Slashdot Mirror
XBOX 360=Dreamcast 2.0?
Tenken writes "1UP has an eye opening article on the many similarities between the XBOX 360 and the Dreamcast. It's actually pretty scary, case in point: both consoles launched a year before their major competitors, and even their logos are incredibly similar. The article also goes on to mention why the 360 will not fail miserably like the Dreamcast. "
I love my Dreamcast. I still play it daily (used the HD output for years to my projectors). Never owned a PSx. I still have (younger) friends who knock on my door all the time to get their Dreamcast fix.
I also couldn't give up my Intellivision for a Nintendo for 2 years (Metroid finally did it). Graphics hype wasn't enough. My friends with Nintendo came to my house for all-night Intellivision gaming. Playability was tops. I still have my Intellivision for a few games. Love that controller.
I can't see picking up an X360 for gaming. I own 2 X-Box consoles, 90% for my Media Center Extenders, 10% for my broad's vampire games. Since back in the day, my gaming was PC gaming. Castlevania and Conan, Ultima, Utopia, etc.
Console gaming for me was never about video hype. I love repeated playability with longevity, and catchy music/sounds. Graphics have always been better on my PC, but I turn them to the lowest settings. We're getting really close to "Life" rather than "Life-like" and when we get there, I'll put graphics near the top once I can truly be reality immersed.
There aren't many gamers like me, I think. I'm not a market. I spend a TON on hardware, very little on software. I'd love to find a group/site I can communicate with, consisting of people with similar gaming issues.
Chu Chu Rocket, anyone?
The slashdot editors were probably not assigning the XBOX 360 to have the same value as the Dreamcast, but rather just doing a comparison. But since they have performed the assignment, the XBOX 360 will fail several years ago, in EXACTLY the same way as the Dreamcast. :-)
that Microsoft is not coming off an abysmal failure of a console, it's coming from a console that did relatively well. It seems a lot of people were just so tired of Sega constantly releasing overpriced hardware(eg 32x, Genesis CD, Sega Saturn) with a very limited software selection that they just gave up on Sega and wouldn't even give the Dreamcast a try. Of course Sony's overhyped PS2 announcement didn't help either, but I don't think that was the main cause of the demise of the dreamcast. Microsoft(in the realm of video games anyway) is coming off a somewhat surprising hit with the XBox, a relatively long lived console with lots of games to choose from. They could still fail, but I don't think it will be for the same reasons the Dreamcast failed.
Monstar L
I've already read this article, and I don't feel that many of those "similarities" are even relevant. After all, couldn't much of the same be said of other consoles?
The same thing occurred to me when I saw the white 360 controller in Walmart. "Is the Dreamcast back?" And then I saw the 360 logo. Interesting...
Because you'd have to be an 8 year old mathematical genius to figure out TFA.
Maybe it's because I'm old [33] or something but that article made little and/or no sense to me on any level.
Idiots.
#13 on the list is "Peter Moore spearheaded the marketing" and most of the actual similarities seem like Marketing aspects of it so I think a better headline would read "How Peter Moore's marketing style resembles Peter Moore's marketing style"
As DRM and other crap like lawsuits threaten the mod comunity I just hope they remember that cool mods help sell consoles.Half the fun is finding out what you can do with it BESIDES play games.If they cut that out I'll just build my boys new computers and forget about consoles.At least then I'll know they'll get as much use out of it as our trusty old DC.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Has anyone else noticed that 1up excels at taking up 2 or 3 pages of space in their articles, despite never actually saying anything? They read like one of those papers you write in school when you aren't sure what you want to say, but you started writing anyway because it's due the next morning.
Of course it's true, that's an assignment statement, not a comparison ;). Sheesh.
WTF? The stupid article is more fortune-telling than anything else. There's nothing technical or logical about the article. It's basically looking for signs of omens. If Mars is aligned on Venus' right on the launch date, the XBox 360 is bound to succeed....
EvilCON - Made Famous by
They assigned it the value of Dreamcast 2.0. There hasn't been a Dreamcast 2.0 yet, so the XBOX 360 is currently null (Nothing in Visual Basic).
Therefore, it actually doesn't exist. Quod erat demonstratum etc.
(Now, having seen many pictures of the console before this, my head will surely explode in either case.)
