Who would have won the battle in a straight fight between Nintendo 64 and Sega Saturn? N64 of course would be significantly more powerful, but Saturn has CDs. Would Final Fantasy stick with Nintendo in this timeline, or switch to Sega?
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Saturn would have come out early too, like genesis vs nes. Without the PlayStation, it's genuinely difficult to imagine where the audience would have gone
The Saturn did come out 2 years before the N64, just like Genesis vs SNES.
Neither, Nintendo would still bottleneck the N64 and Sega would still frick up both the Genny and Saturn with the SegaCD FMVullshit and 32x frickery
In that case, US would have N64 as the winner and Japan would have the Saturn.
No idea about EU but I think that Sega was always a bit more popular here so maybe Saturn, or something else entirely
Another video game gaming industry crash by the end of the 90s.
100% the Saturn.
Sega is getting a lot of shit about the Saturn but it does not compare to the moronation of Nintendo at the time
>nintendo
>release a console with compotent 3d hardware
>don't ship it with a cd drive and artificially limit yourself to ONLY 64MB of storage
>congrats, you have locked yourself out of assets like better textures, better geometry, video, audio, and so on
>not even release a cd addon, instead create an INCOMPATIBLE magnetic disk addon that offers (drumroll) 64MB OF STORAGE LMAO
>apply a pissblur filter over everything sabotaging your competent 3d hardware
Nintendo sucks
>Another video game gaming industry crash by the end of the 90s.
Unfortunately it didn't happen...
the saturn sucks for anything 3D the N64 would have obliterated it
I can see a future where its failure would have been blamed on CDs and future consoles get stuck with cartridges
I feel that they would've had a more balanced relationship, the hardware differences in this generation is miles bigger than the previous generation. This would allow the market to sell both of them as entirely different experiences, so there wouldn't be a war console, or at least there would be enough room for both of them to coexist.
>sprite console
>sucks at 3d
wow imagine water being.... WET
It’s not even good at 2D, can’t even get transparencies right. That console was so bad that even the simplest task that a console could perform during the previous generation was a headache to perform on the Saturn.
>It’s not even good at 2D, can’t even get transparencies right
???
anon the cpus are more than powerful enough to do effects like that in software, that's literally their job
Virtua fighter 2 and resident evil are pretty good looking 3d games on the Saturn.
>the saturn sucks for anything 3D the N64 would have obliterated it
I don't see any non-meme 3d games on N64 like Sega Rally or Virtua Fighter or Tomb Raider, oops, you can't have Tomb Raider because you forgot to have a CD drive, enjoy being stuck with Mario64 and Ocarina of Time LMAO
who in their right mind would want to play tomb raider? she was nothing but a mascot her games were average at best
>oops, you can't have Tomb Raider because you forgot to have a CD drive
Core Design was busy working on a N64 port when Sony bought console exclusivity until 2000.
sega would've dominated with the cd-based sega saturn and we'd all be playing our sega system 5s right now
The PSX is what pushed everyone into early adoption of 3D gaming even though the hardware was clearly lacking. The 2D era would've been extended a generation and we would've had hundreds of insanely high quality and beautiful games and been spared years of 12fps distorted 3D trash.
>The PSX is what pushed everyone into early adoption of 3D gaming even though the hardware was clearly lacking.
homie what LMAO. The PS1 didn't even have an analog stick until 1998. The N64 was the true 3D machine.
>this is what Saturn autists actually believe
anon, please seek help. and it was the N64 that really pushed AAA devs into 3d. the psx had plenty of sprite based games, especially early on
3DO would have stuck around and the Panasonic M2 would have come out and probably shit all over the Saturn. The industry was too big by then for only two machines. Someone was going to fill the void.
Say hello to the king of the 5th generation
It was barely fifth gen at all, anon. More like a fun rival to SEGA CD. That said, I probably prefer them both Saturn and N64, but I'm just weird like that. TurboGrafx-CD also deserves more love imo, Saturn wasn't the first shmup machine to ever exist
I kneel
TENDIEBROS???
It's just way too weak compared to the N64 and Saturn. Perhaps the M2 would have actually come out.
