Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Buys Rare

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the rare-indeed dept.

Phwoar writes "Microsoft have announced their buyout of the games developer Rare. After a $375 million payoff Rare will now produce games solely for the Xbox. After Rare's recent releases for the Nintendo systems bombed, Nintendo decided to sell their 49% stake in the company last week rather than buy the company themselves. Google News has a nice collection of links to articles regarding the announcement." You might be reminded of Microsoft's purchase of Bungie a few years ago.

45 of 510 comments (clear)

  1. No Great Loss by nick_davison · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "You might be reminded of Microsoft's purchase of Bungie a few years ago."

    When Microsoft bought Bungie, it was to buy a "killer app" for the X-Box and nerf it's simultaneous PC development for fear it would show up the X-Box.

    Rare on the other hand has a whole one game announced and a legacy of Nintendo titles. Ultimately, it's just another shot fired in the console wars, rather than a loss to PC gaming, this time.

    I would buy an X-Box, knowing Bill loses as much money as I spend on each one sold - but he has more money than me and so is going to win that war.

    1. Re:No Great Loss by morgajel · · Score: 5, Informative

      if you read up on the release, nintendo kept a lot of IP, including the rights to some of their classics like donkey kong, etc.

      the legacy of nintendo titles is just that- a legacy... not really an asset.

      --
      Looking for Book Reviews? Check out Literary Escapism.
  2. Primates by EvlPenguin · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yippie. Now Steve Balmer won't be the only large, hairy monkey to hold an Xbox controller.

    --

    --
    #nohup cat /dev/dsp > /dev/hda & killall -9 getty
  3. this actually is a good thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Considering the fact that Nintendo is quickly picking up great 3rd part support, such as Squaresoft and Capcom's Resident Evil series, this actually makes a lot more sense then it did at first glance. the register, at http://www.theregus.com/content/54/26394.html, makes a great point about the logics of selling Rare, which is what many argued was Nintendo's greatest asset. Apparently, the founders of Rare, the Stamper Brothers, are soon to leave the company, so most of the innovation that came in Rare games was to leave them. I am a proud owner of a Gamecube, and all I can say is, we still get Starfox, and we can always just make another great 1st person shooter using the 007 liscense :)

  4. that doesn't mean they'll produce good games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    375 million? i think they paid that much just for the prestige of owning a previously successful game company. Now after they pay the cost to switching to the xbox development environment, they got to produce something worthwhile. I dunno about you, but 375 million is difficult to live up to. I think the idea it total garbage on microsoft's part.

    1. Re:that doesn't mean they'll produce good games by zaffir · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think it's less about making tons of money from Rare's games than just having the games on their console. Example:

      1) Rare makes another Goldeneye.
      2) Rare's new game makes MS $5 million
      3) 10,000 people buy X-Boxes just to play this game. Conversely, these people DON'T buy PS2s and Gamecubes because those systems don't have this cool new game.
      4) MS increases user base.
      5) ???
      6) Profit!

      --
      "Upon attaching the waterblock to my penis, I began to notice that I know nothing about computers." -- JRockway
    2. Re:that doesn't mean they'll produce good games by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Interesting



      1) Rare makes another Goldeneye.
      2) Rare's new game makes MS $5 million
      3) 10,000 people buy X-Boxes just to play this game. Conversely, these people DON'T buy PS2s and Gamecubes because those systems don't have this cool new game.
      4) MS increases user base.
      5) ???
      6) Profit!

      Microsoft buys Rare for $375 mill. Microsoft sells $5 mill in games for 4 million in profit. They sell a bunch more consoles at some unkown loss per console.

      Looks to me like Microsoft is still out $370 mill at least. Sure doesn't look like a profit to me.

    3. Re:that doesn't mean they'll produce good games by sweetooth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anyone that buys an X-Box just for golden eye probably already owns the other two or is going to shell out the money for the other two when a "killer game" comes out for those consoles. Especially if you consider that someone makeing a console purchase based on a "killer game" approach will probably have to have a game cube for zelda or a ps2 for Final Fantasy etc.

    4. Re:that doesn't mean they'll produce good games by parliboy · · Score: 3, Funny

      5) Microsoft loses $200 per box x 10,000 boxes.
      6) Bankruptcy!