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
They saved the real reason it would succeed until the end. Piles and piles of cash. M$ would all but give the console away to make sure that it succeeded and that is the reason it will do well. People will have $10 worth of anything that is free.
Perhaps the rest of the PC industry could counter this rise of the console by designing a standard PC spec for gaming. First create a few simple categories. I suggest "PC Gaming Machine 2005 Level 1, 2 and 3". In each category spec out three of four machines (eg one amd with a nvidia, one intel with nvidia, etc) built with decent components. Level 1 machines have top of the range components, level 2 is where most people will be, level 3 is entry gaming. The games publishers could just test their game against these machines specs and get a tick in the "PC Gaming Machine 2005 Level 2 Compatible" (or whatever) box.
Simple, understandable and doesn't need to cost the Earth.
I used to have a better sig but it broke.
Best. Console. Ever.
If the xbox 360 can have half the amount of original games that the Dreamcast had, I'm getting one.
And yes, even though I hate Microsoft, Sony has become the new Evil. DRM on *everything* seems to be their goal, and the PS3 will be the ultimate foot-in-the door in their quest to lock down all things digital.
Blu-Ray. Just say no!
-Copyright law #69:Whenever Mickey Mouse is about to enter the public domain,copyrights get extended by 25 years.
Listing fluffy similarities between two systems isn't "pretty scary". It's pretty easy to do when you set your standards for a similarity at such a meaninglessly low level.
OMG!! Both were white systems when the previous generations were black. Noooz!!!
Calling the PS3 "far superior at this point is rediculous. Mentioning "hi-def" when the Dreamcast was released before there was basically any hi-def sets in homes and when the PS3 is also supporting hi-def is moronic.
The article itself was so fluffy I can't believe it made it to the front page. But hey, if you didn't RTFA in this case it only takes aobut 20 seconds and there's lots of little pictures to help you out.
Hmm, I read it, but then put it down in disgust on reason number 7:
D: Had tons of amazing games...but no Halo 3.
X: Will have Halo 3. And it will be huge.
That point being given to the XBox? To put it bluntly, this is biased crap.
Indeed, the people that accuse Dreamcast of being a "failed" system invariably are those that never had a dreamcast! The system rocked, and had eminently fun & groundbreaking games. If, like me, this is what you want from your console, then the Dreamcast was a smashing success (actually its my favorite console of all time). If, on the other hand what you desire from your console is "the same mediocrity that all your friends have", then the PS2 is your man.
For those who read TFA... did you notice that the Time Magazine shown in #10 has Bill Gates behind the 360 resembling the all-famous Borg image? *shudder*
In any case, I'd rather have bill gates selling a famous videogame console rather than forcing a crappy operating system down our throats.
/ You seem to try to create a gaming \
\ console. May I help you? /
\ ____
\ / __ \
\ O| |O|
|| | |
|| | |
|| |
|___/
So, if one of the biggest problems faced by the original Dreamcast was that is was ahead of its time for some of its features like online play, then I'd say the timing for the 360 is just about perfect!
I was displeased with the sega saturn, i think that was a turn off for alot of people for the dreamcast. I really enjoyed the dreamcast, i spent countless days playing tony hawk pro skater, sonic, GTA 2, powerstone, Marvel vs capcom etc, when they said they were no longer going to support it, it was very disappointing, the graphics were good, i enjoyed the controler (compared to the N64 which i hated) I think giving up the gamesystem was a mistake for the dreamcast, they finally got one that people actually liked, i guess they couldn't compete with Sony's mega millions
Never used Ada have you? = Equality Testing := Assignment
I don't know everything.
Mountain Dew is in no way similar to Pepsi. Drawing a parallel between the two is absolutely ridiculous. Mountain Dew is gathered by hand only from the freshest clover leaves in the unspoiled Smokey Mountains of Tennessee. It was the official drink of the original olympic games. It is versatile. It can substitute for blood plasma during emergencies or natural disasters. Pepsi, however, is nothing but sugar water with brown food coloring.
Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
TFA seems to really be picking on the Dreamcast, but I always loved it. Its controller is still my favorite. To this day I use it to play some amazing games via the VGA box, such as Sonic Adventure (the last really great Sonic game), Seaman, or Jet Set Radio.
Marketing ?
and deeper pockets.