Consider if you will the Nintendo PlayStation, all the power of the PS1 but accompanied by first-party titles by Nintendo. This would have been the best possible outcome, as SEGA would have kept doing their thing, and it would have kept both Sony and Nintendo from resorting to gimmicks later on like motion control and movie games. The PS1 was a great console but no subsequent Sony or Nintendo platform has managed to top its charm, and that is partially due to its history as a joint venture between Sony and Nintendo.
As for Saturn vs. N64, well, it would have been a much fairer competition, since neither of them come close to the sheer amount of games the PS1 had. People mistakenly tend to compare the Saturn to the PS1 since they share a handful of titles, but it is actually closer to the N64. Both systems thrived primarily on a small handful first-party titles rather than the dozens of third-party titles that usually come into conversation when mentioning the PS1.
Nintedo-Sony Playstation schism worst day of my retor gaming life
>Retor
You're a retor
If the SNES CD/Super Disc actually happened, what games would it have gotten besides Secret of Mana and Super Mario All-Stars as rumors allege? I'm sure plenty of Sega CD/3DO games would have gotten ports but what other games are alleged or confirmed to have started life on this platform?
3do was actually pronounced "three-do" as in it does 3d
As opposed to...? How did you think it was pronounced?
may-ree-oh
three-diddly-oh
It's 3 D O. https://youtu.be/xKRTP_RRVd8
The gaming industry was going to 3D games. Arcade cabinets in arcades (and PC games) were already heavily 3D with games like Time Crisis, Tekken, Virtua Cop, etc.
Consoles going 3D was just a matter of time as well. 3D was coming whether anyone liked it or not.
The Saturn was weak when it came to 3D. It could do it but not as good or as easily as Nintendo. Having CDs was a nice bonus sure, but what mattered the MOST was 3D games. Games. GAMES are what mattered.
The N64 was way ahead of Saturn when it came to 3D games like Mario 64, Zelda, Smash Bros, etc. Nintendo 64 would have won the generation in my opinion.
Saturn probably would have ended up in 2nd place.
The only difference is that Nintendo probably would have pushed the Nintendo DD64 add-on harder which used cartridges with extra storage space. So developers would have more storage space to work with.
I also think this generation would have lasted extra long from 1995 to 2001. Without pressure from PS1, Nintendo and Sega would milk the generation for a full 6 years to recoup their costs as much as possible and stretch things out. Especially since making 3d games is more expensive than making 2D games. Just like what happened with last Generation of consoles (Sega Genesis) which lasted from 1989 to 1995....6 years.
Sega and Nintendo announce their sequel consoles in 2001.
western slop would never have taken hold
>What if Sony never entered the video game industry?
Then we never would have gotten cool games like Bram Stoker's Dracula on the SNES.
A big thing to consider is that Nintendo only stuck with cartridges because they didn't want to pay Sony any royalties (even indirectly) for using CDs after the drama that happened between them. If Sony never entered gaming then Nintendo would have probably used CDs for the N64, and regular DVD/BD for the subsequent consoles.
N64 would have destroyed the Saturn due to Sega doing their best to be hated by every retailer and every developer in 1995. If nobody sells your consoles, you can't get an install base.
>Sega doing their best to be hated by every retailer and every developer in 1995.
This is very important. Retailers were royally pissed at Sega for constantly releasing half-baked products and add-ons, and then Sega abandoning their own products half way through. Retailers do not like dedicated shelf space to products that do not sell.
Sega CD, Sega 32x, Sega Nomad, Sega Pico, Sega CDX, Sega Winder Mega, the Sega Game Gear (to a lesser extent), Sega CD 32x games (needing both Sega CD and 32x to run), etc. Plus all the accessories for each system took up space in stores.
Retailers were absolutely pissed with Sega. The Sega Saturn was just the last straw that broke retailers trust in Sega.
The Saturn came before the Nomad, so that one would be the last straw actually.
Retailers were mad about the surprise Saturn release that many of them were excluded from, so mad in fact that one big retailer (K-B Toys) refused to EVER stock the Saturn.
Oh yeah. Wasn't there a few other big retailers than dropped Sega? Like Walmart or K-Mart? I can't recall which but I know KB Toys wasn't alone in dropping Sega.
No, Nintendo and N64 were even worse. Nintendo had been pissing every developer since 1985 and N64 cartridges were really expensive to manufacture.
No ps1 means no surprise launch, no?
No twin sh2 architecture, no n64 as we know it depending on how far you want to take the no ps1 scenario, as it was hugely influenced by the ps1 in itself.
