What if...

[Manji]

What if Sega made the Saturn backwards compatible with Genesis and Sega CD games? the Saturn already has a cartridge slot and i bet some people thought they could play Genesis games in there anyway. obviously it would have made the Saturn super expensive, but worth it! it would have been truly an all-in-one, with next generation capabilities.

i think the prototype system Neptune was close in theory but didnt quite pull the same amount of 2D power the Saturn was going to be equipped with, including future 3D development.

[Warp2063]

I'm... not sure what the point of this line of inquiry is.

Well, if the Saturn could have played Genesis and Sega CD games, more people might have purchased a Saturn. Which wouldn't necessarily promote Saturn games, as people might want to use the backwards-compatibility features more, although it would create a larger installed base. Which in turn could have produced more game sales later on (although it might hurt in the short term, as you wouldn't be recouping development and production costs through software sales).

At the same time, though, people who already owned a Genesis and Sega CD might not buy one, as they might not see significant advantages over what they already had. Not to mention after the costly purchase of a Sega CD, they'd have to shell out even more for the combo Saturn. This might be especially true if they'd already purchased a Sega CD and were disappointed.

People who had not owned a Sega CD but had owned a Genesis might or might not want to play the older Sega CD games. I'm guessing that in a lot of cases, the answer would be "not." I don't think that the combo Saturn would be a strong motivator to go back and buy older games outside of known classics or new hits that might be released in the future.

Either way, competition versus the highly-anticipated and successful (and cheaper) Playstation would most likely not help people's opinions of a combo system that might cost even more than a stand-alone Saturn. While backwards-compatibility would reach out to established fans, I highly doubt it would encourage many previous non-adopters of Sega to switch. This proposed combo system would most likely have made little to no difference in the outcome of the console wars battle that the Saturn lost back in the 90's.



The 32X, as I remember, used the same dual SH-2 configuration for its main processor as the Saturn did. Outside of that, I don't think much was the same. All the Neptune did was combine the 32X and the Genesis into a single console - there were no other enhancements. It would have been just as powerful as a standard Genesis with 32X attached. So you can base your power estimates on that. While the 32X did enhance the Genesis significantly, it was still limited in what could be accomplished by the older system that it was attached to. The Genesis/32X really doesn't hold much of a candle to the Saturn's full capabilities, and because the Genesis/32X and the Neptune were equally powerful... the Neptune would have been just as far behind the Saturn.

[JerryTerrifying]

People always ask me if the Saturn could play SCD and Genesis games. I also see it all over various message boards. The last time I got a game off Craigslist it was a few Saturn games and a Dreamcast game and the guy asked if the Dreamcast could play Saturn games. A lot of people expect backwards compatability for whatever reason.

I think it would certainly have done nothing but help. Look what it did for the ps2. People wanted DVD players adn something that would play their existing catalog of hundreds of games.

The biggest thing that screwed the Saturn, I think, is the non existant advertising. I can only ever remember seeing one commercial for a Saturn game and that was for NiGHTS. Even though Saturn was the first system I played from that Gen I pretty much forgot it even existed for 10 years or more. I didn't know anyone with a Saturn and didn't see any commercials for the thing either. There were tons of people that were just plain unaware of its existence. Of course I didn't read game mags back then either so I was pretty much in the dark on games stuff back then. So I had to rely on what I heard from friends and TV.

[xDerekRx]

Anyone who says backwards compatibility would have hurt the Saturn would be a fool.

It would have helped sell the remaining stock of CD and Genesis games and probably extend the life of those two systems a tad longer. 32x compatibility would have been amazing too.

Although as a collector I enjoy that Saturn never had a backwards compatible successor like the Playstation. It forces people interested in the awesomeness of the Saturn to actual purchase one to play the games. Seeing as time goes on the systems will become harder to get, it makes it more fun to collect.

[Warp2063]

Anyone who says backwards compatibility would have hurt the Saturn would be a fool.

It would have helped sell the remaining stock of CD and Genesis games and probably extend the life of those two systems a tad longer. 32x compatibility would have been amazing too.

