View Full Version : Successful "Unsuccessful" Consoles
Some consoles/handhelds are successful even if the general public doesn't consider them so. For example, the SEGA Game Gear was successful with a long run in the 1990's, but due to the Game Boy line being more popular, most gamers consider the Game Gear unsuccessful. In my opinion, this isn't fair. So I dedicate this thread to all those consoles who were commercial successes even if they weren't the most popular console at their times.
What are your favorite successful consoles that are usually labeled as "unsuccessful?"
AdamAnt316
04-04-2016, 02:01 PM
GCE Vectrex: Probably too expensive for most people, small screen, and B&W-only (though a color version (http://home.earthlink.net/~jmorg/vectrex/VecColor.htm) was reportedly in the works), but it brought pure vector graphics and arcade-style gameplay into the household.
Atari 7800: Intended for release in 1984, it was shelved due to the Tramiel takeover until it was finally released three years later, whereupon it was buried by the NES juggernaut. However, it offered excellent ports of arcade games, and worked with nearly all Atari 2600 games.
Atari Lynx: Another casualty of the Game Boy, but it offered decent graphics, some good portable ports, and the ability to be used right- or left-handed.
Mayhem
04-04-2016, 02:45 PM
Vectrex and N64.
The Vectrex launched at $199, that's $70 less than the Atari 5200 did the same month, so I don't consider that to have been "too expensive".
AdamAnt316
04-04-2016, 03:23 PM
Vectrex and N64.
The Vectrex launched at $199, that's $70 less than the Atari 5200 did the same month, so I don't consider that to have been "too expensive".
Could very well be. I figured that the in-built monitor would've pushed the price into the stratosphere. Of course, the Atari 5200 didn't sell terribly well either, so.......
Emperor Megas
04-04-2016, 04:38 PM
Of course, the Atari 5200 didn't sell terribly well either...Because it was garbage.
Greg2600
04-04-2016, 06:40 PM
Vectrex, Lynx, even the 5200 are now favorites of mine.
ccovell
04-04-2016, 07:02 PM
GCE Vectrex, Atari 7800, Atari Lynx...
Could we clarify with the OP what counts as "successful?" Also, the thread looks like it's about perceived failures which actually were successful, whereas I'd put the posts after the 1st post squarely into the "unsuccessful but I still love it!" category.
So, um, your posts are a bit off-topic? (Understandable since "successful" can mean different things to different people.)
Could we clarify with the OP what counts as "successful?"
I thought I clarified that.
... those consoles who were commercial successes even if they weren't the most popular console at their times.
ccovell
04-04-2016, 07:19 PM
I thought I clarified that.
Specifying a yardstick for what counts as unsuccessful / successful in how many units sold or how many years on the market would be better.
I mean, I understood what you mean (I think), but for example was the Atari 7800 successful, sales-wise, seriously?
Emperor Megas
04-04-2016, 07:22 PM
I'll admit, besides notorious ones like the Virtua Boy and the N-Gage, I have no idea what game systems were unsuccessful. Actually, I'm not even sure that the N-Gage was unsuccessful.
AdamAnt316
04-04-2016, 07:24 PM
Commercial success is relative. The most successful systems, like the NES, Atari 2600, Game Boy, Sony Playstation, etc. have tended to sell tens of millions of units. After that, there tends to be rather of a drop-off, be it shallow (Super Nintendo, Sega Master System) or steep (Atari 5200, Atari Jaguar, Atari Lynx...). Also, the crashes have put the kibosh on once-successful systems like the Colecovision and Vectrex (which was initially popular enough sales-wise to entice Milton-Bradley to acquire GCE, but was commercially toast less than a year afterwards). I think my listed choices qualify, with the possible exception of the Lynx. Without solid sources of sales figures, it's kinda hard to say...
-Adam
ccovell
04-04-2016, 08:07 PM
Yes, and when the topic is about actual success vs. perception of success, that's a bit of a problem...
celerystalker
04-04-2016, 08:31 PM
Success is pretty arbitrary. Like the original Xbox... Microsoft did not profit financially directly, but they did learn marketing lessons, develop an infrastructure to build upon, and create a sellable brand. Comparatively, Nintendo remained profitable with the N64, but they did lose faith with third party developers and let their brand become associated with kiddie games, whether it was accurate or not.
