What went wrong with the Saturn?

  • 119 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for GreekGameManiac
#1 Posted by GreekGameManiac (6439 posts) -

Was it not powerful enough?

Didn't have enough support?

What?

Avatar image for nameless12345
#2 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

I don't think you will get an answer that will please you but...

27455075.jpg

:P

Avatar image for Nismology
#3 Posted by Nismology (649 posts) -
I think it was mainly a series of bad marketing decisions made by Sega while trying to market it in the west. This ended up alienating retailers and developers, which resulted in a small launch library and limited, if any shelf space for saturn stuff in game stores. It was also more difficult to write games for than the Playstation, so devs naturally favoured the PS.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#4 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -

lack of/crappy marketing, convoluted hardware as far as the average developer goes.

Avatar image for nameless12345
#5 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

I think it was mainly a series of bad marketing decisions made by Sega while trying to market it in the west. This ended up alienating retailers and developers, which resulted in a small launch library and limited, if any shelf space for saturn stuff in game stores. It was also more difficult to write games for than the Playstation, so devs naturally favoured the PS.Nismology

I concur that the Saturn was basically non-existent by 1998 or so while the PS1 and N64 were just starting to sell well.

I think I've seen, like, three Saturn commercials in total (not very good ones to begin with) while PS1 (aka PSX as they used to call it back then) add were literally everywhere.

Avatar image for Sali217
#6 Posted by Sali217 (1301 posts) -
Playstation happened. Also bad marketing, people fed up after the whole 32x/sega cd thing. I also heard it had way too much shovelware.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#7 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -
Playstation happened. Also bad marketing, people fed up after the whole 32x/sega cd thing. I also heard it had way too much shovelware.Sali217
the shovelware is not really true. there were piles of crap games on almost every system , from personal experience I would say the Saturn is no worse than what one would expect.
Avatar image for JamesHarden98
#8 Posted by JamesHarden98 (47 posts) -

[QUOTE="Sali217"]Playstation happened. Also bad marketing, people fed up after the whole 32x/sega cd thing. I also heard it had way too much shovelware.Darkman2007
the shovelware is not really true. there were piles of crap games on almost every system , from personal experience I would say the Saturn is no worse than what one would expect.

Hes not saying that the Saturn was a bad system but he was saying that Sega betrayed their fan base with crappy add ons. He was also refering to the boatloads of great titles that are on the playstation versus the few that were on the Saturn

Avatar image for Darkman2007
#9 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Sali217"]Playstation happened. Also bad marketing, people fed up after the whole 32x/sega cd thing. I also heard it had way too much shovelware.JamesHarden98

the shovelware is not really true. there were piles of crap games on almost every system , from personal experience I would say the Saturn is no worse than what one would expect.

Hes not saying that the Saturn was a bad system but he was saying that Sega betrayed their fan base with crappy add ons. He was also refering to the boatloads of great titles that are on the playstation versus the few that were on the Saturn

first of all , complaining about shovelware on the Saturn vs the PS1 is hilarious, as there was plenty of it on PS1 , far more in fact (simply because there were more games) and there were more than a "few" great games on Saturn btw , I never knew the Mega CD was that bad, it wasn't great, but it has its fair share of decent games.
Avatar image for WitIsWisdom
#10 Posted by WitIsWisdom (4773 posts) -

lack of/crappy marketing, convoluted hardware as far as the average developer goes.

Darkman2007

This pretty much sums it up.

The Saturn was great, but as he stated when you dont advertise and others do you will get eaten alive!

Avatar image for Dj-Dampleaf
#11 Posted by Dj-Dampleaf (730 posts) -
**** just have your name on every topic on the front page Greek. Grace us with your threads.h
Avatar image for Sali217
#12 Posted by Sali217 (1301 posts) -
[QUOTE="JamesHarden98"]

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"] the shovelware is not really true. there were piles of crap games on almost every system , from personal experience I would say the Saturn is no worse than what one would expect.Darkman2007

Hes not saying that the Saturn was a bad system but he was saying that Sega betrayed their fan base with crappy add ons. He was also refering to the boatloads of great titles that are on the playstation versus the few that were on the Saturn

first of all , complaining about shovelware on the Saturn vs the PS1 is hilarious, as there was plenty of it on PS1 , far more in fact (simply because there were more games) and there were more than a "few" great games on Saturn btw , I never knew the Mega CD was that bad, it wasn't great, but it has its fair share of decent games.

The problem with the sega CD/Mega CD wasn't really that it was bad per se. The problem was more about the genesis/megadrive being overrun by expensive add-ons. Sega went through a number of bad marketing decisions really.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#13 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="JamesHarden98"]

Hes not saying that the Saturn was a bad system but he was saying that Sega betrayed their fan base with crappy add ons. He was also refering to the boatloads of great titles that are on the playstation versus the few that were on the Saturn

Sali217
first of all , complaining about shovelware on the Saturn vs the PS1 is hilarious, as there was plenty of it on PS1 , far more in fact (simply because there were more games) and there were more than a "few" great games on Saturn btw , I never knew the Mega CD was that bad, it wasn't great, but it has its fair share of decent games.

The problem with the sega CD/Mega CD wasn't really that it was bad per se. The problem was more about the genesis/megadrive being overrun by expensive add-ons. Sega went through a number of bad marketing decisions really.

meh , really there were only 2 main ones, the Mega CD and 32X . counting something like the Master System adapter is not right for instance (nobody seems to care the SNES had a GB player) there were a few other add ons, but they were very obscure for the most part.
Avatar image for nameless12345
#14 Posted by nameless12345 (15125 posts) -

[QUOTE="Sali217"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] first of all , complaining about shovelware on the Saturn vs the PS1 is hilarious, as there was plenty of it on PS1 , far more in fact (simply because there were more games) and there were more than a "few" great games on Saturn btw , I never knew the Mega CD was that bad, it wasn't great, but it has its fair share of decent games.Darkman2007
The problem with the sega CD/Mega CD wasn't really that it was bad per se. The problem was more about the genesis/megadrive being overrun by expensive add-ons. Sega went through a number of bad marketing decisions really.

meh , really there were only 2 main ones, the Mega CD and 32X . counting something like the Master System adapter is not right for instance (nobody seems to care the SNES had a GB player) there were a few other add ons, but they were very obscure for the most part.

Mega CD and 32X could be seperate systems.

They didn't need the Genesis to operate and the whole potential (i.e. Gen + SCD + 32X) went largly untapped.

Anyway, the most common answers for the failure of Saturn are poor advertising and hard development but Sega did a lot of other mistakes too during that era.

For example they launched the Saturn too soon in the US with a poor launch line up and a hefty price (399$ was a lot back then), they didn't bring some of the important Saturn games from Japan to the US (and Europe), they were promoting a "next-gen" system when their console was still supposed to compete with PS1 and N64, they cancelled some big projects like Sonic X-treme (Saturn only got a Sonic racing game and a compilation), they were flooding the market prior the Saturn with too much hardware resulting in people loosing trust in Sega, ect.