      --
      "You're never ready, just less unprepared."
    5. Re:that doesn't mean they'll produce good games by brianvan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      (snicker)

      Microsoft has $60 billion in cash reserves, or something like that. $200 x 10,000 is 2 million dollars (evil pinky finger to lips).

      Microsoft is well known for throwing lots of money at lost causes until either:

      1. They know for sure no one will ever want what they're trying to sell
      2. They finally get it right and it takes off like wildfire

      Most of the time, the result is #2. (I'm using Internet Explorer right now, as a matter of fact.)

    6. Re:that doesn't mean they'll produce good games by Yorrike · · Score: 3, Informative
      No. Selling 100,000 copies would garner $5million gross at the retail level. When you buy a $50 game, the money does not get put in the shop's till and then given directly to MS next time their rep comes in.

      I believe the game companies make between $5 and $10 on each $50 game. In order for MS to make $5million, they need to sell more than 700,000 copies (that is, of course, disregarding the loss they incure with every sale of an Xbox). In order to make the $375 million Rare cost them, they must sell somewhere in the order of 60 million games (this is still disregarding the loss on every Xbox). Rare cost Microsoft way too much.

      Good one Nintendo. You pulled a fast one.

      --

      Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

    7. Re:that doesn't mean they'll produce good games by tc · · Score: 3, Informative
      Er, no. MS probably make somewhere in the region of $5 to $10 for every Xbox game sold in licencing fees. That's regardless of whether they are the developer or publisher of that title. In the case where they are both developer and publisher (as is now the case with Rare titles) the revenue per title is more likely to be in the $20 to $25 per unit range.

      Rare's titles have sold an average of around 1.4 million each throughout their history. Let's suppose they manage to do half that in future. Revenue for MS from each Rare title might therefore be around the $14-21M range.

      Suppose Rare ship another 5 titles over the lifetime of the Xbox. That's getting up to $100M in revenue. Now factor in the extra bonus of having more quality titles on Xbox - which should increase console sales and therefore revenue for all other games sales. Suddenly, it looks like MS's increased revenue as a result of the purchase might be quite substantial, and the purchase price of $375M looks like not a bad deal at all.

    8. Re:that doesn't mean they'll produce good games by edwdig · · Score: 3, Informative

      Dig around at any GameCube website and you'll find that Rare was the first company outside of Nintendo to get GameCube dev kits.

      The whole point of the sale was so the owners could get out of it and retire. They offered to sell the company to Nintendo first, but they decided they weren't worth the money, hence the sale to Microsoft.

  5. Double take by Akardam · · Score: 5, Funny

    Am I the only person who read that as "Microsoft Bugs Rare"?

    More proof that speed-reading CAN cause heart attacks. Or (insert soft drink of choice) to be spit all over the monitor, at any gate.

  6. If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em. by cloudscout · · Score: 3, Flamebait

    It's an old story. Developers aren't exactly flocking to the XBox platform and most that do develop for the Xbox, also develop for the superior PS2 and GameCube platforms.

    It's a last-ditch effort by Microsoft to take control of more game developers in an attempt to slow their continued decline in 3rd place.

    1. Re:If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em. by Chemical · · Score: 5, Insightful
      What makes PS2 and GameCube "superior"? Because they are not Microsoft? Bear in mind that Sony and Nintendo areevil ruthless/faceless/heartless companies too (Nintendo to a lesser extent).

      Fact is, beside the lack of games and the silly controller, the Xbox is a superior system. If you have ever played one you would know. The graphics on the PS2 just can't come anywhere close to the Xbox. The built in hard drive is a brilliant feature. It has an MP3 (or maybe it's WMA) ripper built in, as well as the ability to play your MP3s in certain games. It's got built in networking. People also like to bitch about how you have to buy a remote to watch DVDs on the Xbox. But with the PS2 you have to buy a network adapter to play online, a multitap for 4 player games, and a memory card just to be able to save.

      Quit dissing the Xbox. It actually is pretty cool, even if it is from Microsoft.

    2. Re:If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em. by NineNine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Call me nuts, but no matter how great the graphics are, if they don't have any games I want to play, I don't really care.

      I'm willing to sacrifice a tiny bit of graphics quality for games with good gameplay, stories, variety, etc.