Although as a collector I enjoy that Saturn never had a backwards compatible successor like the Playstation. It forces people interested in the awesomeness of the Saturn to actual purchase one to play the games. Seeing as time goes on the systems will become harder to get, it makes it more fun to collect.

Calling me a fool?

I never said that it would hurt the Saturn... I said that it probably would have hurt Sega - in the short term. If people saw it just as a new system to play their old games - why upgrade? The Saturn, at launch, did not have much in the way of good games to fuel it. So why upgrade to a system that plays the games you already own, plus very few new games (most of which weren't very good) at launch? Might as well just hold onto your existing systems and play games that were proven to be good. Eventually, when better games would come out, it would be great to trade in your old system (I'm not talking about collectors, I'm talking about the average person) and to get a new system that plays all your old ones and the new hits. But at launch... who cares? (This lack of hardware sales would have been the sting for Sega - not being able to recoup losses from development and production through software sales. Sure, it might have extended the life of the 32X and the Sega CD, but these weren't the hot new products, the ones that Sega needed to recoup the most money on. These weren't Sega's focus.)

One of the huge selling points of the PS2 was its DVD player -- it was the cheapest one around when everyone wanted one. THAT was the big selling point for many of the initial sales. It didn't hurt that it could also play your entire library of PS1 games, and a few of the launch titles weren't too shabby. But it was the DVD player that I remember everyone wanted. The Saturn didn't have a comparable perk, as I don't remember CD's being as big of a deal when CD-player/game consoles first were coming out.

Finally, as for backwards-compatibility... it was always a question back then, but was rarely executed well. For the Super Famicom, you'd have to buy a special side system to play your Famicom games (and I don't even know if it ever came out). For the Master System, which only did so-so in the US, you'd have to buy the Power Base Converter to use it on the Genesis. Back then, backwards-compatibility required that you buy a peripheral. Backwards-compatibility didn't become big until people could use their old games in their new system without any additional purchases... for example, the Game Boy Color. After 1998, backwards-compatibility became a bigger expectation - not just a question. The Saturn came out before that threshold was hit.

[xDerekRx]

Ha actually Warp I didnt read you response I kinda did a quick reply to the main post

[Scooter]

But the PS2 could be more easily backwards compatible (BC) because it was based at least in part on the PS1's systems. The Saturn was completely different than the Genesis/Sega CD. Making the Saturn BC would have driven up the cost of an already excessively expensive console (it was released at $400!) so by including BC would have made it incredibly more complex and definitely more expensive.

Back in the day when the Saturn was being marketed it was pretty clear from Sega that they wanted you to own two consoles. If you wanted to play Genesis games you should already have a Genesis or should buy a (by then) cheap Genesis and if you wanted to play the most sophisticated games available at the time you should buy a Saturn. Not confusing, not difficult. Besides, who were they selling it to? Predominently to people who already had a Genesis so selling a BC Saturn to this audience would have been a foolish endeavor and would have priced many more buyers out of the Saturn market for no meaningful return. Also, the Genesis was still trudging along quite well so there was no reason to undermine that segment of the market with yet another compatible console/peripheral.

Backwards compatibility would have made the Saturn even less popular than it was as it is. Besides, tying the Saturn to old technology would have definitely been counterproductive to the whole point of the Saturn, that being that it was the most sophisticated system available at the time.

[JerryTerrifying]

I really don't see how having backwards compatability keeps someone from buying new hardware. A lot of people sell their old hardware to buy the new. So lets say I've got stacks and stacks of Genesis games and Sega CDs. I can sell my Genesis and Sega Cd, buy a Saturn with B/C and still be able to play my old games and save some shelf space only having one super machine that does it all.

If they could have done it without upping the cost it would have sold a TON more Saturns. That's like saying no one would have bought a Ps2 because it could play ps1 games, why not just buy a cheap ps1? Because a Ps1 can't play PS2 games!