AdamAnt316
04-04-2016, 09:22 PM
To me, another successful "unsuccessful" console would be the one which started it all, the Magnavox Odyssey (http://www.pong-story.com/odyssey.htm). It took Ralph Baer and his team several years to iron out the details of what constituted a "tv game", and turn the concept into something which could be sold commercially. After several false starts (Teleprompter, Sears, RCA, just about every other major TV manufacturer), they finally got Magnavox to agree to market the unit. After another year of turning the "Brown Box (http://www.pong-story.com/sanders.htm)" into a sellable product, it hit the market in 1972, initially appearing only in Magnavox's own TV/hifi dealerships. Early ads implied that the Odyssey would only work with Magnavox televisions, which also slowed sales. Even so, after a number of years on the market, the Odyssey managed to sell over 300,000 units, and inspired the very first successful video arcade game, Atari's Pong (http://www.pong-story.com/atpong1.htm), not to mention thousands upon thousands of "Pong clones", which dominated the market until cartridge-based systems took over. Not a massive number of sales by modern standards, but it certainly kick-started the video game industry.
-Adam
kupomogli
04-04-2016, 10:58 PM
In terms of classic systems, Sega CD for me. It doesn't have too many games, but it's got a lot of quality.
I'd also choose the PSP. The PSP wasn't really unsuccessful, but it's the most recognized (portable) console that has no games, despite having a large amount of quality exclusives The average quality on the PSP is well above the average quality of other consoles.
goldenband
04-04-2016, 11:44 PM
for example was the Atari 7800 successful, sales-wise, seriously?
My understanding is that it made a tidy profit for Atari.
Steve W
04-05-2016, 05:15 AM
In terms of classic systems, Sega CD for me. It doesn't have too many games, but it's got a lot of quality.
I'd also choose the PSP. The PSP wasn't really unsuccessful, but it's the most recognized (portable) console that has no games, despite having a large amount of quality exclusives The average quality on the PSP is well above the average quality of other consoles.
I'd agree with both of those. I've always had a soft spot for the Sega CD.
I had always wanted to pick up a PSP but I never pulled the trigger. I would go to a game store and look at the PSP racks, and there would be a dozen games mixed in with 80 crappy movies. It always gave me the perception that there were no decent games for the machine when I could never find any on the shelves due to their being tucked behind six copies of the movie Stealth. I've recently gotten into emulating the PSP, and digging through the releases it's pretty amazing how many decent games there were for the system. Phantasy Star Portable is the one I'm fixated on at the moment.
Tron 2.0
04-06-2016, 03:24 AM
Turbografx 16 and Sega Saturn both flopped in north america.Sure they did better in japan but that's it.
Because it was garbage.
How many Atari 5200 games have you played to come to that conclusion?
Aussie2B
04-06-2016, 02:38 PM
The PC Engine. Seems to me that Westerners often look at Japanese systems, if they happened to be released outside of Japan, with an America-centric perspective. So many people see all variations of the TG-16 as unsuccessful, despite the fact that the PC Engine was a solidly performing system in Japan, doing better than the Mega Drive even. Yet people are more inclined to assume that the latter was more successful, on the basis that the Genesis was doing much better than the TG-16 outside of Japan.
Emperor Megas
04-06-2016, 08:13 PM
How many Atari 5200 games have you played to come to that conclusion?
Honestly, I don't remember. I just remember how hard I thought the system sucked. All 3x3 square feet of it.
BlastProcessing402
06-15-2016, 07:35 PM
In the UK and especial Brazil, the Master System was a huge success. In North America it did so badly that later games that were supposedly released for the system supposedly only showed up in Canada. Many just wound up being published as Game Gear games.
ColecoFan1981
06-15-2016, 07:57 PM
Because it was garbage.
Partly because of the controllers, which only improved if you had the Rev. 9 flex circuits.
~Ben
eskobar
06-16-2016, 10:44 AM
My favorite unsuccessful console would be the Dreamcast. It sold less than the Game Gear and the Sega Saturn and lived less than those 2 consoles, it was discontinued after 1 and half years ... had an incredible library and very good arcade ports.