My guess is that gaming would have moved slower for a few years but you didn't say anything about Microsoft so...
>No ps1 means no surprise launch, no?
No PS1 means the console has one cpu core and that would be all the difference. Early launch would still happen, it was mandated by Japan because the console launched so well there (nips ate up virtua fighter).
Sega had licensing costs on par with Nintendo because they thought they were as big as them, and the N64 outsold the Saturn four to one. So if we extrapolate those two trends and combine it with retailers being pissed off, the Saturn would still end up doing horribly. Also add the fact that Sega intentionally held back Saturn production to minimize their losses.
No playstation would mean the N64 sells three times as well. Sega would still get fricked by their idiotic management.
*op didn't say anything about MS
Right, but that wouldn't be a factor until 2000/2001.
Unless you think Microsoft would have entered the console industry earlier if there was no PlayStation?
Sega was a corporate mess at the time and the Saturn was a nightmare to develop for, I really doubt they would have tempted anyone away.
The Sega Saturn just wasn't very popular outside of Japan. The games weren't very good. It was lacking in RPGs, non-arcadey games, and true 3D games.
The worst was that the Saturn had NO Sonic game. No Streets of Rage. Pretty much NO sequel to any of the famous Sega Genesis games. I think that was a terrible idea.
I remember seeing that clown for Nights into Dreams at a game store one time as a kid and thought it was so weird. I wanted Sonic.
I jumped to N64 and never looked back.
What are you smoking, anon?
It had plenty of RPGs and would have more if not for Sony
Games are fine, more variety than on N64 which actually lacked RPGs and arcadey games.
It is a shame about Sonic and SoR but there are a few series that did get sequels like Shinobi, The Story of Thor, Shining games, Columns.
There were also new Sega series like Panzer Dragoon, Sakura Taisen, Virtua games, Clockwork Knight and Dragon Force.
Although it helps, a company mascot isn't necessary for success, better have multiple flagship series aimed at different audiences instead.
>N64 which actually lacked arcadey games.
Not really, quite a few midway arcade games was ported to n64. It lacks japanese arcade games tho
>Although it helps, a company mascot isn't necessary for success
Not that anon I respectfully disagree. It's extremely important for your mascot to be on your system. Nintendo did it for every thing they made. Mario was on everything. It's about brand identity. When kids think of the system they instantly think of your mascot character. Not having a Sonic game on Saturn was a massive mistake.
Saturn still outsold N64 in Japan, even if just barely
Playstation was a massive success and mascots were constantly changing from console to console
Xbox also was a success (or at least 360 was) and I'm not even sure if it has a mascot
I suppose it's more important in America than other places since that's the only place N64 didn't bomb
>Xbox also was a success (or at least 360 was) and I'm not even sure if it has a mascot
Halo with Master Chief and Cortana. They even made a Halo Cortana phone.
Xbox and Playstation werent successes. Or at least they didn't make any money selling the consoles. Every console was sold at a loss, and they lost billions of dollars overall. But Microsoft and Sony were so big and rich that they absorbed the financial losses, and thought losing money was worth it if it meant putting their consoles in homes. Sega tried to go head to head with Sony by also selling Saturn at a loss.
But Sega made way too many mistakes (design of the systems, lack of games like Sonic, annoying retailers, etc), and they were not as big company compared to Sony. They couldnt absorb the losses like Sony could. Sega pretty much burned through all the profit they earned with the success of the Genesis to sell the Saturn at a loss.
Nintendo was much smarter. The Nintendo 64 was made a small profit for each console sold. Not at a loss. They purposely designed the console to not lose money. There are interviews out there where manufacturers working with Nintendo said that Nintendo regulated everything when it came to the N64. Down to the thickness of the plastic case and even the length of the metal screws. They kept pushing to design the N64 as economical as possible. At times, manufacturers had to push back and say a certain number of screws were necessary to keep the console secure.
In some ways I wish Sega had the same economical attitude as Nintendo. If they made the Saturn more Streamlined and cut out the fat, then perhaps Sega could have survived.
Hard to believe that even with 100 million consoles sold, they didn't crack even tiny profit through software.
Any links where I can read up on it?