I'm speaking about what I've heard/read about it, I wasn't actually there when it came out neither owned one.

I remember it as "the expensive Sega" which played some cool-looking arcade style games like Virtua Fighter and Sega Rally, but not much beyond that.

Avatar image for Emerald_Warrior
#15 Posted by Emerald_Warrior (6581 posts) -

Here's what I think really hurt it:

  1. Lack of support in the U.S. - Too many Saturn games were Japanese-only releases even when the Saturn was still being supported fully in the U.S.

  2. Bad Marketing - From what I've read, specifically the debut of the Saturn. Most companies give third-party companies forewarning and dev-kits well before the console hits store shelves so games are ready to go at and shortly after launching a console. Saturn sprung it on everyone in May 1995, when they had been telling everyone specifically that it was releasing in September 1995. This move upset many third-party companies as well as some chain-stores and hurt Sega's image in the industry. There's also the weird-as-hell Saturn commercials that aired in the U.S. What the hell were those about?

  3. Hard to Program For - Now I'm not a techie by any means. So I'm not gonna try to explain this. But I've heard many times that the Saturn was a system that was hard to program for due to the way the dual-CPUs were set-up. This meant that many developers had a hard time programming for the Saturn, which often led to poor ports or game developers just deciding to skip a Saturn version altogether.

  4. No Great Sonic Games That Weren't Already On Genesis - I know many Sega fans hate to hear this, but it's the truth, Sonic sold A LOT of Sega hardware. Many people automatically associate Sega with Sonic and many people played and enjoyed Sonic games on the Genesis. But on Saturn all we saw were mediocre Sonic games, or ports of Sonic games already on the Genesis. If you really loved Sonic and that's why you bought a Genesis, then you had no real reason to go buy a Saturn.

All that said, I do enjoy the Saturn. I own one. My collection is pretty sparse, but I enjoy the games I do have and I have enjoyed a lot of other games on the Saturn that aren't in my collection as well. It has a fine library of games and is a great system.

Avatar image for Megavideogamer
#16 Posted by Megavideogamer (6349 posts) -

The suprise May 20th 1995 U.S.A Launch which was designed to get a jump on the Playstation Sept 1995 U.S launch. Sega pissed off some major retail chains. Which later refused to support Sega when Sony launched later in the year. Sony also priced the Playstation $100.00 less then the Sega Saturn.

Finally the Sega Saturn was difficult to program for Sony Playstation was easy for third party developers to work with. And Sonic the Hedgehog did not appear on the Saturn.

Avatar image for deactivated-57ad0e5285d73
#17 Posted by deactivated-57ad0e5285d73 (21398 posts) -
The Playstation just had that WOW factor. Ridge Racer and Toshinden were great looking games at the time. Not to mention an amazing port of Tekken.
Avatar image for BlendThree
#18 Posted by BlendThree (160 posts) -

I'm one of those gamers who stood there at the store witha credit card burning in my back pocket and the decision to be made between the Playstation and the Saturn. At launch the Saturn was actually $100 more than the original PS One. By the time I scrounged up enough, Sega had dropped the Saturn's cost (no games included, one controller and the AV cable) to match the Playstation at $299.

Hindsight is always 20/20 but at the time the Saturn seemed like the safer bet. Electronics makers were having a terrible time cracking into the video game sector (Phillips CD-i, Panasonic 3DO anyone?) and Sega, despite some BS with the CD/ 32X detours, still had a MASSIVE following for the Genesis. Nintendo was showing absolutely no signs of releasing new hardware and even then rumors (that would eventually be proven correct) abounded that when they did, it would be cartridge based.

Long story short, it was a $400+ day after picking up a single game and another controller but I sipped the Saturn Kool-Aid. I was actually very happy with the console initially. Games like Bug!, Panzer Dragoon, Clockwork Knight, all great stuff. I think if 2D were going to previal, the Saturn would have mopped up the market. Of course what was really happening behind the scenes was that the move to 3D was in full swing (Nintendo would cememnt this once the N64/ Mario 64 would come out a couple years later) and the Saturn's hardware architecture proved difficult to develop for.

By the time 1997 rolled around, I parted ways with the Saturn to switch to the Playstation camp. The momentum had simply run out for the Saturn but not before many good titles were released. If you actually research the history of Sega, the major reason game companies dumped the Saturn was that behind the scene Bernie Stolar, then-CEO, had basically announced that Sega themselves was pulling the plug on the Saturn to put all their effort into their next console (whcih of course would be the ill-fated Dreamcast). A long line of bad decisions are what ultimately relegated Sega to a software-only developer.

Avatar image for Nismology
#19 Posted by Nismology (649 posts) -

I'm one of those gamers who stood there at the store witha credit card burning in my back pocket and the decision to be made between the Playstation and the Saturn. At launch the Saturn was actually $100 more than the original PS One. By the time I scrounged up enough, Sega had dropped the Saturn's cost (no games included, one controller and the AV cable) to match the Playstation at $299.

Hindsight is always 20/20 but at the time the Saturn seemed like the safer bet. Electronics makers were having a terrible time cracking into the video game sector (Phillips CD-i, Panasonic 3DO anyone?) and Sega, despite some BS with the CD/ 32X detours, still had a MASSIVE following for the Genesis. Nintendo was showing absolutely no signs of releasing new hardware and even then rumors (that would eventually be proven correct) abounded that when they did, it would be cartridge based.

Long story short, it was a $400+ day after picking up a single game and another controller but I sipped the Saturn Kool-Aid. I was actually very happy with the console initially. Games like Bug!, Panzer Dragoon, Clockwork Knight, all great stuff. I think if 2D were going to previal, the Saturn would have mopped up the market. Of course what was really happening behind the scenes was that the move to 3D was in full swing (Nintendo would cememnt this once the N64/ Mario 64 would come out a couple years later) and the Saturn's hardware architecture proved difficult to develop for.

By the time 1997 rolled around, I parted ways with the Saturn to switch to the Playstation camp. The momentum had simply run out for the Saturn but not before many good titles were released. If you actually research the history of Sega, the major reason game companies dumped the Saturn was that behind the scene Bernie Stolar, then-CEO, had basically announced that Sega themselves was pulling the plug on the Saturn to put all their effort into their next console (whcih of course would be the ill-fated Dreamcast). A long line of bad decisions are what ultimately relegated Sega to a software-only developer.

