Dreamcast DVD: Why did Sega not release it?

[theaveng]

Anyone know why Sega choose to release Dreamcast with CD-ROM instead of DVD-ROM? Considering it had to compete against same-generation systems like PS2,GCN,X-box that *do* have DVDs (and therefore more program storage space), equipping the Dreamcast with a CD seems like a major mistake.

Any ideas on what Sega was thinking?

[Charlesaway]

I don't know the official reason, but my guess is copy protection. Just like GameCube's weird disks, it makes them harder to copy. Except, Sega left in CD support, and somebody released ISO's of the Dreamcast games.

Also, to keep control of licensing would be another good reason to use a proprietary format.

[CrazyImpmon]

Keep in mind DC came out in '99 and DVD had been out just 2 years and they were still expensive as heck. IIRC the cheapest DVD player were like $500 back then and I doubt Sega was going to release a DC DVD hybrid that cost as much as a Neo geo system.

They were wise to skip DVD then.

[Blackjax]

This one's easy: cost

Remember how expensive DVD players were around the time the Dreamcast was being developed/released. They eventually announced the DVD player for DC would be released seperately, rumored to be an upgrade, that idea was aborted. Probably they remembered the market segmentation with SegaCD/32x

[Sylentwulf]

I thought Dreamcast games were some weird hybrid GD-Rom?

[asharru]

from http://mozcom.com/~sknkwrks/gdcontroller.html


The Sega Dreamcast GD-ROM system utilizes Oak Technology's OTI-9220 CD-ROM controller which is a single chip integration of Sony's "CXD-3005R" DSP/Servo control and Oak Technology's "OTI-912" CD-ROM decoder.

So what does this mean? Sega had their "proprietary" GD-ROM system designed to use media with 2 times the capacity of CD-ROM discs, but with off-the-shelf CD-ROM components, and may have used a technique of running the spindle motor at half the speed required for CD-ROM's in reading 2x density GD-ROM discs-- tricking the pickup into believing it's reading off data from a CD-ROM disc at "x" (CAV) spindle rpm when it is actually reading a GD-ROM disc at "y" spindle rpm (x divided by 2=y). With same data read rates as with a CD-ROM disc running at twice it's rpm, the optical head, focus servo controls, signal processors, etc etc. aren't aware it's actually reading data off from a larger capacity medium. In other words, the GD-ROM disc is nothing more than a "passively accelerated" (tightly packed) CD-ROM disc, "decelerated" to emulate a CD-ROM by running the spindle motor at half the rpm!

[Achika]

Let's not forget the DVD device the Sega premiered at E3 in 2000(I think it was that year). It was in plans, but then got nixed to I think cost and that Sega didn't feel that the system really needed it (like the DC needed a karaoke machine either. :P ) Simple: too little, too late.

It was that same year that Sega premiered their MP3 VMU-ish component.

When the DC was concieved, DVD wasn't as wide spread as it is today. Why would they use a software medium that almost no one had heard of?

[theaveng]

So a Dreamcast CD holds 1.4 Gigabytes as compared to the PS2's single-layer DVD of about 5 Gigabytes.

In 2000, Sony released the DVD-equipped PS2. Sega could have done the same with Dreamcast 1 year earlier. The price difference wasn't that great in only 1 year's time. Purchasing standardized 1999 DVDs would have been cheaper than the thousands spent on Non-Recurring Engineering of inventing a double-density CD. (IMHO)



So, if I get my hands on a Dreamcast emulator, does that mean I won't be able to read the DD-CDs on my PC?

Troy

[moycon]

The price difference wasn't that great in only 1 year's time.

Where you getting this from?? Wide screen TVs went from $6000 to about $2,500 in one year. The DC was $199 when it came out. A year+ later Sony was taking a loss selling a $300 unit. Lets just assume the price difference a year earlier was only $100, So now you have Sega trying to push a $400 console. Which is right about what low end DVD players cost at that time. To a bunch of folks most of which don't even know what DVD is?? I'd love to have seen the DC DVD compatible at the launch... I would not have paid $400+ for a console.

[theaveng]

Sega could have sold the Dreamcast-DVD at $300... same as the PS2. People would have bought it. By dropping the modem, they could reduce cost and use that extra money for the DVD installation.