>Hard to believe that even with 100 million consoles sold
Not that anon you replying to but keep in mind that its not about the number of consoles sold. It's about how much it costs to manufacture the console + R&D VS the price they sell it. The original cost to manufacture the PS1 was pushing $500 ish, and they sold it at $299. And the $299 price was a very last minute decision to screw with Sega. Sony found out Sega was going to sell the Saturn at $399, and Sony decided to twist the knife and announce $299 launch price. Sony made most of their money on the playstatoon games since they get a small cut of each game copy sold.
>Sony made most of their money on the playstatoon games since they get a small cut of each game copy sold.
That's my point, I thought they would at least get even or something.
With so many consoles sold, surely plenty of people bought different games and then spread the word about them, convincing others to buy them too
Some people might've only got like 6 games or so but the richer ones would buy plenty more, including games someone else would recommend and thus making a profit for Sony.
Or maybe the whole "game-renting" culture prevented that, I wouldn't know because it didn't catch on where I lived.
I think you and other anons are talking about two different things.
The first anon is talking about console hardware sales specifically.
You are talking about the gaming division sales overall - which includes games, accessories, etc.
As far as I know, the console sales themselves never made money.
But the games and accessory sales made up for it. Each Playstation or Xbox owner had many games. Probably a dozen or more. Plus buying extra controllers and memory cards and whatever.
You both are right, but you both are talking about two different things.
>As far as I know, the console sales themselves never made money.
No, they make money. People really took the "sony sells ps3s at a loss" to mean nobody ever makes money on consoles unless they're nintendo. How dumb can you be?
Yeah there are several interviews of Microsoft and Sony execs saying the consoles were sold at a loss. Microsoft said that even at the end of the original Xbox's life it was still sold at a loss.
>Microsoft said that even at the end of the original Xbox's life it was still sold at a loss.
Xbox OG selling at a loss was actually a selling point for many buyers. It was considered to be on a permanent discount, a $399 item you could buy for $299.
Yeah. This is true l. Xbox has never been sold at a profit. Not once over its 20 year lifespan has the Xbox console hardware even been sold at a profit.
https://www.pcmag.com/news/microsoft-says-xbox-consoles-have-always-been-sold-at-a-loss
Xbox live, Xbox games, and accessories are what make money.
Nintendo is the exception because they don't use the bleeding edge hardware in their consoles. They choose to use hardware that is a few steps below the top end. So their consoles always make money.
>N64 lacked Arcade Games
Every 5th N64 game was Cruising USA pr SF rush Zoomer
He meant good arcade games. Cruisin USA is one of the worst racers ever made
>It was lacking in RPGs
It was lacking RPGs OUTSIDE of japan you mean.
Pretty sure anon wasn't in Japan though.
I mean...isn't the whole discussion here about the Saturn selling outside of Japan? No one is really talking about Saturn sales in Japan in this thread since we know Saturn sold decent-ish in Japan.
If Saturn is mostly supposed accel at 2D games, that's what N64 ought to have been expected to be imo. No idea about final fantasy a question. thank you
A kino console war with no clear winner. With both Saturn and N64 having big library of great games. Sony ruined gaming
The Saturn didn't fail because of Sony it was because Sega had been producing crap.
The N64 would of dominated over Sega as much as the SNES did over Mega Drive. But Nintendo was a bad company at the time. Price fixing. overpriced licensing.
Having said that Sony succeeded because they appealed to mass market and knew how to market to the edgey 90s culture. I can imagine Sega filling that role rather than Nintendo.
It's complicated. N64 had a very serious problem with both lack of third parties and lack of games that weren't aimed at normies, aside from having nothing to offer you in a lot of genres. Nintendo has always made very safe and generic games in order to look for the broadest appeal. Here's another game about jumping plushies, here's another game inspired by action movies, take more games involving Mario and friends... repeat ad nauseam. They take zero risks, and without third parties around fixing the holes and giving some personality to their libraries, their extreme safeness and lack of passion can be really tiresome.
Sega, on the other hand, has always made sure that you can play games from all popular genres on their consoles. They are also much more varied than Nintendo and have no qualms about making games for specific demographics.
Third parties are a key factor. Without PSX around, maybe N64 could have received more games from other developers, games with an actual soul, games from multiple genres, games that can make you feel emotions... There's also the Square and Enix factor. If they decided to support one specific console, its sales in Japan would have been clearly boosted.