Look at how many thousands of people are bitching about the ps3's lack of backwards compatability. Mine's b/c and I love having one machine that can handle all my playstation games and supports a catalog spanning 15 years. There's nothing but benefit to the consumer having backwards compatability. Also consider how Sega fans felt when the Saturn came out. A lot of them felt they were abandoning the Genesis...they released they drop it a year or so later completely in favor of the new Saturn which made a lot of consumers skittish about supporting the new hardware. If it supported Genesis, SCD and even 32X games it would have been seen as Sega being loyal to their customers.

Also with an addon the Genesis supported Master System games, so Backwards compatability was not a new idea to Sega and would have been a nice tradition to uphold and would have surely kept Sega fans loyal.

[Scooter]

If they could have done it without upping the cost it would have sold a TON more Saturns.

Also with an addon the Genesis supported Master System games, so Backwards compatability was not a new idea to Sega and would have been a nice tradition to uphold and would have surely kept Sega fans loyal.

But there's the problem, they couldn't sell it for the same price AND include BC. There is no overlap between the Genesis and Saturn architecture so basically they'd have to build a system that holds a Saturn and a Genesis inside! A LOT of people balked at the $400 price tag, they would certainly have done so at a $500 or $600 price tag. Simple economics. Look to the 3DO for an example, as system that was just too expensive to ever expect to have any amount of real success.

The Power Base Converter is a bad example since it is a peripheral, not a BC system. Just like the Sega CD and the 32X, those "systems" can't function without a base system console to be attached to.

[JerryTerrifying]

Still Sega supporting old software through new hardware. Having it built in or having it be an addon to offset costs making it optional is one way to go about it.

Also what made the 3do so expensive is they actually tried to make money on the hardware instead of making money by licensing games. All consoles generally sell for much less than they cost to make and only earn money through software sales.

[Warp2063]

Still Sega supporting old software through new hardware. Having it built in or having it be an addon to offset costs making it optional is one way to go about it.

However, this technique gradually limits what you can accomplish with the system. Imagine if we were still using computers and gaming systems today that were derived from (and instruction-compatible to) Z80 processors. Maintaining hardware compatibility with the archaic would prevent us from making new technological developments. It also increases system complexity, driving up prices. The PS2 ran PS1 games because the PS2 essentially had a PS1 processor in it, normally driving the controller ports and memory card slots, but capable of playing the games. The PS3, however, to maintain compatibility with the PS2, required the Emotion Engine, the PS2's main processor, as an additional chip on the system that provided no other benefits to the PS3, as its technologies were incompatible with anything else. Due to the cost of slapping a whole extra chip in there, it was one of the first things Sony pulled in an effort to cut down on the horrible costs of their system.

And we already discussed add-ons. It's one more thing that has to be taken into account when designing the hardware in the first place (meaning more work from the development department), and results in a piece of technology that many people don't end up buying. It's just not all that profitable.

Also what made the 3do so expensive is they actually tried to make money on the hardware instead of making money by licensing games. All consoles generally sell for much less than they cost to make and only earn money through software sales.

They were convinced that what they were selling was another piece of your entertainment center - that everyone would need one, not unlike a CD player, VHS player, TV, stereo, etc. Just by looking at the array of output ports on the back, you can see that. Therefore, they felt that they could charge a premium price for it. They charged a low licensing fee to developers in an effort to get a lot of titles made for the system.

[Manji]

the only thing i see that could have made it a bad decision on Sega's part is the cost.

however, if Sega wanted to bring the Genesis/Sega CD owners over, they could have made some sort of ad campaign where if you trade in your Genesis/Sega CD, you would get an extra price discount.

[Warp2063]

the only thing i see that could have made it a bad decision on Sega's part is the cost.

however, if Sega wanted to bring the Genesis/Sega CD owners over, they could have made some sort of ad campaign where if you trade in your Genesis/Sega CD, you would get an extra price discount.

That would have cost Sega even more money. The ad campaign, the recycling program, making less money on the new hardware, the reduced sales from Genesis and Sega CD games, all to get a new system in your home. It would have been yet another source of major financial loss.