---
There's also a big difference between DreamCast and Microsoft's consoles :
- DreamCast : runs home brewed software out-of-the-box (although on CD-R and not on GD-ROM).
Some free developpement kits where available for it (KallistiOS)
Some were even blessed by Sega (some *BSD)
- Xbox 1 : DRM filled shit. You must put Mod-Chip inside or exploit bugs to be able to do whatever you want to do with a piece of hardware you paid for.
Microsoft has even tried to stop this, either suing Lik-Sang for providing mod-chips, or trying to lock user with software exploits out of XBox Live.
Developpement has only been possible on the XBox because it is basically a repackaged PC architecture and because the Windows based software is filled with bugs. Developpers have asked to be provided keys to sign software for unmodded X-Boxes but no answers from Microsoft
- Xbox 360 will surely have even more DRM barriers against homebrewer. And isn't PC architecture anymore
---
BTW: DreamCast is not *powered* on Windows CE, but *compatible* with Windows CE. (according to the sticker).
In fact, most of the commercial games are designed using Katana (Sega's own proprietary system),
and most homebrewed software us KallistiOS.
XBOX runs a modified Windows 2k and Microsoft is putting a great deal of efforts to be sure that nothing else runs on it.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
This time around, it feels like the market is a little smarter and not as willing to believe the bullshit. I may be completely wrong about this but that's how it seems. MS will roll out early with a brute force style product, I expect Sony and Nintendo to roll out with products that take much less loss on their initial sales. If there continues to be any parity in the market, and there has been, then they will all be fairly similar in terms of technical specs and it'll come down to the few key titles moving things and then whoever comes up with the next big thing.
The other thing, Sony may have a slight hardware disadavantage in the current market between PS2 and Xbox (tech specs doesn't matter that much though... they are all still pretty close, all things being equal) but they were ambitious, when I bought the PS2, I knew I was going to get a DVD player if nothing else and at that time DVD players were like $150 so I throw in some extra money and I can play games too and I can play ps1 games that block buster sold for $5 a pop. PS3 is doing that with HD and Blu-Ray DVD, ps2 compatibility for my 30-40 games. What's xbox360 doing that with? I don't even know that it will play all of my xbox games, it looks pretty clear that it won't be a DVD player. They're going early but they aren't raising the level, it's just an upgrade and I also think that the technical architecture is going to make it difficult to be manufactured at a break even cost; the big piece where the cost is is a triple core expensive CPU and I think Sony's loss poing will be an early to market bluray and those things historically drop in cost a ton and I just expect a consumer company like Sony to put a lot more thought in to the cost of the CPU so I expect it to be easier to cost reduce than the xbox's will be.
I'm just speculating here but PS3 will either have to be dramatically better looking than the competition or it will be costing the same when it ships so if they can break even faster than MS can, can't they just start rolling with the greatest hits and platinum hits and catch up pretty quickly with cost reduced games since the hardware will pay for itself? That means MS will have to make some really really good games to captialize on this lead, doesn't it?
"DC: Had tons of amazing games...but no Halo 3
X360: Will have Halo 3. And it will be huge."
How the hell do they know Halo 3 will be huge? If it's like the last one it won't be finished and it won't be a patch on the FPS games the PC has been doing for years.
Who the fuck is bribing the whole games industry into giving the Halo franchise such a cock sucking? It's average at best and nothing revolutionary, why everyone hails these games as the second coming I don't know. And before anyone tells me about Halo 2 on Live, it's full of squealing 13 year olds who call everyone gay when they get fragged.
Believe it or not, the gaming business isn't about giving you and your friends fun games to play, it's about making money. That's why it's hard to qualify the XBox as a success. The XBox lost more money than any other console in history. Microsoft has lost billions of dollars on the XBox. Heck, it's still losing money on a quarterly basis as Microsoft readies the 360. If the XBox 360 is as big a financial disaster as the XBox then Microsoft investors are almost certainly going to wonder what they are doing throwing their money down a hole.
Now, I have to slightly disagree with you there. Firstly, was it actually a "disaster"? Is Microsoft in financial troubles because of it? I couldn't claim to have anything near to exact figures, but I'm nonetheless quite sure that the answer is no, it is not in bad financial shape now because of the X-Box. Just because it didn't make money doesn't make Microsoft instantly broke, and investors know that . . .
