Talk:Sega Saturn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Sega Saturn is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Featured topic star Sega Saturn is part of the Sega video game consoles series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
WikiProject Video games (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Sega task force.
WikiProject Japan (Rated FA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 03:52, September 3, 2015 (JST, Heisei 27) (Refresh)
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Saturn articles in EGM and Next Generation[edit]

Following up on what I said here. I'll summarize the articles in my early EGMs related to the Saturn; if they look useful, I'll scan them. Be sure to look at the Saturn coverage listed in the Next Generation index as well.

  • October 1993: New 32-Bit Saturn Info (insider news related to the system's price, backwards compatibility and "code card")
  • November 1993: Sega Readies 32-bit Saturn CD Game Machine (specs, backwards compatibility, price, business implications of the Saturn launch, relationship with the Sega 32x), Latest Dirt On Sega's Saturn (insider news on recordable CDs, "upgrade boards", "cable downloading", concerns about price)
  • December 1993: Saturn Pops Up to 64-Bit (insider news related to the 32-bit and 64-bit architecture of the Saturn, prices of cartridge-only and CD/cartridge releases), Sega to Add 64-Bit Processor to New Saturn System! (confusion over the 64-bit and 32-bit architecture, spec announcements, Japanese press rumors about rewriteable CDs/backward compatibility/price/etc., ten games in development for launch, implications for Sega CD)
  • January 1994: Sega Reaffirms CD Commitment (plans to release incompatible Saturn and CD systems simultaneously)
  • March 1994: The Sega Saturn System Shown at the 1994 Winter CES! (this is cited in the article already, but I can provide a scan if you guys didn't have the complete article yet), More Information on the Sega Saturn and New Releases! (full specs, price)
  • May 1994: Sega Vs. Nintendo ... U.S. Vs. Japan (editorial about the Sega/Nintendo console war including the Saturn, along with comparisons between Sega's performance in North America and Japan), Turn Your Genesis Into a Saturn (Sega 32x announcement and how it relates to the Saturn business plan)
  • September 1994: 32x and Saturn Try to Get Along (insider rumors about struggles to make 32x and Saturn compatible, even though they use the same Hitachi chip), 32x and Saturn (Sega of America considers changing the Saturn hardware for the North American release)
  • November 1994: Sega to Overhaul Saturn System? (insider rumors about a hardware upgrade to the Saturn after its Japanese release)
  • December 1994: Sega's Saturn Launched in Japan (release date, price, launch games, future games, controller variants)
  • May 1995: Sega to Launch Sega Saturn on Saturn-Day, September 2 (this article is already cited, but there's quite a bit of good sales information in it that hasn't been used; ask me if you need the full article), Sony Suffering from High Price Tag Blues (insider news about Sony moving up the PlayStation's release and lowering its price to counter Saturn-Day)
  • June 1995: The System Pack-In Wars are Heating Up (Saturn pack-in news), Saturn is pricey to manufacture (rumors about the Saturn's internal price)

That's that. Tell me if you want me to look at later issues. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 01:34, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

