Xbox 360 equal to or greater than Dreamcast

ON the last part when they compare the 10 things why Xbox 360 will sucseed. it is so true
Sega had only 100 Mil to market the console
And MS will spend as much as they need

why xbox360 is ps2:
1. launched one year before the major competitor.
2. has wider range of games:
A) rumors about studios dumping ps3 projects because of developments difficulties.
B) companies want to expand their audience => less exclusive titles, more multi-platform (a big loss for sony).
3. the main competitor console is more powerful.
4. didn't need last minute solutions (ps3 > RSX) (xbox 1 > well um.. the whole system).

Hilarious. But I'm still not sure that porting an MMORPG that's 4 years old to this new system counts as "support" by Square Enix.

Now that they mention it, I want to be able to play some of those Dreamcast games emulated somehow. Someone needs to let me play Power Stone again.

hahahaha the SquareEnix reaosn is laughable. I highly doubt they will get much more support from Square... maybe a game or 2(and deffinetly not any thing else Final Fantasy)

If the 360 is like the Dreamcast I will be fucking thrilled (content wise,not marketing wise).

The Dreamcast is the best console to date,period.

I was worried there, I thought 1up might bash a system not made by Nintendo. Whew!

nm, found an emu

I love the Dreamcast, never bought a ps2 because I did'nt see any diference in graphics til xbox/gamecube launch. Now I've got 360 preordered, I'd love to have a Dreamcast faceplate for it or maybe a sonic type theme. Sega should make one and package it with PSO, Alien Front and other online games that I never got to play on Sega net for live.

why are the comments from the 'editors' of the blog getting more ridiculous? the not posting anymore ARG/viral marketting thing while linking to tons of rumors and even the recent 360 tv ad? ('i'm not gay, but my boyfriend is')

and then claiming the dreamcast was a failure?! it wasn't a huge success but compared to real failures like the Jaguar and 3DO, it was far from a failure, and it even gained sales on the back of the saturn, which actually still did reasonably well. i mean, by what stretch of the imagination would you want to consider it a failure, much less one of the 'biggest' failures.

soco: It was a "failure" because, like you said, it wasn't a huge success. That, and in light of the Saturn, I think a lot of people expected the DC to fail, even though it didn't really :P (I'm a DC owner myself, and I love the system)

As for that second list, item #7 about the DC not having Halo 3 was just plain "huh?!"

Difference is the DC has become an amazing piece of history. The Xbox 360? junk.

bought my DC 2 years ago and have loved that and its huge Japanese game library.

Dreamcast was one of the best moments in gaming. We still to this day play "Samba De Amigo" when friends and family come over.

As for XBOX 360. My hopes are set pretty high for it to be "All that" before the PS3 comes through the market like a hot knife through butter.

In the End, The next generation of consoles might just be the PS4, unless the 360 comes out with some great "heavy hitters" like the original HALO

I can think of worse consoles to be compared to than the Dreamcast. If the Xbox 360 turns out to be like the Dreamcast, we're in for some stellar games. Heck, even the original Xbox had a little bit of Dreamcast in it - Panzer Dragoon Orta, Jet Set Radio Future, Shenmue II were all pieces of Sega quality (before their eventual downward spiral).

That being said, calling the Xbox 360 the Dreamcast 2 is obviously an uninformed attempt at making a witty observation - Microsoft's enormously deep pockets will NEVER let the 360 disappear as soon as the competition hits.

I remember the exact same comparisons with the original XBox. The logic was flawed then as it is now.

I don't mind that Xbox360 is a failure, if it is a failure like Dreamcast, then I'll be a happy user buying the 360 failure. :)

#15, the comparisons now are much more clear though. but still, it's really just speculation.

I would also speculate that the PS3 has similarities to the Sega Saturn in the sense that:
1)Sony is putting all their chips on the table with the PS3, like sega did.
2)will be the most expensive console of the upcoming gen
3)The PS3 is difficult to program for, like the Saturn.

Yea some of those comparisons are quite errie, but others actually could be said about the PS3 too i.e. #3,6,7 and 11.
Also many of the comparisons are actually benifits of the console and not something that should neccesarily be held against it i.e. #5,7,8,11,12,14,15,17,18 and 22.

I don't mind all the comparisons though because im just looking forward to the next gen, period. Theres' also very little chance Msoft could screw up the launch this late in the day (people leaving, budget cuts etc) which was the major mistake with the DC and lets face it, its' the first time in a while that Sony actually has to work for that topspot (which benifits all consumers, regardless of console).
Only time will tell, regardless of how many opinions are portrayed as fact, we still have atleast another year, maybe two untill this gen plays it's full hand.