      And as far as having a hard drive, that's a main reason that I didn't buy an X-Box. Your X-Box is gonna die loooong before my PS2. In case you've never owned a computer, the hard drive is *always* the weakest point.

    3. Re:If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em. by mosch · · Score: 5, Funny
      beside the lack of games
      Colour me stupid, but I tend to think that a superior game console that doesn't have games is best defined as a paperweight.
    4. Re:If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em. by mao+che+minh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think that the Xbox, for all of it's bells and whistles, just isn't that solid of a system. I have not seen any title on the Xbox that had graphics so compelling to persuade me to declare that the Xbox is the top graphical powerhouse. It is all about how much memory developers can use, how easy it is to program for, and how many special gimmicks you can get out of the system.

      For example, the little GameCube has cranked out a few graphically amazing and all out awe inspiring titles with Mario Sunshine, the Resident Evil remake, and Animal Crossing. Resident Evil has the best graphics that I have seen in a new generation game. Mario Sunshine is amazingly complex, big, and fun. Animal Crossing is just fun as hell to play, innovatiuve with it's real time clock and animal people that remember things, and interactive capabilities with the Gameboy Advance.

      The majority of game players, myself included, had jumped the gun on the GameCube and declared that it would never have any kind of real potential. We were proved wrong. A lot of people, myself included, origionally touted the Xbox as the premiere system once it hit. Well, it turned out to be not all that great (comparatively) after all.

      P.S. we are sick and tired of hearing about Halo. It ain't all that.

    5. Re:If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em. by Tim+Browse · · Score: 5, Informative

      As some guy from MS pointed out when asked about the HD reliability of the XBox, he reckoned the DVD drives used in current generation consoles (XBox, PS2, GC) were the most likely point of failure. The hard drive was definitely lower down his list of things to worry about.

      Shrug.

      Tim

    6. Re:If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em. by Cryptnotic · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Bear in mind that Sony and Nintendo areevil ruthless/faceless/heartless companies too (Nintendo to a lesser extent).


      No. Nintendo is not a lesser evil.

      http://www.gamersgraveyard.com/repository/oddities /nintendosuits.html

      --
      My other first post is car post.
    7. Re:If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em. by Cryptnotic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sega Saturn was superior to Sony Playstation (two processors, more memory, etc). Sega Dreamcast was superior to PS2 in some ways (it had a more "normal" graphics system and each one came with a modem).

      Sometimes, the superior systems don't "win".

      --
      My other first post is car post.
    8. Re:If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em. by stubear · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One use of this feature can be found in Project Gotham Racing. I can rip my favorine tunes from my CD collection and build a custom playlist. Instead of listening to the crappy in-game music and mindless radio DJs, I can drive to King's X, Van Halen or whatever I want. I think it was a brilliant feature with a promising future.

  7. Cyclic links by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 5, Funny
    Slashdot: "Google News has a nice collection of links to articles regarding the announcement."

    Google News: "Microsoft Buys Rare - Slashdot - 11 minutes ago"

    Slashdot: "Google News has a nice collection of links to articles regarding the announcement."

    Google News: "Microsoft Buys Rare - Slashdot - 11 minutes ago"

    Slashdot: "Google News has a nice collection of links to articles regarding the announcement."

    Google News: "Microsoft Buys Rare - Slashdot - 11 minutes ago"

    Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

    --
    main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
  8. Does anybody else smell desperation? by second+class+skygod · · Score: 4, Interesting

    375 megabucks is a lot of cash. MS has had significant problems marketing XBox. It seems to me that they must be really worried about losing a source of games.

    Does anyone know how many employees work at Rare? I know it's not distributed evenly but they must be pretty happy about it on the average.
    Especially so for those whose stock is already vested.

    -scsg

  9. Money buys quality-but its too late by Gizzmonic · · Score: 4, Funny
    People who liked Rare that much have already purchased a Gamecube. And if they do like Rare that much, they probably like Nintendo as well-enough that they aren't going to sell that Gamecube.

    Anyway, Rare doesn't have as much of a pedigree as Microsoft probably thinks it does. I'm betting most people associate Perfect Dark, Donkey Kong, etc more with Nintendo than Rare. They are going to have to shout from the makers of perfect dark on any future commercial advertising Xbox titles by Rare if they expect anyone to care, or even notice...