BlendThree
Cheers, that was an interesting read!
Avatar image for GaussRiemann
#20 Posted by GaussRiemann (249 posts) -
I wasn't a console gamer back in the day, all I know I've read in the last year. I do not claim to be definitely right in any of the points From what I know, there were many factors: Difficult to program: the Saturn was more difficult to program for than the Playstation. One big thing was that it has a dual core, but due to programming difficulties, many games only one processor, which only was weaker than the Playstation CPU. Poor marketing: I remeber Sony advertising the PSX very aggrissively on TV in Europe, rigth from the start, while I only saw one single time a Sega Saturn commercial. It seems this was quite representative. Sega only had good marketing in Japan in 1997 and 98, when North America and Europe were already lost. Poor decisions: Sega pissed of several third party developers and retailers with their "surprise attack", i.e. releasing the Saturn in spring and not autumn 1995. Also, the console suffered from a lack of new titles, since the third party titles were still scheduled with the later release date. Adding to this, Sega decided to focus all of there efforts on the Saturn, dropping the Genesis / Mega Drive and all attachments, leaving Nintendo the still profitable 16-bit market and pissing of several huge toy selling chains to quit selling Sega products. I'm especially not sure about this one, but I once read that Sega of America decided against a U.S. of many shoot'em ups and RPGs, because the latter were considered to "nerdy" and the former to not show the system's technical capabilities enough. Price: the system was more expensive, and the complex hardware did not allow Sega to do the same price drops as Sony Bad Zeitgeist: Not later than '97, 3D was all the hype and many reagarded 2D games as being outdated or "last gen", and 3D was the Playstation's strong point. No Sonic game, espeicially no 3D Sonic game as answer to Mario 64, and there was also no game causing a hype like Final Fantasy VII.
Avatar image for Subtle_Ninja_X
#21 Posted by Subtle_Ninja_X (36 posts) -

lack of/crappy marketing, convoluted hardware as far as the average developer goes.

Darkman2007
Its almost like Sega didn't really want to sell them at all. They just released it... because
Avatar image for mariokart64fan
#22 Posted by mariokart64fan (20547 posts) -

the lack of third party support-way worst then n64 or gc

the lack of high profile titles -goldeneye , turok top gear , etc

the lack of advertising

the expensive asking price of 400 ,

the failed genesis add-ons and a subsequent rare cdx release also had its part in it ,

sega unable to get stores to actually carry the units ,

and i hate to bust peoples bubble ---no sonic that was worth mentioning , also racing games seam to be next to extinct on it , owning only 6 games and struggling to find some that are actually worth a dime , i can honestly say i wasted my money on it , and the fact it does not have 4 controller ports out of the box is another problem dont say oh but ps1 didnt have them - the thing with ps1 was rpgs , and singleplayer expierences and nfs games, driver games not possible on saturn

n64 was the party system of that gen im surprised it didnt sell 60 million honestly ,

Avatar image for CLOUDsea
#23 Posted by CLOUDsea (1095 posts) -

I think, to put things in perspective, while the Saturn is known as a failure it's also relatively similar to the Dreamcast. Except the market it succeeded in and the 3rd party support was switched. Dreamcast sold more than the Saturn, but not by a large margin.

the lack of third party support-way worst then n64 or gc

mariokart64fan

This is actually not quite true, at least in terms of Japanese 3rd party support. The Saturn seems to have had better Japanese support than the N64. Moreover, as far as racing games go, weren't Daytona USA and Sega Rally two of the highest profile games for the system? And if Grandia was possible on the Saturn, plenty of the PS1's JRPGs would have been possible on the Saturn. In fact, the Saturn had the 2nd best JRPG selection out of the three consoles that generation (because the N64 had lost that much support).

Avatar image for penpusher
#24 Posted by penpusher (3573 posts) -

Just as many other people have already said it was a combination of things. For one thing the Saturn didnt get a build up to release like most consoles do, as I recall all sega did was just suddenly say "oh its out in a month or two" or something to that affect and retailers were just expected to deal with it. Thus a suprising amount of retailers refused to sell it when it came out.

There was also the fact that not enough developers wanted to support it because as a system it was powerful, but as a platform for developing games it was nothing short of a pain in the backside thanks to what sounds like a hideous multi processor architecture, which made programming much more diffifult and expensive than was needed. That resulted in not enough games to back up the system.

It also didnt help that Sega had kind of alienated its fan base a fair bit with the likes of the 32x.

Oh and obviously the playstation really, seriously, didnt help.

I dont own one at the moment, but I will be doing because despite its flop it looks like it has some awesome games :D

Avatar image for bultje112
#25 Posted by bultje112 (1868 posts) -

Was it not powerful enough?

Didn't have enough support?

What?

GreekGameManiac

the answer is simple: sega of japan screwed up big time. they totally misjudged the us market and thought it was the same as japan. in japan saturn was a succes. in europe and usa it was a disaster sales wise.

also the surprise launch was a disaster because half the retailers weren't in on it. they were so mad they wouldn't carry saturn anymore. also in europe retailing was horrendous. I knew only 1 shop in 30 km radius in netherlands who sold saturns and games.

Avatar image for bultje112
#26 Posted by bultje112 (1868 posts) -

Playstation happened. Also bad marketing, people fed up after the whole 32x/sega cd thing. I also heard it had way too much shovelware.Sali217

that is absolutely not true. It had far less than playsation for instance. most exlusive saturn games were actually very good, while most shovelware is either multiplatform or for system easiest and cheapest to develop on, which was psx

Avatar image for bultje112
#27 Posted by bultje112 (1868 posts) -

[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="JamesHarden98"]

Hes not saying that the Saturn was a bad system but he was saying that Sega betrayed their fan base with crappy add ons. He was also refering to the boatloads of great titles that are on the playstation versus the few that were on the Saturn

Sali217

first of all , complaining about shovelware on the Saturn vs the PS1 is hilarious, as there was plenty of it on PS1 , far more in fact (simply because there were more games) and there were more than a "few" great games on Saturn btw , I never knew the Mega CD was that bad, it wasn't great, but it has its fair share of decent games.

The problem with the sega CD/Mega CD wasn't really that it was bad per se. The problem was more about the genesis/megadrive being overrun by expensive add-ons. Sega went through a number of bad marketing decisions really.

the expensive add ons being bad for sega are such a myth. the sega cd actually sold very wlel until the congress hearings in 1993. the 32x nobody knew and cared about. the real problem was sega abonding the genesis worldwide in 1995. while in europe and usa the 16 bit market was still way bigger than the 32 bit market. this cost sega tons of money and customers

Avatar image for bultje112
#28 Posted by bultje112 (1868 posts) -

The Playstation just had that WOW factor. Ridge Racer and Toshinden were great looking games at the time. Not to mention an amazing port of Tekken. Heirren

saturn had panzer dragoon.

Avatar image for bultje112
#29 Posted by bultje112 (1868 posts) -

I think, to put things in perspective, while the Saturn is known as a failure it's also relatively similar to the Dreamcast. Except the market it succeeded in and the 3rd party support was switched. Dreamcast sold more than the Saturn, but not by a large margin.

[QUOTE="mariokart64fan"]

the lack of third party support-way worst then n64 or gc

CLOUDsea

This is actually not quite true, at least in terms of Japanese 3rd party support. The Saturn seems to have had better Japanese support than the N64. Moreover, as far as racing games go, weren't Daytona USA and Sega Rally two of the highest profile games for the system? And if Grandia was possible on the Saturn, plenty of the PS1's JRPGs would have been possible on the Saturn. In fact, the Saturn had the 2nd best JRPG selection out of the three consoles that generation (because the N64 had lost that much support).

we are talking here about failure in the west. dreamcast far outsold saturn in the west in less than 2 years while saturn was on the market in the west for over 3 years.