Also, why do you say people never heard of DVD in 1999? I bought my very first DVD movie all the way back in 97! By 99, DVDs were everywhere... right next to VHS tapes.

Troy

[asharru]

for whatever it's worth

from http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlot...og/3647444.htm


"The average cost of a DVD player dropped from $490 in 1997 to $270 in 1999 to $190 last year, with a few models falling below the $100 barrier, according to the Consumer Electronics Association. VCRs, introduced in 1974, cost $331 in 1986. They averaged $70 last year.

Although DVDs are less than 5 years old, they will occupy a spot in one in three U.S. homes by year's end, according to CEA. VCRs didn't reach that milestone until a decade after their introduction."

[Captain Wrong]

I strongly doubt Sega could have sold the DC at $300. I still would have bought one, but considering they were (literally) giving them away and Joe Q. Public still kind of seemed uninterested I don't think that would have worked. In fact, I think the fact that the DC was less than the PS2 was probably one of it's biggest selling points. I think the average person bought one as a stop-gap until the PS2 came out anyway, so $199 (or less when most people probably bought them) didn't seem quite so much.

As for the DVD add-on or whatever, here's my personal conspiracy theory. I don't think it, or the MP3 VMU, were ever real products despite the E3 mock ups. I think Sega was planning to get out of the hardware biz from the get go but had too much $$$ wrapped up in develping the DC and had to release the sucker to try to recoup some losses (through licensing, I'd imagine, since the hardware was still sold at a loss AKAIK.)

I think Sega threw these things up there (and the Zip drive attachment, remember that one?) to try and bolster consumer confidence in the machine. Remember, this was about the time the PS2 was coming out in Japan and pundits were already pronouncing the DC dead.

It was an easy out for Sega because they never actually promised anything as far as those add-ons go (despite all of them being covered in the Official DC magazine.) Since they were all in the "prototype/mock-up" stage, Sega probably wouldn't have run into a situation like Mattel and the computer add-on because they didn't promise anything.

Considering the past consumer acceptance of Sega console add-ons such as the 32x and Sega CD (and the fact that every damn magazine couldn't mention the DC with out reminding you of how Sega cocked up in the past) I think it was really smart of them to leave all that alone. I think the GD-Rom format was a good idea, given the time the DC was developed and released. Shame for them though it was cracked so easily.

About emulation. First off, I think it's going to be a long while before you see really useable DC emulation. Second, you're going to need some real horsepower to do it (I'd think). Third, no you can't read a GD-Rom in a CD-Rom. Just won't work. It can read the outer cd part, but the more dense GD part (where most of the game info is, I think) will not work.

Just buy a real DC and save your self some headaches.

[moycon]

Also, why do you say people never heard of DVD in 1999

Im not saying people never heard of DVD in 1999. I'm saying the majority of the people didn't own a DVD player or even understand what a DVD player was and did. Dont take my word for it. Look up the figures on the net.

By the end of 1999 (Dec.) 4 million US households had DVD players. Thats a drop in the consumer bucket. The early players weren't even the best players, they tended to skip and digitize the picture I know I have 3 DVD players and about 250 DVDs. Plus they were expensive. After a couple years they caught on very quickly and as such, like all technology the price dropped very quickly, but they didn't explode until well after the DC came out.... Prolly right around the PS2 came out. Here's a link for anyone that wants to do some actual research on DVD technology

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techrev...timeline_x.htm

Argue all you want theaveng if the Dreamcast had a DVD player built in when it was released in Sept of 1999 it would have A.) Been expensive (Keep in mind they didnt design and build the DC in a month it had been in production for some time and players were alot of money) and B.) Sucked....all the bugs hadn't been worked out, you say you had a DVD player in 1997... You should know.

[YoshiM]

As it was mentioned before, price for licensing of the hardware. It's not like Sega went and whipped up the DC is a few months time. It takes a couple of years or more to come up with a solid viable platform.