    --
    (-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
  10. Foolish Purchase by Rura+Penthe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not to sound like an MS hater here, but this is an incredibly poor purchase. Rare as a development studio was cut loose by Nintendo because (in addition to making up very little of Nintendo's revenue for 2001 and 2002 prior to Starfox) they missed deadlines and put out subpar games (DK64, Jet Force Gemini, Perfect Dark (if you can't stand the horrid framerate)) for the last several years. To make matters worse, most of the decent devs (including the founders) have left to form their own companies and Rare itself only has two or three marketable licenses (Perfect Dark, Banjo Kazooie, and Conker (maaaaybe)). So MS is paying hundreds of millions for a game developer recently known for its overbudget, late games that aren't very good and doesn't even get any big licenses in the bargain. Why didn't they just sink $10 mil into 20 or 30 dev houses to fund a bunch of big exclusive games? They'd get more results faster and almost assuredly higher quality.

    With the delay of Panzer Dragoon Orta to 2003 the Xbox's Christmas lineup is also fairly lackluster and sales this Xmas could be very poor. Of course, if MS keeps pumping marketing dollars into it maybe they can convince America that the console is doing great.

    I'm not trying to start a console flamewar (I go where the games are in most cases, and I will probably pick up an Xbox at the next price drop), but with Xbox's sales figures for Japan (the-magicbox.com) showing that in some weeks even the PSOne is outselling it, I wonder if the Japanese game studios will be abandoning what little development they already do on Xbox and concentrating on the two surviving consoles instead.

  11. Bungie, Rare, ... Sega by jvmatthe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think the obvious next move is for Microsoft to buy Sega. Their own developers have some ok sports games, but Sega would buy them some real sports clout along with some younger generation appeal that they could use to balance their library of titles.

    Just think, if they could claim exclusive rights to Sega's line of sports games, including NFL, NBA, NHL, baseball, tennis, and college football lines. They could be the premiere sports games for the Xbox Live online service, for example. And a Virtua Fighter would put Xbox squarely in the sights of many fighting game fans, since then DoA, VF, and Soul Calibur would all be available on one system. Add online opponents and tourneys, and they could potentially hand out more hats of money. Then with Sonic and those cute little Super Monkey Balls, they'd have a possible in with children and youngsters that aren't necessarily into the older games. Make all of these exclusives, and the Xbox looks a whole lot better of an investment.

    You know they've thought about it, and now we know the stakes: $3.75e8 dollars for someone like Rare that doesn't have the rep or the library of Sega. Sega's gotta be worth what...twice that...in franchises and development talent alone.

    While we're talking numbers, how many units of games does Rare have to sell to be worth it to MicroSoft? Or, perhaps more importantly, how many monthly online subscriptions? And how long is it going to take them to pay it off, given that they're going to incur more costs, in terms of development and promotion, just to get a game out the door?

    The usual disclaimer: I'm not an Xbox or MS fan. Read my blog and you'll see where my interests lie. I'm just commenting on the situation as I see it...

    --
    Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
    1. Re:Bungie, Rare, ... Sega by CondeZer0 · · Score: 5, Informative

      > I think the obvious next move is for Microsoft to buy Sega.
      They already have tried:
      http://www.redherring.com/insider/2002/0716/sega07 1602.html

      And after that they tried to buy Nintendo for 25Bn(I think to remember 2.5Bn,
      but in the news sites I found it says 25Bn!):
      http://www.vnunet.com/News/1131308
      http://gameinfowire.com/news.asp?nid=263

      I don't remember much, I just found this links by looking in google for less
      than one minute, I'm sure you can find some better info elsewhere in the net.

      My favorite part of this history is the answer of Nintendo: "We weren't sure
      what to think when Microsoft made the offer. In fact I was surprised - we
      didn't need the money. I thought it was a joke."

      hehehe...

      I wonder what will they try next, it's obvious that they are desperate for
      finding some other business now that the software licensing is going to become
      obsolete thanks to opensource, I think they should stick to what(only) they are
      good at: mouses ;)

      \\Uriel

      --
      "When in doubt, use brute force." Ken Thompson
    2. Re:Bungie, Rare, ... Sega by sehryan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I doubt it will happen since Sega is currently in bed with Nintendo. There is a reason you are seeing Sonic on the GBA and GC lately.