Avatar image for bultje112
#30 Posted by bultje112 (1868 posts) -

Just as many other people have already said it was a combination of things. For one thing the Saturn didnt get a build up to release like most consoles do, as I recall all sega did was just suddenly say "oh its out in a month or two" or something to that affect and retailers were just expected to deal with it. Thus a suprising amount of retailers refused to sell it when it came out.

There was also the fact that not enough developers wanted to support it because as a system it was powerful, but as a platform for developing games it was nothing short of a pain in the backside thanks to what sounds like a hideous multi processor architecture, which made programming much more diffifult and expensive than was needed. That resulted in not enough games to back up the system.

It also didnt help that Sega had kind of alienated its fan base a fair bit with the likes of the 32x.

Oh and obviously the playstation really, seriously, didnt help.

I dont own one at the moment, but I will be doing because despite its flop it looks like it has some awesome games :D

penpusher

the third party thing is really bs. initially third party support was huge for the saturn. because it was sega and a pretty save bet it would be succesful. however when sales were bad third parties pulled out. the ps3 and ps2 were/are hard to program for. did it stop companies to develop?? of course not. because it sells well.

Avatar image for l34052
#31 Posted by l34052 (3757 posts) -

Originally the saturn was to be a 2d powerhouse machine however once sega heard about the PS and its 3d capabilities they hurriedly threw together a 3d chip and added it tot he saturn making it a very difficult machine to program for thanks to the convoluted architecture, this and the lack of any real marketing from sega were the main reasons the machine failed.

Personally speaking i never liked the saturn anyways so no real loss to me, the DC on the other hand....:(

Avatar image for Darkman2007
#32 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -

Originally the saturn was to be a 2d powerhouse machine however once sega heard about the PS and its 3d capabilities they hurriedly threw together a 3d chip and added it tot he saturn making it a very difficult machine to program for thanks to the convoluted architecture, this and the lack of any real marketing from sega were the main reasons the machine failed.

Personally speaking i never liked the saturn anyways so no real loss to me, the DC on the other hand....:(

l34052
I have a feeling that story is nonsense, there is no "3d chip " and "2D chip" in the Saturn , there is the VDP1 which does both sprites and polygons, and the VDP2 which does 2D backgrounds and 2D effects. what they might have done is add more RAM, the Saturn has a very odd RAM configuration , where half the RAM is slow , while the other half is fast RAM , which makes you wonder if it was added later once they realized 2MB of RAM was becoming standard (first with the 3DO , then the PS1)
Avatar image for TheKungFool
#34 Posted by TheKungFool (5384 posts) -

the unfotunately poor legacy of the Sega-DC/32X/Neptune dissasters played a role I believe; people just didn't have much faith in Sega after its hardcore fans had been duped and generally dissapointed prior to the Saturn.

myabe I'm overstating or over-estimating this as a factor, but its the reason I personally stayed away initially.

Avatar image for Darkman2007
#35 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -

the unfotunately poor legacy of the Sega-DC/32X/Neptune dissasters played a role I believe; people just didn't have much faith in Sega after its hardcore fans had been duped and generally dissapointed prior to the Saturn.

myabe I'm overstating or over-estimating this as a factor, but its the reason I personally stayed away initially.

TheKungFool
its a factor, but the past can only help or ruin so much , the N64 was 2nd place despite the NES , SNES and Gameboy all being dominant (well , the SNES less so , but it was still the top seller). I think that even if Sega did things well , they would have lost (as Nintendo did) , Sony was just too big a company to compete against.
Avatar image for Eliminatorcanon
#36 Posted by Eliminatorcanon (41 posts) -
There's no complex reason at all or combinations of reasons. The Saturn was stupidly designed. it was made to be a CD/32X into one and released as such and slapped some 3D power in it. Both of those just caused it to be a mess to make games for and no one gave a hoot to even try. The second thing is that Sega once again forgot people buy game systems to play games, and just like the Master system did virtually no advertising or promotions for certain games to get people into the system, so it was not only a risk to buy, it was a risk for sales success for developers. That's literally it. Remove the design, more devs support and the Saturn would have gained more games and promotion from companies and word of mouth from players because it had more supported games. Remove lack of focusing on promoting games means people know it has games and all those dumb rumors about the Saturn that were around would not exist. More consumers, more profit, and more.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#37 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -

There's no complex reason at all or combinations of reasons. The Saturn was stupidly designed. it was made to be a CD/32X into one and released as such and slapped some 3D power in it. Both of those just caused it to be a mess to make games for and no one gave a hoot to even try. The second thing is that Sega once again forgot people buy game systems to play games, and just like the Master system did virtually no advertising or promotions for certain games to get people into the system, so it was not only a risk to buy, it was a risk for sales success for developers. That's literally it. Remove the design, more devs support and the Saturn would have gained more games and promotion from companies and word of mouth from players because it had more supported games. Remove lack of focusing on promoting games means people know it has games and all those dumb rumors about the Saturn that were around would not exist. More consumers, more profit, and more.Eliminatorcanon

saying the Saturn is a CD/32X is hilarious, quite dumb to say the least.

Im not quite sure how 3D was "slapped on" either.

Avatar image for Eliminatorcanon
#38 Posted by Eliminatorcanon (41 posts) -
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"]There's no complex reason at all or combinations of reasons. The Saturn was stupidly designed. it was made to be a CD/32X into one and released as such and slapped some 3D power in it. Both of those just caused it to be a mess to make games for and no one gave a hoot to even try. The second thing is that Sega once again forgot people buy game systems to play games, and just like the Master system did virtually no advertising or promotions for certain games to get people into the system, so it was not only a risk to buy, it was a risk for sales success for developers. That's literally it. Remove the design, more devs support and the Saturn would have gained more games and promotion from companies and word of mouth from players because it had more supported games. Remove lack of focusing on promoting games means people know it has games and all those dumb rumors about the Saturn that were around would not exist. More consumers, more profit, and more.

saying the Saturn is a CD/32X add on is hilarious, quite dumb to say the least.

I never said that the Saturn was a CD/32X add-on buddy.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#39 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -
[QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"]There's no complex reason at all or combinations of reasons. The Saturn was stupidly designed. it was made to be a CD/32X into one and released as such and slapped some 3D power in it. Both of those just caused it to be a mess to make games for and no one gave a hoot to even try. The second thing is that Sega once again forgot people buy game systems to play games, and just like the Master system did virtually no advertising or promotions for certain games to get people into the system, so it was not only a risk to buy, it was a risk for sales success for developers. That's literally it. Remove the design, more devs support and the Saturn would have gained more games and promotion from companies and word of mouth from players because it had more supported games. Remove lack of focusing on promoting games means people know it has games and all those dumb rumors about the Saturn that were around would not exist. More consumers, more profit, and more.

saying the Saturn is a CD/32X add on is hilarious, quite dumb to say the least.