Anyway, regardless who would have been the winner, Saturn could have survived in these circunstances, unless Nintendo obtained massive support from third parties. Sony stole Sega's audience, but without them around there's a lot of things that Nintendo just cannot give you.
Everyone would have sucked it up and made awful cartridge games for one extra generation
Assuming that both consoles have the same hardware, then Saturn would have definitely performed better, but I don't think it would've sold PS1 numbers for numerous reasons. The Saturn does have confusing architecture, but having solid 3D capabilities and CD's would've made it easier to market and would have stronger appeal with 3rd parties. Also, development tools like Psy-Q for the Saturn would've been invested in and prioritized more and would've made making 3D games on Saturn not as awful.
Sega would still have gone broke.
Stop coping.
We prolly would have had another gen of classics before the goyim showed up in droves and ruined it all
The playstation not existing would mean that the saturn would had a been a pure 2D focused system with some rudimentary 3D in the mix. They wouldn't have to put some more CPUs last minute and the system would had came out cheaper and be easier to develop for but the 3D would had been worse and I assume a game like nights wouln't be possible in a saturn like this.
The N64 would had still mogged It hard just with the US market alone. I can see the N64 selling like 10 more million in the US alone with no PS1 to compete with. The saturn would still sell better in japan, especially if they somehow got square to make final fantasy exclusivelly on the saturn and not the N64, and europe since sega at least tried to market here unlike nintendo.
In this scenario the N64 could had sold closer to 50M while the saturn something like 25M. I think at some point sega would come up with a successor that could actually compete with the N64 in the 3D graphics hence why I think it wouldn't sell much better than the N64.
all they did was add the second SH2, everything else that makes the system complex to code for would be still there. And 90% of the games didn't even use that.
I remember they had a bunch of stuff for Sega Saturn in my Target and it would never be moved, the N64 and PlayStation were in constant move and the Saturn shelves were always piled 'till they removed them. I guess Target let them pile up so people could see Sega sucked and never give them a second chance.
All games on PS1 would be made for Saturn, well not all, but it would've spurred more developers to master the Saturn architecture and probably would've resulted in something like that dude with the tomb raider Saturn demo going. Tough to say how they would've compared, but ff7 and mgs would most likely be Saturn exclusives.
If the Playstation never happened Sony would not have pushed the Saturn out so quickly in the USA. This means that the 32x would not have failed as hard and retailers would not hate Sega as much as they did in OTL. Both the Saturn and N64 release in 1996 and the Saturn beats the N64 in every market (but Nintendo comes closest to Sega in North America). The Dreamcast releases in 2001 and is basically just an xbox.
>Sony would not have pushed the Saturn out so quickly in the USA.
Sony didn't kill the Saturn in the USA. Sega themselves managed to do that. Without Sony, the Saturn would do the same while the N64 would do three times better.
Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy 7, all of the games that made Americans pick the Playstation over the N64, would have been Saturn exclusives. If Sony didn't release the Playstation, the Saturn would have killed the N64.
I doubt it all of them would go to Saturn. FF7 would have been on N64 since that was the original plan. Square was a Nintendo exclusive before jumping to Sony. These companies want to sell their games on the most popular platform which is Nintendo.
Without Sony around, Nintendo would pushed the Nintendo 64DD add on much harder, and used 750mb zip disks for it. Thus solving any storage concerns.
Do you not understand that the Saturn was not carried by stores? The console won't sell frick all if it stays this white unicorn that one guy claims to have seen in Toys R Us once in 1995. With no competition the N64 would've been the only console and everyone would just develop for that.
And this is ignoring that without the Sony influence, the Saturn would've had 3DO level 3d graphics, that Resident Evil and Tomb Raider were always multiplatform, and that MGS and FF7 never would've been such a big hit without Sony doing a multimillion dollar marketing behind them (and they would have stayed Japan exclusives because Sega hated bringing over rpg titles). MGS being a M2 exclusive would be more likely than the Saturn killing the N64.
Saturn wouldn't be powerful enough to run those 3D games since Sega only added a 2nd CPU to fight Sony Playstation. Without Sony Saturn would be half as powerful and be mostly a 2D machine.
Ps1 ports (like Tomb Raider, SotN and Resident Evil) only used one CPU. The Saturn would have been weaker, but it still would have been powerful enough to beat the N64.