      --
      The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
  12. Speaking of Microsoft buying things... by goldspider · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...looks like game companies aren't all that Microsoft has been able to buy.

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
  13. rare's best game by sirinek · · Score: 3, Interesting

    and one they should update for the XBOX.....

    R/C Pro-AM!!!! :)

    sorry, had to. i looove that game.

    siri

    1. Re:rare's best game by Explo · · Score: 4, Informative

      and one they should update for the XBOX..... R/C Pro-AM!!!! :)


      IMO Rare's best game was Underwurlde, produced when they were still called Ultimate and produced games for 8-bit computers. ;) Sabre Wulf was not bad either, and I guess Knight Lore was pretty good, but I never saw it. All these games were mentioned on rareware.com, but sadly the information seems to have disappeared since. But you can get all that information on the Ultimate-Wurlde and get either nostalgic, enlightened about history or just plain bored. ;)

      --
      Everyone who makes generalizations should be shot.
  14. Nintendo, Rare come out ahead; MS breaks even by Tofuhead · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Nintendo sells their shares in Rare and top-off their coffers. They win.

    Rare makes off with MS money, the finest money that money can buy. They win too.

    MS gets a development house that used to turn out hits, but has floundered in recent years. Tim and Chris Stamper are leaving. That leaves Conker, Perfect Dark, and that's about it. No Donkey Kong or anything else owned by Nintendo.

    About the only _real_ downside to Nintendo consumers (IMO) is that any sort of RC Pro-Am sequel will be an xbox exclusive. Boohoo. On a lot of the gamer website forums, this has been a huge non-issue for the past few days, since Rare hasn't been playing with the big boys in terms of game quality/quantity for quite a while.

    < tofuhead >

    --
    It is still the dark of night.
  15. How appropriate... by Dan+Crash · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now Microsoft will be able to say what we already knew: "If it's good and it's Microsoft, it's gotta be Rare!"

    --
    He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
  16. I need new glasses. by augros · · Score: 3, Funny

    I thought it read "Microsoft Buys Rare Sofa". Just the thought of Lazy-Boy XP makes me shudder.

  17. Re:Sega made (past tense) awesome games by ZaMoose · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Play some Super Monkey Ball 1/2, Virtua Fighter 4, Sega Soccer Slam, or Sega Sports Tennis, then come back and post that comment again. I dare ya.

    There's not much that's more fun (at least when it comes to video games) than getting three friends together and playing Monkey Fight 2 for a couple of hours.

    --
    I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
  18. Re:If this is not "anti-competitive", then what is by spectecjr · · Score: 5, Informative

    not saying that SONY would not, if they had the money to do it -- oh wait, they DO have the money to buy a couple outside developers just for shits and giggles, but didn't.

    What kind of crack are you smoking, exactly?

    Nintendo bought Rare, as well as a few other houses.

    Sony bought Psygnosis (Wipeout), Square (Final Fantasy; major shareholder), Polyphony Digital (the guys who did Gran Turismo), Incog (Twisted Metal), Verant (Everquest), Red Zone (989 Sports), Naughty Dog (Crash Bandicoot), The Station (Online game center), RTIME Inc. (online game infrastructure company), Millennium (Medievil), Arc Entertainment Inc., Sugar and Rockets Inc. (Kurushi), and Contrail Inc.
    (Wild Arms).

    So, I guess Sony's customers are suffering because of this game buy out thing?

    Or do you still claim that sony DIDN'T do this?

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  19. Re:OT: Its effect not affect. by PotatoHead · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I agree with you for the most part, but I must say that Perfect Dark is a great game. Frame rate could have been quicker, but that was just because they pushed the N64 hard.

    I keep an N64 around just for that one to be played in multi-player mode once in a while.

    --
    Blogging because I can...
  20. Stupid Business Model, too! by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "You might be reminded of Microsoft's purchase of Bungie a few years ago."

    When Microsoft bought Bungie, it was to buy a "killer app" for the X-Box and nerf it's simultaneous PC development for fear it would show up the X-Box.

    Throwing away money to assure exclusivity, same as with their acquisition of rights to FASA's BattleTech video game development (IP value, if nothing else... too bad they don't roll out Ralph Reed's BattleMech!)

    Rare on the other hand has a whole one game announced and a legacy of Nintendo titles. Ultimately, it's just another shot fired in the console wars, rather than a loss to PC gaming, this time.