Some of the comparison's are pretty scary, but the 360 is an inevitable success even with the predicted shortages. The only way Microsoft could mess up is if something randomly goes wrong.

oh poor saturn, I loved you and your Astal, Silhoutte Mirage, and Guardian Heroes (!!!!) so much.

I think it's fair to call the Dreamcast a failure in the sense that it FAILED to keep Sega from dropping out of the hardware business completely.

The DreamCast was and still is the best system that was ever made. it just did not have the marketing support that Sony gave the Playstation.

I still have and sometimes play my Dreamcast. I never bought a PS2 either because I couldn't see a difference in either system. I do although have two Xbox's and three 360's preordered. I think it's really cool that I can run all my HD content and ripped DVD's from my PC to all three of my HDTV's. Does anyone know if I can do that with a PS3? I doubt it. I still haven't even seen one single working PS3 anywhere. Have you?

Saturn > Dreamcast

The Saturn had 2 CPUs and 6 other dedicated processors, it MUST have won the console wars that generation, because all that matters is hardware power and graphics. Right?

"For example the original Xbox was not a failure..."

Really? Hrm... I guess 4 billion lost is not a failure in modern economics. Silly me, I would have considered that a failure.

Wow....I'm taking out my DC and Crazy Taxi when I get back home! And I need to find Sega Rally or TNT Hardcore(Best off-road racing game ever created IMO).

I hope someone at microsoft is listening to the parallels here, i think the xbox360 could use gallons more sega love, and getting us olde timey sega fans to stumble a few yards from our dreamcasts, would make microsoft loads of money.

Listen to us, we want out sega back, any way we can.

Lets look at history. Sega had a 3rd place position when it dropped the much loved Dreamcast on us. I ran out on 9/9/99 and bought mine. Loved every single second of it. Still have it hooked up to the tv today. Sega was running out of money when the system shipped, Microsoft has 100 times more money than its closest competition. Sony is in the Red in all aspects of its business except the games. If it system stumbles, then the whole company could be in the same bucket with Sega from back in 02. Dreamcast gave us online for free, then asked us to pay for it. That didnt sell well. Msoft made us pay for it from day one and that was smart. People dont mind spending more to get something, but to get something they have already had for free is a hard sell.
The DC could not play movies, the 360 can. Some say that HD will make that large of a difference, maybe in the latter years but not now. The blue ray will be nice for people like me that already has a few hd tvs, but most people dont. Most people already have DVD and DVD recorders. Im not getting rid of my recorder any time soon. So Blue ray is not the next DVD at least not for the next 4 years. We dont need blue ray for hd on demand movies. I already have on demand. I already have a DVR that records hd. I dont need this just yet.

I hear its possible Nintendo is gonna get a good portion of Sega's backlog for the Virtual Console...anyone else hear this? That'd be loads of love for the Sega fans.

Revo Virtual Console,
It's possible, but i wouldnt feel confortable with nintendo (the red) Grubbing my precious sega goodness.

Revo Virtual Console,
It's possible, but i wouldnt feel confortable with nintendo (the red) Grubbing my precious sega goodness.

Also, it's worth noting that the Dreamcast had virtually no marketing budget outside the US and a few large European countries. Microsoft isn't afraid to spend marketing dollars in smaller markets to gain market share.

daryl - "Really? Hrm... I guess 4 billion lost is not a failure in modern economics. Silly me, I would have considered that a failure."

Modern economics would take the context into account, noting that 4 billion is an expected drop in Microsoft's ocean of cash. Microsoft's very first foray into manufacturing consoles not only netted them a larger user base than Nintendo, but yielded a brand that is recognizable by most - everybody knows what an Xbox is. It's a platform that's garnered enough success to warrant the Xbox 360 and loads of developer support.

C'mon now, just looking at the Halo 2 sales figures, how could anybody think the Xbox was a failure? :) I don't think any consoles this generation were outright failures...

Such blasphemy saying the Dreamcast was one of the biggest failures ever. Maybe it was to some people, but I have such love/fond memories of that system.

My question for anyone who says that xbox was not a failure is this:

If xbox was a success, How many more "successes" do you think microsoft will tolerate. I guarantee if xbox360 is as much of a "success" as original xbox, there will be no more MS consoles.

Xbox was a failure on its own terms. One could argue it was a necessary failure to position MS for a future success. However, 4 billion in losses over 5 years could never be considered a success on its own terms. For 4 billion dollars, I could get the entire world to know my name too. That is meaningless. Its all meaningless unless 360 makes money.

A funny well done article about 1up. The similarities of the good and bad are well done. However, the rich bald argument was a cheap shot. ;-P

I still play my Dreamcast to this day. One of the best systems ever. I been a SEGA fan since the beginning of the Master System. MS should bring back the VMU and make it a video and Mp3 player

The dreamcast is most peoples favorite console ever. IT was simply a faliure because of copyright. Everyone owned the system but 0 games. I mean, to get a game all you needed to do was put in a boot disc and then your downloaded game. It was so simple and the games were cd based so they were small. Sega took too much of a loss because no1 bought any games. The system itself was extreamly successful from the consumers point of view, but not the companies.