Exactly. What would have happened is that Sega launches early with a weaker Saturn. They push 2D games thinking they are ahead of Nintendo. Then Nintendo launches with games like Mario 64 and the gaming world goes nuts just like in the original timeline. Sega is sent into panic mode because they didn't think 3D would be the next big thing. Saturn is underpowered from the very beginning. They can't port their arcade hits like Virtua Fighter to Saturn because it's not powerful enough. So Sega probably scrambles and makes another 32x style add-on and call it the 64x to give Saturn more horsepower. Probably using the Saturn's ram cartridge port. Nintendo wins the generation.
Which is why they would perform worse on Sega Saturn. It's single CPU hardware is weaker than PS1. These 3D Saturn games would have frame rate issues, and other compromises compared PS1. That's why Sega was panicking against Sony. The Saturn was built to be a 2D machine with some small bits of 3D as a distant secondary concern. But the PS1 was meant to be 3D primarily. Sega had made a machine designed to do the wrong job they needed to do.
In this scenario the Saturn isn't competing against the PS1 as the PS1 would not exist. The weaker Saturn would still be capable of passable 3D, even with framerate issues, it would beat the N64.
The Nintendo 64 is better at 3D than Saturn with only 1 CPU.
It also used carts so nobody wanted to make games for it.
If you remember, most gaming companies did not leave Nintendo until Sony showed up with their Playstation using CDs. These same game companies were aware that Sega Saturn was using CDs, but they still didn't leave Nintendo to go to Sega. They only left for Sony.
>It also used carts so nobody wanted to make games for it.
That's because Sony making CDs was so much cheaper, and Sony WANTED all devs to join up so they made everything as third party friendly as possible. Sega making CDs wouldn't be cheaper, and they'd have the shittiest developer support ever.
Any company making 3d would default to the N64.
The Sega Saturn can't run Virtua Fighter with only one cpu. And Virtua Fighter was the big system seller that carried the Sega Saturn during its first year of launch. It was massive deal in Japan for Sega. People bought Saturn just for Virtua Fighter alone.
>They can't port their arcade hits like Virtua Fighter to Saturn because it's not powerful enough.
virtua fighter launched on the Saturn and literally used just 1 cpu, exactly like how the original config worked before the playstation announcement.
>virtua fighter launched on the Saturn and literally used just 1 cpu
Virtua Fighter on Saturn used both CPUs. This is well known.
Saturn used both CPUs for Virtua Fighter.
>Virtua Fighter on Saturn used both CPUs. This is well known.
Yes. After porting Virtua Fighter, Yu Suzuki at Sega said that Saturn had powerful potential with both CPUs working together, but also said most developers would probably not be willing to invest the time to learn how to use both CPUs effectively.
That was Virtua Fighter 2, not 1.
Virtua Fighter 1 did use both CPUs. It relied more on CPU 1 than CPU 2, but it still used both. Virtua Fighter 1 Remix relied heavily on both CPUs.
I work in an industry that is basically a duopoly. They would have gotten along, not worked together but coexisted. The distribution pretty much demands it. No eggs all in one basic/ make them compete against each other/ special programs for the biggest buyers etc.
Nintendo still wins because many of the top 3rd party manufacturers would have put out there products on the N64.
Final Fantasy and Street Fighter would have been on the N64.
Tekken I'm not sure about.
Maybe no Tekken at all, or a very different Tekken made for either the Saturn or N64 hardware from the beginning.
The arcade industry would be radically different.
It's just a really deep question. But my gut instinct says Nintendo.
Since the Saturn's extra processor was a last-minute add-on due to the threat of the PlayStation we would have instead gotten the original 2d-focused Saturn.
This Saturn would have a short lifespan because Sega's 3d arcade games were becoming insanely popular. Thus necessitating the release of *another* Sega console designed from the ground up for 3d.
This console would probably have been very similar in design to.....wait for it..... The PlayStation.
In all realities the PS1 reigns.
If you want to be a big butthole about it, Sony not influencing the gaming industry is impossible. They and Phillips MADE the Compact Disc. Remember; Nintendo broke off from Sony when making the SNES-CD because they knew Sony would be making too much money off of manufacturing the CDs.