    More good money after bad. Seems apparent, to me, that without their monopoly they couldn't shoot fish in a berrel. I can't recall where I've seen this strategy of spending money like crazy on to prop up a dying horse, but I do recall it's unusual in the extreme to see it succeed. They're hemmoraging cash and the estimates (from CNN) are they'll get 1.5 million units into the Europe-Middle East-Africa market, and Sony/Nintendo will cover the remaining sales of 12.7 million units.

    IMHO Sony and Nintendo are smarter to leave much game development out of house, in the hands of garage developers everywhere, which fosters more creativity than:

    "We bought you for $375 million dollars from some guy who dragged the sacks of cash off to the bank, while laughing his head off, now here's a soda machine, a fax for ordering pizzas, a bunch of former Office coders to help you out, NOW BE GREAT OR YOUR'RE ALL GONNA BE FIRED!"

    It's practically a guarranteed failure.

    What next? Steve Balmer running around on a stage, getting all sweaty and telling us how great the new X-Box Solitaire is? Actually, that might sell...

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  21. Exclusivity by Winterblink · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I have two thoughts on this.

    1. Now all of a sudden a lot of really good games that may have been produced and released on different platforms are only going to be for the X-Box. I was hoping to see the PS2 doing a sequel to Perfect Dark or Conker's but I guess that won't happen.

    2. This is EXACTLY what Microsoft needs for the floundering X-Box. So far the machine has had only a handful of decent games that are exclusive to the machine, and a whole lot being developed for all platforms. If I own a PS2, why should I bother getting an X-Box for a game that is available on my machine? The more imaginative developers jump on to the X-Box bandwagon (or in this case are lassoed and pulled onto the bandwagon) the better it is for the platform.

    Whether any of this is a good thing I guess remains to be seen. Considering that nothing spectacular has been heard to be coming from Rare (at least any time soon), maybe this won't make a difference worth mentioning. Anywho, just my 2c. Agree or disagree?

    --
    "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
    -Hoban Washburn
    1. Re:Exclusivity by Winterblink · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Hmm...manipulation, greed, and Microsoft. It's all so...familiar, isn't it?

      Capitalism at its worst indeed. But, the goal of a competetive market is to, well, compete. It has to be hard for companies to do that without crushing their competition. Imagine if there was no restrictions to that effect? What kind of monopoly would MS have today? *shudder*

      You're very correct regarding the Nintendo thing, I totally forgot about how they rampaged through the 80's. The SMS was a pretty cool system too, had some neat games.

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
  22. The Sega Saturn was inferrior. by Inoshiro · · Score: 3, Informative

    The PSX had an internal MPEG decoder (allowing higher-quality, fullscreen playback of MPEG files than the SH2-bound softdecoding the Sega Saturn used), a 3D acceleration engine based around triangles instead of quads. Its SH2 CPUs were slower (even if there were two of them, not all games took advantage of SMP), and its overall MIPS level was lover than than of the PSX. It was also very hard to program for, as the SMP locking was beyond most game programmers, or wasn't really as beneficial as Sega had hoped. A shame, because the SMP parts were more expensive to build -- which led to Sega losing money on each unit.

    The PSX won because of its games, possible because 3rd party people had an easy-to-use developer kit which provided easy MPEG playback for cut scenes, an easier to write for 3D engine (triangles vs. quads againt, remember the NV1? It failed because it was quad-based), and because it was easier to write UMP games than SMP ones (although Yu had Virtua Fighter running with each processor computing one of the players' characters, this was the exception).

    Sometimes, superior systems do win even if people seem to think something else was superior (although the PS2 is another discussion ;)).

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  23. Re:Foolish Purchase??? by rseuhs · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Well, MS has lost 0.75 billion so far on XBox, the 0.35 billion for Rare is not a small percentage of that.

    Also this adds up. MS will need over 1 billion PER YEAR just to keep XBox alive.

  24. Re:If this is not "anti-competitive", then what is by pastie · · Score: 3, Informative
    ..., Square (Final Fantasy; major shareholder), ...


    At least in this case, they were buying into the company to help them out of the sticky situation they got themselves into by making a poor and very expensive film, which put Square into dire financial difficulties. Can't blame Sony for that, IMHO :)