ended up purchasing them.
---

Solar_Crimson posted...

Darmik posted...

creativerealms posted...

I was here before the Xbox launched, when it was announced even. The consensus around gamefaqs was that it would fail.

I don't blame anyone who would think that.

Hell without Halo maybe it would have.

If it did fail, I wonder what would have become of Rare? Would Microsoft keep them to work on PC games? Would another company swoop in and snatch them up? Or would they float around in corporate limbo? I doubt Nintendo would have reacquired them, since they were unwilling to keep them in the first place.

Crazy to think about. If the Xbox flopped out the gate maybe they wouldn't have even bought them the following year.

Some other interesting things

- Square was nearly bought out by Microsoft. To the point where contracts were drawn up and everything. The only thing that stopped them was Square asked for more money in the last possible moment

- Microsoft also attempted to buy Nintendo. They met with them several times. I think most people assume Nintendo would tell them to fuck off and go away but it didn't really happen like that. Takeada even went to Redmond and pitched a joint console. It fell through because both companies wanted to be in charge. Microsoft also pitched them a really beneficial partnership on Xbox. Nintendo knew everything about Xbox before it was announced. They said no because it would appear like a defeat.

The gaming industry was hectic around this time. Pretty much all of the decisions made then are what defines the shape of the industry now.

I made a topic about the Xbox history a few months ago as I was reading a book all about it. There's a lot of interesting stuff.
---

What did you read, dude? I've read a few books focusing on Nintendo, but they were older history (pre-64, or 64 era)

Sounds super fuckin interesting
---

Balrog0 posted...

What did you read, dude? I've read a few books focusing on Nintendo, but they were older history (pre-64, or 64 era)

Sounds super fuckin interesting

https://www.amazon.com/Game-v-1-Standard-Rusel-DeMaria/dp/1976455170

it's neat. These stories are collected right from Microsoft employees too.
---

Balrog0 posted...

Man the grafx on these DC games are actually still really awful. I remember it being a big step up from the N64 and some games that's true, but mostly it kinda isn't

It's like an NES compared to the TG16 of the GameCube

VGA box will fix that

Darmik posted...

creativerealms posted...

I was here before the Xbox launched, when it was announced even. The consensus around gamefaqs was that it would fail.

I don't blame anyone who would think that.

Hell without Halo maybe it would have.

I remember some gaming magazing I read claimed the name meant that it was a console/PC hybrid. I knew literally one kid who thought that was a good idea lol.

I dunno where they got their info though. Turns out Microsoft actually did their best to keep peoppe from associating it with PC's, lol.
---

DevsBro posted...

Darmik posted...

creativerealms posted...

I was here before the Xbox launched, when it was announced even. The consensus around gamefaqs was that it would fail.

I don't blame anyone who would think that.

Hell without Halo maybe it would have.

I remember some gaming magazing I read claimed the name meant that it was a console/PC hybrid. I knew literally one kid who thought that was a good idea lol.

I dunno where they got their info though. Turns out Microsoft actually did their best to keep peoppe from associating it with PC's, lol.

A lot of my friends in middle school liked Xbox. Now that I think about it, I was the only dude I knew had a gcn for a while
---

Kind of funny that MS literally used Sega as a stepping stone on how to develop and launch a console.
---

Im so confused about 48
---