I felt that the consumer was really stupid for not buying the Dreamcast ... the shadow of the forthcoming PS2 was immense and you really couldn't blame the consumer because PS2 was beyond expectations. It was really sad to see the DC fall, if Mexico had more confidence of the japanese and american business men we could easily kept the DC alive, it was very popular in my country ... well, pirated software was a huge reason for that popularity, but in that time we didn't have official distribution for home consoles, only for Neo Geo MVS and Arcade Divisions of Capcom and more publishers.
SparTonberry
06-16-2016, 12:30 PM
It was blowback from the 32X, which made people lose confidence in Sega.
eskobar
06-16-2016, 12:43 PM
It was blowback from the 32X, which made people lose confidence in Sega.
Yeah, that too.
The 32X was as lame as was expensive :embarrassed:
Steve W
06-17-2016, 05:30 AM
It was blowback from the 32X, which made people lose confidence in Sega.
It was more about all the hype Sony was creating for the Playstation 2. Mix in the fact that the Dreamcast couldn't play the new DVD format and the PS2 could, and the result was that everybody waited for the PS2 like it was the greatest thing since oxygen. And with Microsoft entering the market with their first console they're hyping as the machine for the "hardcore gamer", Sega just didn't have a chance.
I bought my Sega 32X for $19.99 when Toys R' Us cleared them out. I feel sorry for anybody who bought that thing for its original price.
Emperor Megas
06-17-2016, 10:37 AM
It was blowback from the 32X, which made people lose confidence in Sega.Which is sort of weird considering no one owned a 32X.
theclaw
06-20-2016, 10:55 AM
I dunno. I've always assumed technically 32X was profitable in the United States. Irrelevant as its global failure and damage to Sega's reputation made that.
Shicky256
06-26-2016, 09:04 PM
My favorite unsuccessful console would be the Dreamcast. It sold less than the Game Gear and the Sega Saturn and lived less than those 2 consoles, it was discontinued after 1 and half years ... had an incredible library and very good arcade ports.
I felt that the consumer was really stupid for not buying the Dreamcast ... the shadow of the forthcoming PS2 was immense and you really couldn't blame the consumer because PS2 was beyond expectations. It was really sad to see the DC fall, if Mexico had more confidence of the japanese and american business men we could easily kept the DC alive, it was very popular in my country ... well, pirated software was a huge reason for that popularity, but in that time we didn't have official distribution for home consoles, only for Neo Geo MVS and Arcade Divisions of Capcom and more publishers.
Honestly, the Dreamcast wouldn't have done that well even if it had lived longer. I think the problem was that Sega decided to abandon the Saturn early, so the Dreamcast was underpowered compared to the PS2. If it had lived long enough to compete with the Xbox, which also focused on the "hardcore" market, consumers would have obviously chosen the Xbox instead. Sega would have then had to pull a PC Engine (releasing hardware that can't compete with its next-gen peers, and then having to release a bunch of add-on hardware to barely keep pace with the competition) in order to survive, which probably wouldn't have worked to the company's favor.
The S
06-30-2016, 01:03 AM
Maybe I'm an apologist but I feel like the OUYA did better than anyone outside of the company had predicted and it still got labeled as a "failure".
Gamevet
06-30-2016, 05:39 PM
I think there's a fine line between successful and money pit. The Colecovision sold something like 3 million units, but the Adam add-on/computer sunk any profits the console produced for Coleco.
I think that the Sega Master system was a succesful "unsuccessful" console. The licenseced versions of the console in areas like Brazil, saw a long time of support and solid sales well into the early 90s.
danny_galaga
07-04-2016, 07:09 AM
Another vote for Dreamcast.
And I don't think anyone has mentioned the NeoGeo Pocket. That is a fantastic handheld, with an excellent thumbstick
The S
07-09-2016, 11:05 PM
Another vote for Dreamcast.
And I don't think anyone has mentioned the NeoGeo Pocket. That is a fantastic handheld, with an excellent thumbstick
I wish the NGP/NGPC had a larger homebrew community. It's just too darn good to let it stagnate.