I never said that the Saturn was a CD/32X add-on buddy.

I will quote you "it was made to be a CD/32X into one and released as such , and slapped some 3D power in it" the addon part was a mistake by me, but thats a minor point, the point is that claiming this, is dumb, its not correct in terms of hardware, or even the way it was designed.
Avatar image for Eliminatorcanon
#40 Posted by Eliminatorcanon (41 posts) -
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] saying the Saturn is a CD/32X add on is hilarious, quite dumb to say the least.

I never said that the Saturn was a CD/32X add-on buddy.

I will quote you "it was made to be a CD/32X into one and released as such , and slapped some 3D power in it" the addon part was a mistake by me, but thats a minor point, the point is that claiming this, is dumb, its not correct in terms of hardware, or even the way it was designed.

The whole reason they cancelled the 32x/cd combo WAS for the Saturn which was basically that machine modernized (for 2d) and slapped with 3D modeling. It was basically made to take it's place because it was a 32-bit CD system. The issue though again, is that it was not designed with the same though at the PSX and the N64, and therefore, especially with dual Cpu's and slapped on 3D processing, was a disaster to make games for.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#41 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -
[QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"] I never said that the Saturn was a CD/32X add-on buddy.

I will quote you "it was made to be a CD/32X into one and released as such , and slapped some 3D power in it" the addon part was a mistake by me, but thats a minor point, the point is that claiming this, is dumb, its not correct in terms of hardware, or even the way it was designed.

The whole reason they cancelled the 32x/cd combo WAS for the Saturn which was basically that machine modernized (for 2d) and slapped with 3D modeling. It was basically made to take it's place because it was a 32-bit CD system. The issue though again, is that it was not designed with the same though at the PSX and the N64, and therefore, especially with dual Cpu's and slapped on 3D processing, was a disaster to make games for.

the reason they cancelled the 32X/CD combo was because the 32X failed miserably, and Sega was not really in a financial position (given that the Saturn was already out) to push a dead horse. so what exactly was "slapped" on to enable that 3D processing? and what was "mordernized" from the 32X?.
Avatar image for Eliminatorcanon
#42 Posted by Eliminatorcanon (41 posts) -
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] I will quote you "it was made to be a CD/32X into one and released as such , and slapped some 3D power in it" the addon part was a mistake by me, but thats a minor point, the point is that claiming this, is dumb, its not correct in terms of hardware, or even the way it was designed.

The whole reason they cancelled the 32x/cd combo WAS for the Saturn which was basically that machine modernized (for 2d) and slapped with 3D modeling. It was basically made to take it's place because it was a 32-bit CD system. The issue though again, is that it was not designed with the same though at the PSX and the N64, and therefore, especially with dual Cpu's and slapped on 3D processing, was a disaster to make games for.

the reason they cancelled the 32X/CD combo was because the 32X failed miserably, and Sega was not really in a financial position (given that the Saturn was already out) to push a dead horse. so what exactly was "slapped" on to enable that 3D processing? and what was "mordernized" from the 32X?.

I noticed you are for no reason as far as I can tell, are stripping my post which is how you some how ended up stating in your post as if i was only talking about the 32x. Now again, the Saturn, is basically a better system than what the combo CD/32x system was going to be. I am not saying the Saturn actual is the 32x and Cd, but it's quite clear, especially with the cartridge slot, it had ideas based on the 32x and cd, and I can't see how that's deniable. Keep in mind I never said the Saturn WAS the 32x/Cd, but more of a modernized version of what the combo system probably was going to be. A lot of ideas were taken and put on the Saturn, and some were intended but did not appear. I am pretty sure they had more ideas for the cart slot for example. Keep in mind the combo system was already pre-planned. With that out of the way, the Saturn did have tacked on 3D, now I know to alot of people tacked on now means somehow that the 3D was god awful. Not what I am saying, it was more just put on there but barely pushed, which is why it is not exactly the best 3D system. Also the console already had enough problems as it is the 3D support just made developing games more inconvenient for developers that tried to use it. Sega never really pushed it as much as others as well. Not much investment. This all goes back to my original point from before, The saturn was a bunch of jumbled ideas and some of them not complete, in a box, and was hard to program for, including 3D processing. Lack of support for games and system capabilities is another issues, no one pushed for 3D on the Saturn, Sega did not promote games, they did nothing to convince outsiders to promote their own games, the Saturn became less and less popular if it was at some point, and people would start odd rumors about the Saturn. One of which was the Saturn had no games, which was widely considered accurate to potential buyers despite it having over 200 games. Just two main problems caused the Saturns downfall the hurt everything else and like a virus spread until its demise. Which they forgot to inject a vaccine before launching the Dreamcast. Sega to me has always had a problem looking at the competition and thinking of how they can advance instantly instead of actually looking ahead of the competition and try doing something that will actually be better competition in the long run. There short term thinking is something i wished they had fixed.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#43 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -
[QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"] The whole reason they cancelled the 32x/cd combo WAS for the Saturn which was basically that machine modernized (for 2d) and slapped with 3D modeling. It was basically made to take it's place because it was a 32-bit CD system. The issue though again, is that it was not designed with the same though at the PSX and the N64, and therefore, especially with dual Cpu's and slapped on 3D processing, was a disaster to make games for.

the reason they cancelled the 32X/CD combo was because the 32X failed miserably, and Sega was not really in a financial position (given that the Saturn was already out) to push a dead horse. so what exactly was "slapped" on to enable that 3D processing? and what was "mordernized" from the 32X?.

I noticed you are for no reason as far as I can tell, are stripping my post which is how you some how ended up stating in your post as if i was only talking about the 32x. Now again, the Saturn, is basically a better system than what the combo CD/32x system was going to be. I am not saying the Saturn actual is the 32x and Cd, but it's quite clear, especially with the cartridge slot, it had ideas based on the 32x and cd, and I can't see how that's deniable. Keep in mind I never said the Saturn WAS the 32x/Cd, but more of a modernized version of what the combo system probably was going to be. A lot of ideas were taken and put on the Saturn, and some were intended but did not appear. I am pretty sure they had more ideas for the cart slot for example. Keep in mind the combo system was already pre-planned. With that out of the way, the Saturn did have tacked on 3D, now I know to alot of people tacked on now means somehow that the 3D was god awful. Not what I am saying, it was more just put on there but barely pushed, which is why it is not exactly the best 3D system. Also the console already had enough problems as it is the 3D support just made developing games more inconvenient for developers that tried to use it. Sega never really pushed it as much as others as well. Not much investment. This all goes back to my original point from before, The saturn was a bunch of jumbled ideas and some of them not complete, in a box, and was hard to program for, including 3D processing. Lack of support for games and system capabilities is another issues, no one pushed for 3D on the Saturn, Sega did not promote games, they did nothing to convince outsiders to promote their own games, the Saturn became less and less popular if it was at some point, and people would start odd rumors about the Saturn. One of which was the Saturn had no games, which was widely considered accurate to potential buyers despite it having over 200 games. Just two main problems caused the Saturns downfall the hurt everything else and like a virus spread until its demise. Which they forgot to inject a vaccine before launching the Dreamcast. Sega to me has always had a problem looking at the competition and thinking of how they can advance instantly instead of actually looking ahead of the competition and try doing something that will actually be better competition in the long run. There short term thinking is something i wished they had fixed.