  • I would be interested in reading "Sony Suffering from High Price Tag Blues", although I don't necessarily lean towards including such rumors here (if anything, they may be more relevant to the PlayStation article). "Sega to Launch Sega Saturn on Saturn-Day, September 2" is mostly sales projections, outside of 500,000 units sold in the first year in Japan (if I remember correctly), and I didn't want to get too detailed with year-by-year regional sales. I'm sure I could find a use for "32x and Saturn Try to Get Along" and maybe "Sega Vs. Nintendo ... U.S. Vs. Japan", even if only as another cf. (Thanks for your help on Sonic R, BTW; I'm pretty sure it looks much better now, although I won't really know for sure how much sense my changes made until I look at it with fresh eyes tomorrow.) Cheers,TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 06:37, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for posting all this Jimmy. I would definitely like to see the "Saturn Pops Up to 64-Bit" article, as there are so many contradictory rumors relating to the Saturn redesign that its best to read as many of them as possible to try and get some sense of what actually happened. "Sega to Overhaul Saturn System?" looks interesting despite being rumor, as it speaks to continued dissatisfaction relating to the hardware. I also second the interest in both "32x and Saturn Try to Get Along" and "Sega to Launch Sega Saturn on Saturn-Day, September 2." I could also definitely go for some "Sega Vs. Nintendo ... U.S. Vs. Japan" since the title promises more info on Saturn's early acceptance in Japan and its failure in the US. Indrian (talk) 14:59, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
  • No problem about Sonic R, Times. Anyway, here are the scans you guys asked for. I threw in a couple that you didn't mention because they were tied into Quartermann gossip columns that you wanted to see.
  • Hope there's something useful in these. Good luck with the renom. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:40, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Okay, so "Saturn Pops up to 64-bit" refers to the Japanese press using conflicting descriptions of the system as alternatively 32-bit or 64-bit. I didn't expect the material to be about the Saturn's redesign, considering it would have been written around October 1993. The other story from the same issue, which is coincidentally placed on the same page as "Sony of Japan has just made an announcement that they are planning to get into the video game hardware market", is more interesting because it provides direct confirmation from Sega that the Saturn had seven processors at that time rather than eight.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 22:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Just in case my summaries were too vague, I scanned this (Staff, #52, November 1993) and this (Staff, #52, November 1993) for you guys to double-check. They give development and announcement dates for the Saturn, among other information that might be interesting. There's some stuff in them that I didn't notice in the article. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 03:25, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Those are interesting!TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Please, your precious Next Generation was still saying the Saturn had seven processors in September 1995. ( Those types of discrepancies don't prove anything about a redesign. You'd be amazed by how many inaccurate rumors and false, contradictory claims you can find in these old magazines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2ECA:C150:4818:35CD:6A8:61E1 (talk) 19:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

True enough, but what is the alternative? We have been able to establish that the SH-2 was specially commissioned for the Saturn and that the system had at least seven of its eight processors prior to Sony's PlayStation announcement, which certainly limits the extent to which we can speculate about the rumored redesign. I am largely sympathetic to your opinion about the accuracy of these tabloids. Even just looking at Sega-related stuff, I found Next Generation 11 (for example) a rather amusing read, with claims like Hirokazu Yasuhara (rather than Yuji Naka) as the programmer of Sonic The Hedgehog and Shining Wisdom being developed by Sonic Team ("the makers of the original Genesis Sonic") rather than Sonic! Software Planning. That said, we're stuck with the sources available, and I think the article uses them as well as possible to avoid the many contradictions they contain.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 20:53, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Restoring the lost info[edit]

Some time ago several sections, such as Saturn models and Compatibility, have been removed. I re-added them recently (see the history) but was reverted by another user, who claimed a lack of sources - after looking, some sections like Sega Pluto have enough/reliable ones whereas the Compatibility section does not, so clearly it differs.

I personally think there are lots of useful information and details here that I think deserve to be on the article. These removed sections have plenty of info that should belong part of the page.

As much as I can, I will make sure that those sections will be restored. For sections that are not sourced enough, I would hunt for reliable sources and add them. But clearly sections like Sega Pluto have many, and are trustworthy. Tell me your opinion on this. --G&CP (talk) 15:55, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Once you find the reliable sources, submit your revision here. Changes will be met with scrutiny because this is a recognized Good Article and former Featured Article candidate. The bits of the deleted Pluto section that were reliable and non-trivia are still in the article.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 20:16, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Seconded. Your changes to this and Sega Genesis are meeting so much resistance because they are radical changes to articles that have been extensively worked on and reviewed to GA/FA specifications. And many of your suggestions contain unsourced information or personal commentary in parentheses, which are frowned upon anywhere anywhere on the site. Sergecross73 msg me 21:27, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Grammar of Genesis/Mega Drive[edit]

I've discussed this with Sergecross73 where I take issue with one line that he/she finds should not be changed: "Released in Japan in 1988, the Sega Genesis (known as the Sega "Mega Drive" in Europe and Japan) was Sega's entry into the fourth generation of video game consoles.".

  • I'm not debating whether the console should be referred to as Mega Drive or Genesis; my point is that this sentence as it's currently written is referring to the Japanese 1988 launch, and in that context it should read Mega Drive. The Genesis article itself (under Launch) refers to the Mega Drive in that context.
  • There's also the additional point that Japan is mentioned twice in a short sentence and could be tidied up.
  • If we were to keep the same sentence structure but correct the inaccuracy, it should read something along the lines of "Released in Japan in 1988, the Mega Drive (known as the Sega Genesis in North America) was Sega's entry into the fourth generation of video game consoles.".
  • If the consensus is to keep it US-centric and use the Genesis nomenclature, the sentence could be re-written – one suggestion: "Released in North America in 1989 (originally released as the Mega Drive in Japan in 1988 and Europe in 1990), the Sega Genesis was Sega's entry into the fourth generation of video game consoles."