If the same thing happens with the 360 I will be more then pleased. I will enjoy a great gaming experiance, and the company will not make profit, which is something I do not care about for it is not my company.

Youre right terramar.

If PS3 is as successful as XBOX was, Sony will be in big trouble.

I really doubt MS is hoping for another console that is as successful as the XBOX! Ha!

My guess is they want to make a profit this time! Anyone else think so?

Nah, we dont need profits to be successful. Thats silly, we're microsoft. We have outgrown the need for profits. We are successful because people dont think xbox is a food dehydrator.

Bla.

I believe that the xbox 360 will be a success WHY? you ask....

Because when MS made the XBOX they were stepping into the video game console genre...
SO not as many ppl were going to buy it over the ps2 and GameCube... HOWEVER now thta MS has their feet in the sand they will already have loyal fans and new ones alike...

Success is not only measured in money. You need to take into account the success of games, brand awareness, 3rd-party support and the quality of the services rendered. Xbox Live alone makes the Xbox a success, if only for truly kicking console online gaming in the pants.

If the Xbox is deemed a failure because it's not helping Microsoft into the lands of profits and splendor, then one could easily point out Sony's mounting debts and call the PS2 a failure as well. That makes this entire generation a failure. :)

Besides, this devil's advocate talk is being taken far too seriously. If I can plug in my Xbox and play Ninja Gaiden until the early hours of the morning, then it's a success in my mind. The same holds true for the Dreamcast. Most gamers who still play Jet Grind Radio or Skies of Arcadia would consider the Dreamcast a success - only it got discontinued very quickly. The Xbox has a great lineup of games and didn't suffer the same fate. How could I not consider it a success then?

Those who think Microsoft's goal was to make money with the Xbox are fools. Their goal was to get their foot into the market and gain some marketshare. I doubt they even expected to finish ahead of Nintendo. The mere fact that they gained enough marketshare to pass Nintendo and put out a 2nd system shows it isn't a failure. Its a long term plan that they want to eventually generate profits. As for the Dreamcast, it was an ok system. Had some good games, had some clunkers like any other. The controller was horrid though. As a system, it comes nowhere close to the SNES in terms of game quantity and quality.

You can consider it whatever you want. But that dont make it so. All the love in the world isn't going to make the DC a success. It might make it a great console but it nearly drove its makers out of business. Not a success.

If you got all "F"s in high school, do you think they would send you to college because you had alot of fun and everyone knew your name? Nope? Wait, mabye they would if you had as much $$$ as microsoft. :)

You are confusing "having sucesses" with overall success. Of course, every console has its "successes". Whether it be a great franchise that sold well, or a new idea that helped the industry. But in the end, if your corporation, cuts your lifecycle short after you lose 4 billion, its not because you were an overall success. The xbox is an abortion for microsoft. They can't get into next gen fast enough. Thats because they can't handle all the success that is xbox? No, like any smart company, they want to get their failures behind them.

As for PS2, its finally making good cash for sony. Overall it will certainly be a success. In almost every aspect. The most sales, the most support, the most profits, the greatest brand recognition. All of it. Thats why sony isnt rushing out the PS3. Because they want to bask in the PS2s success a little longer. If the PS2 were a failure, sony would either drop out or be rushing to the PS3 as fast as possible. Just like MS.

Make sense yet?

4 billion lost...

Microsoft's mission was to #1 enter the market and compete with Sony and Nintendo. They accomplished that. Then it was to get people use to the idea of a set top media center that was for movies, music, and gaming. And with 2mil XBox Live users they did that. So now enter the XBox 360. Phase 2 in accomplishing Mircosoft's mission to move windows, gaming, and entertainment from your PC to your TV screen. From day one that has been their goal. And if they have to sepnd 4 Billion to become the center systen in American households then it will pay off down the road. Gates said a log time ago that he would do whatever he had to, to get into the position that he is in right now. He's not compete with an Ipod he's trying to wipe out Sony so that he can have centerstage in the household. Gates see that the bigger picture is in the settop and not a portable.

The article was great until 1UP backpedaled and started ferociously fellating Microsoft. "Oh, wait, did we say it was like the Dreamcast? Noooo... it's nothing like Dreamcast, because Microsoft has a lot of money (some of which it gave us for this article) and, and... HALO! Yes, the glorious Halo solves everything! It's not just another tiresome first-person shooter, honest!"