So think of it, at the time the DC was on the drawing board (prior to November 1998, which is when the DC was released in Japan) DVD drives were expensive and DVD titles were starting to filter into the discount stores (no matter what anyone says, if a media doesn't make it to the masses via discount stores like K-Mart or Wal-Mart, it's not going to fly or not gain mainstream acceptance). To remain competitive with current competition (Playstation and the N64) they had to use what's available at the time of planning. Also add to the fact that during the blueprint stage of the DC the PS2 was a rumor (with added rumor that it was going to use DVD hardware). I don't think actual specs really didn't hit the scene until just before or just after the DC was released. Then the PS2 was released in Japan in March of 2000. If they DID release the DC with a DVD player, it probably would have cost as much as a 3DO when it came out and probably wouldn't be compatible with certain movies, load slow, and still not have the backing of 3rd parties due to cost of development.

My 2 zenny on this

[Arcade Antics]

Sega could have sold the Dreamcast-DVD at $300... same as the PS2.

Uh... what? People didn't even buy them when they were LESS than $300.

I was wondering what happened to the virtual crack pipe... :P

[Achika]

By dropping the modem, they could reduce cost and use that extra money for the DVD installation.

In 1998-1999 how much was the cost of a 56K modem compaired to a DVD player? A big gap I think, so what? They'd save a few bucks? I'd rather have my online capabilities than some low end DVD player.

[theaveng]

..all the bugs hadn't been worked out, you say you had a DVD player in 1997... You should know.

It amuses me that some persons CAN'T READ! :lol: I did not say I bought a dvd player in 97. I said I bought a dvd MOVIE in 97. See the difference?

Also, now that we have price data, we see that the price difference between a Dreamcast-era DVD (99) and a Playstation-era DVD (2000) was only $40. So, I'm not buying the "it was too expensive" argument.

I think it's interesting that you guys assume Dreamcast would have flopped no matter what Sega did. Why is that exactly?




>>>Also add to the fact that during the blueprint stage of the DC the PS2 was a rumor (with added rumor that it was going to use DVD hardware). >>>

Now THERE'S a good argument. Sega didn't know the competition was going to wipe them with DVD technology. That I can believe.

Troy

[moycon]

*sigh*
Yeah yer right dude, It's all so clear now that you pointed out it was a dvd you purchased and not a player. Man I wish you had been in charge of Sega. The Dreamcast would still be around today (prolly #1) and with an awesome DVD player built in ta boot. Sega sucks. theaveng is the smartest guy ever!!!

[YoshiM]

@theaveng: Don't think 1999 for Dreamcast. It first hit gamer's hands in 1998. Even though it's a few measley months Japanese and US launch dates, you don't just replace hardware that was tested, tried, and had software written for with different technology and expect it to work. It takes research and a lot of testing to make sure such a drive works with existing architecture. Think of the fiasco with the Saturn when they scrapped the idea of the ultimate 2D system and tried to get it to be a great 3D gaming platform as well, all at the last minute. Not to mention they were probably building DC units months before launch. Then you have to figure that, if Sega would replace the CDROM with a DVDROM for America, Japan (the place they must succeed in at any cost) gamers would be PISSED. So there you shoot yourself in the foot.

If Sega waited, yeah, I could have seen a DVD unit. However, I think Sega really needed to get a system out to get them out of financial hot water (theory-they didn't do so well with the Saturn).

One of the reasons I think DC flopped was because it didn't have EA as a third party developer. No Madden, no Fifa, no ton of other games EA is behind. People eat that stuff up and flock to the games because they are good. Sure we had cross-platform games thanks to Midway, though they are the video game making sluts . Another is that Sega had sullied it's name with the stunts they pulled with the addons for Genesis and the Saturn. Third was that PSX was kicking ass and taking names. When news of a PS2 was getting more and more detailed and then the mention of "backwards compatibility" was added, it was a no-brainer for the masses. Their original game investment of PSX games, memory cards, and controllers would remain intact as they all could be used on the new PS2. Plus you add the platform exclusive games that get some gamers wet (Final Fantasy, Tekken, Gran Turismo, etc.) and you get a death sentence for the DC.

[Griking]

I'm one of those people who feel that videogame console are to play games on, not watch movies on. That's what I have cable television, a VCR and a dedicated DVD player for. Why would I want to pay extra just to have the ability to watch movies on my Dreamcast?