I also took issue with the use of quote marks around the Mega Drive term. Sergecross73 insist they're necessary as they denote the product name and the two words are also commonly used in other contexts. I don't find that a valid argument, since many other product names are made up of common words such as the Family Computer, Game Gear, Game Boy and countless others. Thoughts would be appreciated. (talk) 20:06, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Oppose. We state the original release year, and use the name of the relevant Wikipedia article, which is Sega Genesis. "Released in North America in 1989 (originally released as the Mega Drive in Japan in 1988 and Europe in 1990)" is not an improvement, and is needlessly confusing. Also, Sergecross73 didn't insist the quotes were necessary as much as he explained why they are there, as opposed to your sinister intimation that they are intended as some kind of insult to Europeans such as yourself.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 06:10, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your clarification on policy re stating the original release year and relevant article name. I respectfully disagree on the quote marks, with Sergecross73's stating that "[(unlike] Wii, which has no use other than a name of a product. The same cannot be said of "Mega Drive".)" sounding like quote marks are necessary in this case. I also point out that my secondary objection to the quote marks was just a personal one, and at no point did I say they were purposefully intended to be some kind of sinister insult to Europeans or anyone outside of North America, but I appreciate your comment on that, however patronising. I assume you reject my Family Computer/Game Gear/Game Boy examples in favour of keeping the quote marks. (talk) 06:24, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose - consistency with other article name, and the proposal is just needless tinkering. And thank you, Times, as I already tried to explain that they weren't meant as scare quotes, but the IP continued to go with his negative imagination rather than assume good faith. Sergecross73 msg me 11:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your thoughts. Yes, you already did explain they weren't meant as scare quotes which I understood – only once have I ever mentioned my opinion of the quotes having a possible negative connotation, so can you show me where I (she) "continued to go with [her] negative imagination" and not assume good faith? I don't see how that could be used as justification in your side of the discussion since I've done so such thing. I was pointing out your example of Mega Drive needing quotes because they're two very common words used in different contexts – "[Wii] has no use other than the name of a product. The same cannot be said of "Mega Drive"" – was flawed at best and wasn't consistent with other articles – "Family Computer", "Game Gear" and "Game Boy" don't appear in quotes for example. That's something I've repeatedly mentioned but has yet to be directly addressed or countered.
In response to my comment where I was explaining not every time quotes are used means they're "scare quotes", you started complaining about how I had put "factual innaccuracies" in quotes as if they were meant to belittle you. I was just telling you about how not every quote is scare quotes, and that's your next response. That's a failure to assume good faith. Pretty certain this is what TheTimesAreAChanging is referring to as well. Sergecross73 msg me 14:49, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
"Your "factual argument" has been debated endlessly [...] so I'm not interested in that one" was a misquote (intentional or not) and sounds clearly belittling and patronising to myself anyway, but I apologise if you believe I failed to assume good faith. Any thoughts to the actual point I was making re: Family Computer etc? (talk) 15:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Honestly, I think the anon here has a perfectly valid point. Grammatically, it does make more sense to either refer to the system as the Mega Drive initially and then as the Genesis in parentheses or to remove any reference to the Mega Drive at all and just call it Genesis throughout (or Mega Drive throughout, though that leads to problems of inconsistency with article titles). As the anon says, this is not a matter of which name is "right" on Wikipedia, but is a grammar situation; the current wording really is unnecessarily awkward. I think the anon inadvertently walked into a minefield on this one though, due to the contentious naming debates surrounding the Genesis/Megadrive article. I think this should be fixed to flow better grammatically, but I don't really care how that is achieved. Indrian (talk) 15:16, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Thinking about it more, what about this: Why don't we just get rid of in Japan so the sentence reads "Released in 1988, the Sega Genesis (known as the Sega Mega Drive in Europe and Japan) was Sega's entry into the fourth generation of video game consoles." The fact that it was released in Japan only in 1988 is really not a relevant detail for this article and eliminating that clears up the awkwardness while preserving both names. Indrian (talk) 15:20, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm fine with that. Sergecross73 msg me 15:35, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
That's an acceptable compromise. Thanks for taking the time to consider my points, Indrian. (talk) 17:29, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Tokyo Game Show[edit]