all that, and you never answered my question , a very simple one. what was added to the Saturn to give it 3D support, and what was modernized about it to mean as though its somehow a 32X on steroids? Im looking for the actual hardware, and no , using the cartridge port is incredibly stupid,
Avatar image for Eliminatorcanon
#44 Posted by Eliminatorcanon (41 posts) -
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] the reason they cancelled the 32X/CD combo was because the 32X failed miserably, and Sega was not really in a financial position (given that the Saturn was already out) to push a dead horse. so what exactly was "slapped" on to enable that 3D processing? and what was "mordernized" from the 32X?.

I noticed you are for no reason as far as I can tell, are stripping my post which is how you some how ended up stating in your post as if i was only talking about the 32x. Now again, the Saturn, is basically a better system than what the combo CD/32x system was going to be. I am not saying the Saturn actual is the 32x and Cd, but it's quite clear, especially with the cartridge slot, it had ideas based on the 32x and cd, and I can't see how that's deniable. Keep in mind I never said the Saturn WAS the 32x/Cd, but more of a modernized version of what the combo system probably was going to be. A lot of ideas were taken and put on the Saturn, and some were intended but did not appear. I am pretty sure they had more ideas for the cart slot for example. Keep in mind the combo system was already pre-planned. With that out of the way, the Saturn did have tacked on 3D, now I know to alot of people tacked on now means somehow that the 3D was god awful. Not what I am saying, it was more just put on there but barely pushed, which is why it is not exactly the best 3D system. Also the console already had enough problems as it is the 3D support just made developing games more inconvenient for developers that tried to use it. Sega never really pushed it as much as others as well. Not much investment. This all goes back to my original point from before, The saturn was a bunch of jumbled ideas and some of them not complete, in a box, and was hard to program for, including 3D processing. Lack of support for games and system capabilities is another issues, no one pushed for 3D on the Saturn, Sega did not promote games, they did nothing to convince outsiders to promote their own games, the Saturn became less and less popular if it was at some point, and people would start odd rumors about the Saturn. One of which was the Saturn had no games, which was widely considered accurate to potential buyers despite it having over 200 games. Just two main problems caused the Saturns downfall the hurt everything else and like a virus spread until its demise. Which they forgot to inject a vaccine before launching the Dreamcast. Sega to me has always had a problem looking at the competition and thinking of how they can advance instantly instead of actually looking ahead of the competition and try doing something that will actually be better competition in the long run. There short term thinking is something i wished they had fixed.

all that, and you never answered my question , a very simple one. what was added to the Saturn to give it 3D support, and what was modernized about it to mean as though its somehow a 32X on steroids? Im looking for the actual hardware, and no , using the cartridge port is incredibly stupid,

Except I never said it was a modernized 32X on steroid you stripped the 32X out the post by itself for no reason. Also I already talked about the dual processors. Which one was clearly tacked on and used for lesser 3D processing. Also I didn't use the cartridge port when i said the 3D graphics capabilities were tacked. Not exactly sure why you are just stripping things.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#45 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -
[QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"] I noticed you are for no reason as far as I can tell, are stripping my post which is how you some how ended up stating in your post as if i was only talking about the 32x. Now again, the Saturn, is basically a better system than what the combo CD/32x system was going to be. I am not saying the Saturn actual is the 32x and Cd, but it's quite clear, especially with the cartridge slot, it had ideas based on the 32x and cd, and I can't see how that's deniable. Keep in mind I never said the Saturn WAS the 32x/Cd, but more of a modernized version of what the combo system probably was going to be. A lot of ideas were taken and put on the Saturn, and some were intended but did not appear. I am pretty sure they had more ideas for the cart slot for example. Keep in mind the combo system was already pre-planned. With that out of the way, the Saturn did have tacked on 3D, now I know to alot of people tacked on now means somehow that the 3D was god awful. Not what I am saying, it was more just put on there but barely pushed, which is why it is not exactly the best 3D system. Also the console already had enough problems as it is the 3D support just made developing games more inconvenient for developers that tried to use it. Sega never really pushed it as much as others as well. Not much investment. This all goes back to my original point from before, The saturn was a bunch of jumbled ideas and some of them not complete, in a box, and was hard to program for, including 3D processing. Lack of support for games and system capabilities is another issues, no one pushed for 3D on the Saturn, Sega did not promote games, they did nothing to convince outsiders to promote their own games, the Saturn became less and less popular if it was at some point, and people would start odd rumors about the Saturn. One of which was the Saturn had no games, which was widely considered accurate to potential buyers despite it having over 200 games. Just two main problems caused the Saturns downfall the hurt everything else and like a virus spread until its demise. Which they forgot to inject a vaccine before launching the Dreamcast. Sega to me has always had a problem looking at the competition and thinking of how they can advance instantly instead of actually looking ahead of the competition and try doing something that will actually be better competition in the long run. There short term thinking is something i wished they had fixed.

all that, and you never answered my question , a very simple one. what was added to the Saturn to give it 3D support, and what was modernized about it to mean as though its somehow a 32X on steroids? Im looking for the actual hardware, and no , using the cartridge port is incredibly stupid,

Except I never said it was a modernized 32X on steroid you stripped the 32X out the post by itself for no reason. Also I already talked about the dual processors. Which one was clearly tacked on and used for lesser 3D processing. Also I didn't use the cartridge port when i said the 3D graphics capabilities were tacked. Not exactly sure why you are just stripping things.

Im afraid youre avoiding the question , youre still not answering anything, and here I thought I was going to get some info. the dual CPUs on their own , are not for 3D , in an "ideal" situation , the first CPU is used as a CPU , while the 2nd is used for geometry calculations, but that alone does not give it 3D capability. and yes, modernized and on steroids mean more or less the same thing in my book , an updated version , so to speak. so I will ask again. what was "tacked on" to the Saturn to give it 3D capability, and what was added to it to make it into a modernized 32XCD?
Avatar image for Eliminatorcanon
#46 Posted by Eliminatorcanon (41 posts) -
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] all that, and you never answered my question , a very simple one. what was added to the Saturn to give it 3D support, and what was modernized about it to mean as though its somehow a 32X on steroids? Im looking for the actual hardware, and no , using the cartridge port is incredibly stupid,

Except I never said it was a modernized 32X on steroid you stripped the 32X out the post by itself for no reason. Also I already talked about the dual processors. Which one was clearly tacked on and used for lesser 3D processing. Also I didn't use the cartridge port when i said the 3D graphics capabilities were tacked. Not exactly sure why you are just stripping things.