Now, I'm usually the first to lambast the system for the encouragement of short-term quarterly gains instead of long-term goals, but I think in this case Microsoft (or, since this is slashdot after all, I should say "M$") has been pretty clear with its goals and the investors are on board with it. The fact that Microsoft is making so much money in every other area is exactly why it needs to go into this area even if it means losing a fraction (perhaps a sizable fraction, even) of that profit; there really isn't much room for growth where it is now. Already with a virtual monopoly, what is "M$" left to do? So what if some money is lost in the short term. It's a sacrifice to get a foothold in an industry that is quite difficult to break through into. But the X-Box is a success because it does show a widespread adoption. It was certainly never intended to make money, it was meant to be successful in the "screw the monetary consideration!.....for now" way. And a foothold in the video-game industry gives the Redmondians a stepping stone for access into the vague but promising directions that digital entertainment is always threatening to soar off into.
The company has grown, and growth is nearly synonymous with success. The profit part can come later. If Microsoft had less of a seriously impressive disposable income, then it would be another story, but the company has the luxury of such (relatively) grand planning.
Naturally, if anyone has facts to back up my arguement (or alternatively, to dismantle it) please do elaborate!
I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
Because we're talking about Microsoft here? Remember Windows 1.0?
The Xbox isn't yet supposed to make money. It's supposed to extend Microsoft's market. Then, it's supposed to make money.
it's just that their marketing sucked, lots. They had the best looking games in existence. Games that look so good there was no comparison. Games that looked so good that only 5th gen ps2 games (and very few of those) compare. So why the fsck didn't they show them off? Instead, we got dumb ass 'It's thinking' commercials with Sonic all 'jammin' to the xtreme!!!' with the NBA. wtf?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
What makes you think the Dreamcast failed because of marketing?
I knew about it. I bought consoles. Heck, I bought an Atari Jaguar - AND the CD unit! It wasn't like I made my choices based on popularity.
But I just wasn't interested in the Dreamcast, because while it had some good games it did not have (in my mind) a lot. And the other problem was that for a brand new system, it seemed underpowered. To a lot of gamers that was a point in time where the increase in graphics meant more than they do now. To me the Dreamcast languished because of being slightly underpowered and a trickle of games I cared about.
In that respect I do think the 360 has some things in common. Not exactly in the graphics where it appears to be about equal, but more in storage with the space-limiting DVD meaning games with wider ranges of graphic content will be released on the PS3. And there just aren't enough interesting games lined up for release yet (the ones that are actually releasing anyway) to make me want to buy the system now, or seemingly even in six months.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
One interesting aspect of the 360 that may help it fare well is with a DVD drive instead of a newer drive like HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, piracy will be simpler - so more peeople may actually buy the console for that reason. Even pirates end up buying some games so it might help it out.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The media while not that great is unique to Sega and they did move away from the cartriges that every thing else was using at the time.
Sega Saturn?
Sony Playstation?
Optical Media...
Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
Xbox 360 would be Dreamcast 3.0.
Back when Dreamcast was starting up, MS offered up their Windows CE as a platform to Sega as the DC OS. It came in late, so the first games didn't use it. But Sega was pressing their developers to use it, and MS was helping out a lot. Japanese DCs came with the text "designed for Windows CE" on the front.
But something happened, Sega got word MS was doing all this because they were working on a gaming machine of their own, a "super Dreamcast". And MS was offering up CE so that when MS' box came out they would have a lineup of games ready to go, or at least easy to port. It would give them a huge legup on all the other competitors in the video game market (including Sega).
So Sega immediately told their developers not to use Windows CE. Only one game came out with Windows CE, Sega Rally (the browser also used CE). And US Dreamcasts say "compatible with Windows CE" on the front.
And not too long after, MS released their machine with a controller which was very similar to the DC controller. Same basic layout, with two additional buttons and the hole in the top for the memory unit display covered (Sega had moved away from the memory cards with displays by that time too).
So, Xbox really was a super Dreamcast, or a Dreamcast 2.0 if you wish.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Microsoft literally gave the Xbox away.
:)
Microsoft did not literally give the Xbox away. When we say stuff like "Microsoft gave the Xbox away", we accept some slight exaggeration being used to make a point.