The logic of the article started falling apart halfway through, too. The Saturn wasn't a complete failure; it actually did quite well in Japan, where it gave the Playstation a decent run for its money and beat the pants off the Nintendo 64. Guess what WASN'T successful in Japan? That's right, the Xbox!

Then there's the whole "poor management" complaint levied against the Dreamcast. Yes, Bernie Stolar was a tool, but he was fired before he could do any more damage to Sega. Afterwards, the company hired Peter Moore, the same person who's in charge at Microsoft's gaming division now. You can't have it both ways, guys... either BOTH Sega and Microsoft have craptastic management, or the man in charge at both companies is competent. What's it gonna be?

JR

"If xbox was a success, How many more "successes" do you think microsoft will tolerate. I guarantee if xbox360 is as much of a "success" as original xbox, there will be no more MS consoles. "
How many more "sucesses" both nintendo and sony can take? especially when sony is pushing expensive blu-ray drive, GPU, Processors for next-gen for approx. 400-500 bucks? and nintendo pushing next-gen console for rumored 99 bucks? Same could be said PS2 and PSP sales for sony, and nintendo slow sales on gamecube. Apprently there'll be no game console industry from your view point then?

That's hilarious! the PS3 described as a "Far Superior System". The PS3 doesn't even have a reliably working prototype yet. And when it does, it'll be based on an as of yet unproven Cell processor with marginally the same capacity as the 360's proven PowerPC processors.

I'm willing to admit that the PS3 may be slightly more capable, but only in the same sense as the Xbox was slightly more capable than the PS2. It's hardly far superior.

Terramar, PS2 was a success long before MS came onto the scene. MS was fighting an uphill battle by simply entering the console market, let alone giving the ps2 a year to establish it's fanbase virtually without competition. And yet, they managed to beat out Nintendo, and as some people have already pointed out, established a franchise that by its very name alone will keep the console alive.

Add to this the fact that MS finally has third-party support, an efficient online service that comes out of the box (at least relative to sony's POS online service), and more money than god and you should have a system that will sell enough so as not to be crushed immediately by Sony's "We don't really have anything to show you but we PROMISE it will be really cool(just please don't buy our rival's console)" marketing style.

Make sense yet?

In response to Terramar:

A mere glance at the Xbox release list for 2006 shows that it's far from being "aborted". The Dreamcast can be labeled as such as Sega ran out of money and discontinued production of the console after 2 years. Third-party support dried up completely (what little was there to begin with, anyway) and the stock vanished from stores. This is not the case with the Xbox. Microsoft Game Studios is shifting development exclusively to the new machine, but that's to be expected from a first party.

Launching a new console after 4 years is hardly unprecedented and is not indicative of failure. I'd say it's far more indicative of brand momentum brought about by huge franchises and Xbox Live's growing list of users.

In the end, you point out that the PS2 is "finally" making Sony some money. This is the most popular console and it took that long? I think your standards of what is considered ultimate success are unrealistically high. Everything needs to be viewed in context.

As a machine that provided classic Nintendo games to a specific fanbase and didn't cost an arm and a leg to maufacture, the Gamecube is a success. As a brand new property and contender aiming to get a foothold in the console market and introduce new franchises, the Xbox is a success. If you want to look at just in terms of money (which, as I've stated before, is not how I believe success should be viewed), then none of the consoles can be considered truly successful. You can't turn around now and say well, "overall" the PS2 will be a success. It's either making profit or it isn't, right?

Finally, there's not much difference between "basking in the PS2's success" and "holding off on innovating because we're making so much money". :)

Oh, and just to continue the smug train:

Make sense yet?

"Apprently there'll be no game console industry from your view point then?"

Hello! You're not just missing my point of view, but the entire point. Sony and Nintendo are PROFITABLE. PS2 was a success overall. You could say cube was a financial success but not necessarily overall success. So yes there will be a future for consoles. Get it?

As for Logain,
Ok, Ok I get it, it was REALLY tough for MS. Oh, it was so hard, im so proud they did what they did with there first console. Gimme a break, you sound like xbox's mom after he didn't make the football team on his first try.
MS doesn't need you to make excuses for them. They know xbox failed thats why they are killing it so soon. Theres no other reason to kill it.

I'm guessing you're still not getting it because you dont want to. Dont get me wrong, I like the xbox too. I liked dreamcast. Thats not important. Whats important is if 4 billion in losses is sustainable. Now if xbox360 turns that around, then it may be successful. But it will have to turn it around. And if xbox was a success there would be nothing to turn around.
See?

Didnt think so.

Debating whether or not the Xbox was a success in a thread that is specifically about the similarities of the Xbox 360 and the dreamcast seems alittle off topic. Especially when people are being to aggressive about something completely offtopic.
Question is- Is Logain 'Xbox's mom' or are you nitpicking for the sake of it?