Im afraid youre avoiding the question , youre still not answering anything, and here I thought I was going to get some info. the dual CPUs on their own , are not for 3D , in an "ideal" situation , the first CPU is used as a CPU , while the 2nd is used for geometry calculations, but that alone does not give it 3D capability. and yes, modernized and on steroids mean more or less the same thing in my book , an updated version , so to speak. so I will ask again. what was "tacked on" to the Saturn to give it 3D capability, and what was added to it to make it into a modernized 32XCD?

You seem to just be ignoring the answers. I see we are back to 32x/cd instead of just 32X now, getting confused there with the trolling I see. The dual Cpu's are the 3D i am referring to in which i say tacked. The second additional CPU is tacked. In A game that uses one to draw background and one to draw other polygons, clearly have shown to have better results, a lesser texture wrapping than the PSX. Also higher perspective correctness, which the PSX suffers from. But this usually applied to closed games such as 3Dlike fighters. If the Cpus were actually used and the system was made to use their potential, the 3D capabilities of the Saturn would have been great and much better than what the PSX was able to produce. only they were not. It was a tacked on feature, and because of walls as many would say or problems with how the Saturn does things and it's design, you would not be able to see late PSX type 3D games looking as well on the Saturn. The Saturn due to these problems had all around wise, weaker 3D. If the 3D was not tacked on, then the PSX would not be the dominate all around 3D console. But the Saturn was a mess, and the tacked on processor that the Saturn was clearly not made to take full advantage of among a few other things, prevents the Saturn from having great 3D capabilities, which is why it's common to hear people talking about the Saturn having barely to no 3D on its console.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#47 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -
[QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"] Except I never said it was a modernized 32X on steroid you stripped the 32X out the post by itself for no reason. Also I already talked about the dual processors. Which one was clearly tacked on and used for lesser 3D processing. Also I didn't use the cartridge port when i said the 3D graphics capabilities were tacked. Not exactly sure why you are just stripping things.

Im afraid youre avoiding the question , youre still not answering anything, and here I thought I was going to get some info. the dual CPUs on their own , are not for 3D , in an "ideal" situation , the first CPU is used as a CPU , while the 2nd is used for geometry calculations, but that alone does not give it 3D capability. and yes, modernized and on steroids mean more or less the same thing in my book , an updated version , so to speak. so I will ask again. what was "tacked on" to the Saturn to give it 3D capability, and what was added to it to make it into a modernized 32XCD?

You seem to just be ignoring the answers. I see we are back to 32x/cd instead of just 32X now, getting confused there with the trolling I see. The dual Cpu's are the 3D i am referring to in which i say tacked. The second additional CPU is tacked. In A game that uses one to draw background and one to draw other polygons, clearly have shown to have better results, a lesser texture wrapping than the PSX. Also higher perspective correctness, which the PSX suffers from. But this usually applied to closed games such as 3Dlike fighters. If the Cpus were actually used and the system was made to use their potential, the 3D capabilities of the Saturn would have been great and much better than what the PSX was able to produce. only they were not. It was a tacked on feature, and because of walls as many would say or problems with how the Saturn does things and it's design, you would not be able to see late PSX type 3D games looking as well on the Saturn. The Saturn due to these problems had all around wise, weaker 3D. If the 3D was not tacked on, then the PSX would not be the dominate all around 3D console. But the Saturn was a mess, and the tacked on processor that the Saturn was clearly not made to take full advantage of among a few other things, prevents the Saturn from having great 3D capabilities, which is why it's common to hear people talking about the Saturn having barely to no 3D on its console.

first problem , you don't use the CPUs to render polygons, at most, you use 1 of them to do the geometry work , not the rendering. 2nd problem , the Saturn does not have perspective correction whatsoever, not for the 3D anyways. 3rd , less warping is not because the CPUs were used, less warping is simply because of the way the Saturn rendered 3D (or rather , 3D sprites in the case of the Saturn) so again , what hardware was used to give the Saturn the ability to render 3D? there is more than just the CPUs in there, and like I said, those do not render in 3D. nor am I getting an answer for how the Saturn is a modernized 32XCD,
Avatar image for Eliminatorcanon
#48 Posted by Eliminatorcanon (41 posts) -
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] Im afraid youre avoiding the question , youre still not answering anything, and here I thought I was going to get some info. the dual CPUs on their own , are not for 3D , in an "ideal" situation , the first CPU is used as a CPU , while the 2nd is used for geometry calculations, but that alone does not give it 3D capability. and yes, modernized and on steroids mean more or less the same thing in my book , an updated version , so to speak. so I will ask again. what was "tacked on" to the Saturn to give it 3D capability, and what was added to it to make it into a modernized 32XCD?

You seem to just be ignoring the answers. I see we are back to 32x/cd instead of just 32X now, getting confused there with the trolling I see. The dual Cpu's are the 3D i am referring to in which i say tacked. The second additional CPU is tacked. In A game that uses one to draw background and one to draw other polygons, clearly have shown to have better results, a lesser texture wrapping than the PSX. Also higher perspective correctness, which the PSX suffers from. But this usually applied to closed games such as 3Dlike fighters. If the Cpus were actually used and the system was made to use their potential, the 3D capabilities of the Saturn would have been great and much better than what the PSX was able to produce. only they were not. It was a tacked on feature, and because of walls as many would say or problems with how the Saturn does things and it's design, you would not be able to see late PSX type 3D games looking as well on the Saturn. The Saturn due to these problems had all around wise, weaker 3D. If the 3D was not tacked on, then the PSX would not be the dominate all around 3D console. But the Saturn was a mess, and the tacked on processor that the Saturn was clearly not made to take full advantage of among a few other things, prevents the Saturn from having great 3D capabilities, which is why it's common to hear people talking about the Saturn having barely to no 3D on its console.

first problem , you don't use the CPUs to render polygons, at most, you use 1 of them to do the geometry work , not the rendering. 2nd problem , the Saturn does not have perspective correction whatsoever, not for the 3D anyways. 3rd , less warping is not because the CPUs were used, less warping is simply because of the way the Saturn rendered 3D (or rather , 3D sprites in the case of the Saturn) so again , what hardware was used to give the Saturn the ability to render 3D? there is more than just the CPUs in there, and like I said, those do not render in 3D. nor am I getting an answer for how the Saturn is a modernized 32XCD,