I can't see any justification for throwing "literally" in there, unless you actually meant "literally". Or perhaps you didn't mean "literally" literally. But I doubt it...
Please don't tell me you were actually referring to Microsoft giving a few of the things away in promotions; we know that's not what you meant
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
The Dreamcast was a financial failure and caused Sega to get out of the hardware business. Sorry.
Were some of the games very good? Oh hell yes. I played the shit out of Phantasy Star Online 1/2 (before cheaters ruined it), Soul Calibur, Skies of Arcadia, and Jet Set Radio. Uh, that was about it though.
Being mad at Sony for having better sales and in the end a much better game selection just proves you're a fanboy. That "mediocrity" comment will provide me with a chuckle or two when I'm playing Shadow of the Collosus, Devil May Cry 3, Ico (for the 10th time), Metal Gear Solid 3, Fatal Frame 1/2, Silent Hill 2/3/4, God of War, Ace Combat 4/5, etc. etc.
They are basically only the second company every to succede at that, Sony being the first. After the NES got popular and gaming was revitalized, it was basically a Nintendo-Sega hegemony. Sure there were other consoles, lots of them, but they were all tiny. The PC Engine (TG16), Neo Geo, 3DO, Jaguar, all did just peanuts for business. There was Nintendo on top, Sega with a slowly but surely slipping second place and then maybe someone is a waaaaay distant third.
Sony was the first company to ever smash in to that and survive. Now they did it at an extremely good time too. Sega's downward slide was in full force with the disaster that was the Saturn. Nintendo pissed off some developers with the announcement that the N64 was cart based (Square essentially told Nintendo FF7 WOULD be on a CD, on the N64 or not) and also miscalculated the kid gamer market, forgetting that many of the kids who had NES's were now older teens or young adults. In to that gap, Sony stepped successfully, the first major player other than Nintendo and Sega since, well, Atari.
Microsoft didn't have nearly so easy an environment to try and compete in. Sony's second gen system was out and people liked it, between Nintendo and Sony there was a selection of games for everyone. For all that, they managed to do it and well enough to edge out Nintendo in market share, and they are now comming back for round 2.
I certianly don't think Microsoft has a lock on the gaming market and the 360 may well prove to be less than they hoped, but to try and write it off because the X-box was costly is silly. Of COURSE it was costly, they were trying to bash in to a market that's extremely hard to get in to. They were also smart enough to know you either go all in or you forget it. To try and just poke at the edges, even if your stuff is superior, and sell an expensive console is doomed to failure.
This is even more true these days in the era of the computer GPU. Time was, consoles were it for high-end graphics. You could spend all the money you liked on a computer, the top dog console would still whack it. No longer the case. At best, a first flight console is as good as new accelerators (the 360 should be roughly on par with upper ATi X1000 and nVidia 7000 series accelerators) and it doesn't take long for comptuers to pull ahead. So those with tons of free cash and the need for the best will go with computer gaming, and not spend tons of money on your specality console.
I own one and while I don't think it is too kiddie, they DID lend that impression with the GC earlier on because there really wasn't a lot of adult/mature appealing titles out for it when it shipped, unlike the PS2 and X-Box.
What was available in the "M" category at the first release date?
Eternal Darkness, I think was mostly it (And a damned good game at that...). Most of the rest of the titles were kiddie style games and a couple of things like Madden Football, etc. There were follow on titles of the "cool" variety like Eternal Darkness, but the damage of the impression was done by how many kiddie type titles were available for the GC versus the more adult ones.
Nintendo missed the boat on this round of consoles; the titles they'd lined up at release colored the impressions of the console and made it a little less appealing to other studios to make titles for- the impression was that Nintendo was placing the market for the GC with the younger audiences. Basically, Nintendo was still marketing to and planning for the younger crowd where they used to make their money, when they should have been catering initially to a broader audience with the rollout of the GC. When the X-Box came out, they had an edge, but they lost it fairly quickly because MS could out-spend them and managed to score enough X-Box Only titles (such as Shenmue, etc...) that they lost that edge. Right now, I wouldn't count them out yet- they've still got at least one iteration of consoles to go before they're in trouble and I think they might have learned something from the oopses done with the GC's marketing and sales efforts (which they DID do...).