What would have actually happened would have been:
>With nowhere to turn, everyone jumps back on board with NEC, because SEGA wasn't big in Japan
>NEC actually puts quality work into the PC-FX. >By 1996, they actually give it the polygon-chip upgrade to make the Super PC-FX
>With no-one to panic develop against, SEGA gets its shit together and the Saturn actually launches on time with enough support to properly fight against Nintendo
>Nintendo probably hangs on to more of its third party devs, but everything still goes the same with them
>The big western hits of the late 90s probably would have launched on the Saturn, while the big Japanese hits would have launched on the PC-FX
>Nintendo broke off from Sony when making the SNES-CD because they knew Sony would be making too much money off of manufacturing the CDs.
That wasn't due to manufacturing, Sony would have been the sole licensor for the SNES-CD, meaning Nintendo would have lost control over software.
So nintendo made the n64 who they made macronix the sole licensor of chips!! Brilliant miyamoto!
Who makes the carts/cds and who owns the platform are two separate things.
For the N64, the game publishers get a license from Nintendo, and Nintendo then decides if they allow their games to be released (and in what numbers). Meaning if Nintendo does not allow you to publish your games because it goes against their guidelines, then that would be that. Even if an arab sheik offered a trillion dollars for them to produce 20 million carts of Holy Jihad IX, it would just not happen.
The Sony SNES-CD deal would have meant that Sony decides what can be licensed. If someone wanted to publish a port of every PC-FX hentai game, and Sony allowed them, then Nintendo couldn't have done anything about it because they would not have owned the platform.
If I remember correctly, Sony even had plans of releasing a standalone SNES-CD, is this true or just a rumor?
They had the add-on, and a standalone device. The leaked prototype was the latter.
>they would not have owned the platform.
That's a straight up lie. nintendo would be the one licensing the devkits while sony would license would assure hardware compatibility I hate how you nintendo fanatics love to create a false narrative. If you wanted to port hentai vn's you would have to first go to nintendo and inform them about that to get a software license. You wouldn't even make it to the step sony stamps on their license without first going to nintendo. Unless the SNES-CD was supposed to be a 3DO where you could develop without official devkits you are lying.
>Unless the SNES-CD was supposed to be a 3DO where you could develop without official devkits you are lying.
At least half a dozen companies created third party devkits, some were in-house (Rare, Argonaut, Interplay, Accolade), some were sold commercially (Psy-Q, Cross Products). The only problem for releasing your games was officially licensing them, otherwise you cannot legally sell SNES carts due to the lockout chip (and the legal obstacle it presented) but the SNES CD had no such thing. And Sony wanted to do just that, by releasing music and video content on the machine, for which they could leverage their giant multimedia empire; which also means creating software for the console with Nintendo out of the loop. Notably they teamed up with Sega to release a bunch of shitty FMV Sega CD games.
So not having control over game licensing and therefore not owning the platform was THE problem.
>in a straight fight between Nintendo 64 and Sega Saturn?
They are both extremely homosexual. Nothing straight about either.
S*ny actively ruined what was the zenith of sprite art perfection.
>Would Final Fantasy stick with Nintendo in this timeline, or switch to Sega?
No. Square was already aware of the Sega Saturn and its CDs. They didn't care about Saturn because Sega consoles were not popular in Japan. All of the failed. Sega SG 1000/Sega Master System/Sega Genesis/Sega CD/Sega 32x/etc were all big failures in Japan.
Sega was much more popular in the West in the USA and Europe. And Squaresoft heard that the original Saturn (before it got hastily upgraded to compete with Playstation 1) was focused on 2D graphics and couldn't do 3D well. It originally was just a beefed up Sega CD.
The original plan for Squaresoft was for them to release Final Fantasy 7 on Nintendo 64, and use the 64DD for bigger storage space. Nintendo 64 was focused on 3D and could do 3D graphics very well.
>It originally was just a beefed up Sega CD.
lolwat? where does this come from?
Wouldn't the 3DO also get cheaper eventually?
What about the Jaguar?
No-one gave a shit about the 3DO and Atari was practically a shambling zombie by 1993.
Even in a completely Sony-less environment, no sane developer was going to move their a hobbyist console or the Atari 14400.
>Who would have won the battle in a straight fight between Nintendo 64 and Sega Saturn?
Saturn but also could be 3do, disks were too alluring for publishers
N64 still would have won. Japanese game companies were aware of Sega Saturn's CDs, but still stayed with Nintendo. Sega's reputation in Japan for consoles wasn't good.