The Saturn is a 32-bit system with CD storage, which is what the combo was going to be the the Saturn is far superior tech wise=modernixzed. you can't be this dumb. First of all, I said higher perspective correctness, you do realize that the floors in 3D fighting games in PSX versions and Saturn versions or usually noticeably different right? Why do you think that is magic? Thus the above means that textures on environments can be less wrapped than those on the playstation. Also the VDP1 can render polygons so now all of a sudden the Cpu's can't render 3D? Because they can, and uh, the Cpu's are the main problem for why the capabilities are limited in the first place All this is are troll attempts, you are getting answers but you are ignoring them, or are making up things as it seems.
Avatar image for Darkman2007
#49 Posted by Darkman2007 (17928 posts) -
[QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"] You seem to just be ignoring the answers. I see we are back to 32x/cd instead of just 32X now, getting confused there with the trolling I see. The dual Cpu's are the 3D i am referring to in which i say tacked. The second additional CPU is tacked. In A game that uses one to draw background and one to draw other polygons, clearly have shown to have better results, a lesser texture wrapping than the PSX. Also higher perspective correctness, which the PSX suffers from. But this usually applied to closed games such as 3Dlike fighters. If the Cpus were actually used and the system was made to use their potential, the 3D capabilities of the Saturn would have been great and much better than what the PSX was able to produce. only they were not. It was a tacked on feature, and because of walls as many would say or problems with how the Saturn does things and it's design, you would not be able to see late PSX type 3D games looking as well on the Saturn. The Saturn due to these problems had all around wise, weaker 3D. If the 3D was not tacked on, then the PSX would not be the dominate all around 3D console. But the Saturn was a mess, and the tacked on processor that the Saturn was clearly not made to take full advantage of among a few other things, prevents the Saturn from having great 3D capabilities, which is why it's common to hear people talking about the Saturn having barely to no 3D on its console.

first problem , you don't use the CPUs to render polygons, at most, you use 1 of them to do the geometry work , not the rendering. 2nd problem , the Saturn does not have perspective correction whatsoever, not for the 3D anyways. 3rd , less warping is not because the CPUs were used, less warping is simply because of the way the Saturn rendered 3D (or rather , 3D sprites in the case of the Saturn) so again , what hardware was used to give the Saturn the ability to render 3D? there is more than just the CPUs in there, and like I said, those do not render in 3D. nor am I getting an answer for how the Saturn is a modernized 32XCD,

The Saturn is a 32-bit system with CD storage, which is what the combo was going to be the the Saturn is far superior tech wise=modernixzed. you can't be this dumb. First of all, I said higher perspective correctness, you do realize that the floors in 3D fighting games in PSX versions and Saturn versions or usually noticeably different right? Why do you think that is magic? Thus the above means that textures on environments can be less wrapped than those on the playstation. Also the VDP1 can render polygons so now all of a sudden the Cpu's can't render 3D? Because they can, and uh, the Cpu's are the main problem for why the capabilities are limited in the first place All this is are troll attempts, you are getting answers but you are ignoring them, or are making up things as it seems.

ah , finally we are getting somewhere. 1) the 32bits mean nothing in this, in my book , modernized means updated, an evolution , so to speak , and yet with the exception of the CPUs , the 32X shares very little with the Saturn. 2) you are indeed correct that the floors are perspective correct , but those are not 3D polygon floors, these are 2D floors drawn by the VDP2 in most cases, its a totally different thing. 3) ah , well done , youve now identified the part of the Saturn which renders the polygons (or does the grunt work of it) , but this presents a problem for your theory. if the VDP1 is the chip which renders the polygons (and it is) , then the Saturn could not have had the 3D capability added at the last minute, as the VDP1 is also what renders sprites (the machine's supposidly original intent). so evidently, 3D was not added on at the last minute, the CPU might of, but not the 3D ability itself, RAM is also a candidate. so this presents us with a few possibilities 1) the CPU was added in to give the Saturn more geometry calcuation ability 2) more RAM was added to compete with the newer 5th gen systems (mainly the 3DO at that time) , which had 2MB of RAM standard. 3) the Saturn was complex from the begining.
Avatar image for Eliminatorcanon
#50 Posted by Eliminatorcanon (41 posts) -
[QUOTE="Darkman2007"][QUOTE="Eliminatorcanon"][QUOTE="Darkman2007"] first problem , you don't use the CPUs to render polygons, at most, you use 1 of them to do the geometry work , not the rendering. 2nd problem , the Saturn does not have perspective correction whatsoever, not for the 3D anyways. 3rd , less warping is not because the CPUs were used, less warping is simply because of the way the Saturn rendered 3D (or rather , 3D sprites in the case of the Saturn) so again , what hardware was used to give the Saturn the ability to render 3D? there is more than just the CPUs in there, and like I said, those do not render in 3D. nor am I getting an answer for how the Saturn is a modernized 32XCD,

The Saturn is a 32-bit system with CD storage, which is what the combo was going to be the the Saturn is far superior tech wise=modernixzed. you can't be this dumb. First of all, I said higher perspective correctness, you do realize that the floors in 3D fighting games in PSX versions and Saturn versions or usually noticeably different right? Why do you think that is magic? Thus the above means that textures on environments can be less wrapped than those on the playstation. Also the VDP1 can render polygons so now all of a sudden the Cpu's can't render 3D? Because they can, and uh, the Cpu's are the main problem for why the capabilities are limited in the first place All this is are troll attempts, you are getting answers but you are ignoring them, or are making up things as it seems.

ah , finally we are getting somewhere. 1) the 32bits mean nothing in this, in my book , modernized means updated, an evolution , so to speak , and yet with the exception of the CPUs , the 32X shares very little with the Saturn. 2) you are indeed correct that the floors are perspective correct , but those are not 3D polygon floors, these are 2D floors drawn by the VDP2 in most cases, its a totally different thing. 3) ah , well done , youve now identified the part of the Saturn which renders the polygons (or does the grunt work of it) , but this presents a problem for your theory. if the VDP1 is the chip which renders the polygons (and it is) , then the Saturn could not have had the 3D capability added at the last minute, as the VDP1 is also what renders sprites (the machine's supposidly original intent). so evidently, 3D was not added on at the last minute, the CPU might of, but not the 3D ability itself, RAM is also a candidate. so this presents us with a few possibilities 1) the CPU was added in to give the Saturn more geometry calcuation ability 2) more RAM was added to compete with the newer 5th gen systems (mainly the 3DO at that time) , which had 2MB of RAM standard. 3) the Saturn was complex from the begining.

1)I was thinking more of a replacement/successor than an update when i said modernized. 2)Not exactly, since character models also benefit in certain cases due to the high perspective correctness, when you compare them to PSX counter parts. 3)No, that's exactly what I means by tacked on, the system was not intended to use the VDP1 as a 3D processor, and as such, the VDP2 was slapped on instead of them making away to take advantage of the DP1's current ability and expanding it, and instead used a crappy workaround. Many 3D games are limited because of the 2nd processor, and at the same time, without the VDP2, certain 3D games would not exist or look anything like they do. Use fighters as an example. The VDP2, helps with perspective correlation as it is good with it and can also help removed certain issues with textures on models. At the same time, the VDP2 actually adds to the already problematic software programming on the Saturn as it comes with many graphical limitations that prevent other types of 3D games to be prevalent on the Saturn, or at least without issues. The combination of both create things like Virtua Fighter and FIghters Megamix, which would not even look close with just the VDP1, and the VDP2 is pretty much tacked on.