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
1. Nintendo is the most profitable of the big three, despite having the smallest share.
2. One of the reasons that the Gamecube is so dang affordable ($90 retail here in Canada) is because they left out the ability to play DVDs. Those licenses cost money.
3. The "kiddie" market is extremely lucrative, and Nintendo dominates it. Kids harass their parents constantly about toys. Parents have money. Teenagers and college students don't. Did you ever wonder why 90% of your friends' XBoxes and PS2s are modded?
4. If "Clueless Dad" walks into Wal-Mart looking for a console for his kids, he'll find that the cheapest one has about 200 E-rated games. On top of that, "Clueful Dad" will probably know that this cheap console is so durable that his kids will have to work really, really hard to wreck it before the next generation comes out.
5. Were the 'cutesy discs' really a problem? I can only think of a handful of games that needed to span two discs.
I think that Nintendo is working to convert a bit of its "kiddie" image to a "casual" image. The fact of the matter is, Gates didn't get into the console business because of Sony. He did it because he heard Nintendo had these insane 20% profit margins. Now he cries himself to sleep every night because Nintendo still has 20% profit margins and he's losing a mint.
The US Army: promoting democracy through unquestioned obedience
Immersive is nice, but it only applies to certain kinds of games. Many great games were never meant to be real. And many real-type games are not great.
Super Bomberman was one of the best games ever made, and it was not immersive. Most puzzle-type games are far from immersive.
In order to be good (or great), a game needs to be engaging like Super Bomberman is, like Robotron is, like Mario Kart is, like Halo at its best (not in the library) is.
Quake 2's immersion made it more engaging than it would have been otherwise. But it didn't seem to work for Doom 3. Doom 3 is immersive, but it's a long way from engaging.
As to PS3 not having an online service, how do you know that? Has Sony said? Personally, I think that PS3 will have good online play, even if it doesn't have an online service. PS2's online play has gone from awful to decent, and there's no reason to think it won't get even better with PS3.
As an aside (and perhaps a contentious point), do you prefer Gran Turismo 4 to Forza due to it's noticeably better graphics? Personally, I like them both, probably liking Forza's driving better, despite the oddly inferior graphics. I mean, Rallisport Challenge 2 looked better than Forza! What happened?
Finally, did you like God of War? Great game. Best game in a while, very engaging. It's graphics are good, not quite Xbox quality in resolution of textures or models. But in other ways, the graphics are utilized well that it sets a standard no Xbox platformer can touch (perhaps GC's Metroid Prime comes close though).
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
If the PS3 can promise immersion and variety, then I'm there. It'll be an easy call. I'm already going to get an XBox 360 because PS3 missed the boat by not having an online service.
I don't see it as missing a boat at all. I see it as not needing to spend $10 (or whatever the cost is now) a month for the rest of my life just to play online games... there are a number of PS2 games with online play too; it's just up to the companies to provide the servers instead of Sony. It's that they've chosen a whole different boat to be on.
Personally I like that approach a lot more since I only irregularily play online games now and have come to detest any form of recurring payment. I do realize the benefits of having a centralized service such as comprehensive buddy lists and invites that can appear while you're in the middle of some other game... but I just don't need it, and sometimes I wonder how many other people really do.
I also see the scary things that can happen like your XBox being forever denied entry to Live if it's hacked. To me it does not seem desireable that a company that makes a thing I buy should so easily be able to remove such a degree of value so easily.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Sega probably did fail because of marketing. The Christmas season of 2000 was where they totally failed. PS2 had been anounced, but wasn't available. Dreamcasts were plentiful and had tons of great games (Soul Calibur on Dreamcast is still better than PS2 versions). But Sega didn't market it. There were no commercials on TV for it. They didn't tout it as an alternative to waiting for PS2. So no one bought it. Everyone I know who had a Dreamcast loved the games on it (Sonic Adventure, Soul Calibur, Jet Set Radio, various sports games, Shenmue I and II, Crazy Taxi, Resident Evil: Code Veronica, Skies of Arcadia, Sakura Taisen series, Napple Tale, Vib Ribbon, Space Channel 5, Psychic Force 2012, Rival Schools, Guilty Gear X, and tons more). PS2 didn't get that many good games for it until years later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamcast
My other first post is car post.