Response: Dural is the Key...
Strider
nagi@cybergal.comHaving owned a Saturn for nearly 3 years, I am happy to report my satisfaction both with the machine and its software. I currently own more than 90 titles for the Saturn, and if I have to give an overall mark for the lot, I would have to give it at least 7 out of ten. It may not look good at first but if you get to play over 100 games like I do then you realize how impressive this score is, since the more you play the more you demand. I am so glad I didn't pick the PSX when the machines came out. In case you are wondering, I bought most of my games (all originals, and NOT pirates) in Hong Kong (as if you can get that many decent games in the US).
While the Saturn has provided me with a lot of enjoyment over the years, it's fact that the hardware has not been well designed. I am therefore very happy to hear about the introduction of a brand new piece of hardware, namely the Dural. I sincerely hope that Sega gets it right this time, as I am totally addicted to Sega games! However, I don't think backward compatibility is 100% a good idea.
It would be nice for the existing Saturn owners to be able to play their old games in the new machine. It would mean an immediate library of over 700 titles (in Japan, of course) for the new machine. But what about the first time buyers? If Sega tries to market Saturn software under a new "label", the first question I would ask is: why bother about the new machine? It would be very difficult to explain to the public the increased power of the new hardware if you continue to produce 32-bit software. The public would probably get suspicious. Then again this tactic may work in the US where the public is so discerning that most of them go for the PSX rather than the SS...
Backward compatibility is a plus IF Sega don't over do it. Production of 32-bit software should slow down so as not to compete with the new hardware. It only makes sense. This time Sega must show that it means business, that it is 100% behind the new hardware, and that it wants to make it a success. This means a 100% commitment of resources to the new machine, even at the expense of the old followers. While this may seem stupid at first sight, it makes sense because first, casual gamers don't care if the new machine is backward compatible or not (or else they wouldn't be "casual" gamers). Secondly, the old followers, and I mean FOLLOWERS, will follow Sega anyway, as they are most likely to be die-hard gamers who demand quality software, which Sega has been able to deliver (at least in SE Asia). Thirdly, a NEW machine that is backward compatible gives the impression that the designers haven't gone far enough into "improving" the hardware, and this will definitely put off potential buyers looking for THE console to own. The PSX is successful NOT because it is technically superior to the SS. It is successful because it is PACKAGED and PRESENTED as such. It is more like the Super Famicom whose limits are quickly reached - you know it has reached its limits when new games begin to look similar (due to the use of the same firmware features). I am in no way saying the PSX is a poor machine. On the contrary, it is a great machine with a few games that I really enjoyed. It just isn't THAT good.
The sad fact is that most buyers of game consoles buy them on the strength of their presentation, and this is where SS falls down badly. Sega must make sure their new hardware is at the cutting edge and is promoted as such. Backward compatibility is not a bad idea but it must not get in the way.