The article currently states that the Saturn was first showcased at the 1994 Tokyo Game Show. However, I'm now reading an EGM article from August 1994 which says the Saturn debuted at the 1994 Tokyo Toy Show. Moreover, Wikipedia's own article on the Tokyo Game Show asserts that the convention didn't have its first show until 1996 (though I must note that the source they've cited doesn't actually back up this claim). I'd like to confirm the information in EGM before jumping to make corrections, since it wouldn't be hard for a typo to turn "Tokyo Game Show" into "Tokyo Toy Show".

So, can anyone offer any more clues on whether or not there was a Tokyo Game Show back in 1994, whether the Saturn might have been displayed at a 1996 Tokyo Toy Show, or anything else that might sort out this discrepancy?--Martin IIIa (talk) 01:27, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

That's a massive blunder. You are completely correct--a typo turned "Toy Show" into "Game Show". Although I did not add this citation, I should have caught the error during the previous FAC, when a reviewer noticed the magazine--EGM²--had been mistaken for the standard Electronic Gaming Monthly. I'll fix it up--and thank you! TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 01:45, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
To be honest, this is the only citation in the article I feel uncomfortable using. Every magazine I added I either have in my possession, found scans of online or from JimmyBlackwing, or got in PDF format from Sega-16 forum user Sheath. The EGM² interview is basically cheating, because although it was partially scanned here and I'm sure the transcript is accurate, the relevant bit isn't actually scanned. That's unless Indrian actually has a copy of the magazine, which I doubt. Of course, I am as complicit in this as anyone, because I added the Okamura quote in bold, and never raised any concerns about this before now--for the obvious reason that the interview contains very significant information we are unlikely to get anywhere else. Still, on reflection I feel compelled to leave this note here, to assuage one of the only parts of this effort that still troubles me.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 02:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm glad you were able to clear this up so quickly.--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Game Informer article[edit]

I've been reading up on the Saturn launch, including a helpful article in EGM which includes the list of titles available at the North American launch. As I went to add that info to this article, I noticed that it contradicts the already cited Game Informer article. Given that the EGM article was written right after the launch and so must have come from first-hard information, I'm relying upon it rather than the Game Informer article, which was compiled from (in the author's own words) "Leonard Herman's Phoenix: The Fall & Rise of Videogames, Wikipedia, Midwest Gaming Classic co-founder Martin Goldberg, and various Internet sources." Moreover, I noticed that the Saturn launch lineup isn't the only one the GI article got wrong. It lists Raiden as a launch title for the Jaguar (close, but nope), and despite listing no less than three 3DO launch games, it overlooks the one game that actually was available at the 3DO's launch, Crash 'n' Burn. So... should we remove the Game Informer article as unreliable?--Martin IIIa (talk) 15:32, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Sounds good to me. That article appears to have used some pretty dodgy sources. Nice catch! Indrian (talk) 16:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
EGM doesn't say there were only seven, it just lists seven. The reference to "a couple of Sega Sports titles such as Worldwide Soccer and NHL All-Star Hockey" leaves open the possibility that Pebble Beach Golf Links was also available. Even though I should have looked at EGM more carefully, I saw no reason to doubt GI's list because they covered Pebble Beach in their first round of Saturn reviews in July 1995.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 18:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Also of note is this Sega of America press release from May 19, 1995, which states: "Currently, Sega Saturn is accompanied by six launch titles including Virtua Fighter–which is free with every Sega Saturn unit and included in the box–Daytona USA, Panzer Dragoon, Worldwide Soccer and Pebble Beach Golf Links. I'm not so sure that Bug! or NHL Hockey were launch titles.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 22:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
EGM was wrong–NHL was definitely not available for launch. GamePro, August 1995, page 82, says the game is still "coming soon". Now we just need to debunk Bug!, which EGM already casts doubt upon by not reviewing it in July alongside the other launch games, instead covering the game's showing at E3.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 23:00, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Phew, I hate it when sources get contradictory. I much appreciate your speaking up though, TheTimesAreAChanging.
About the GI review of Pebble Beach Golf Links, are you sure that the review wasn't based on the Japanese version of the game? Pebble Beach is certainly a likely candidate for a launch game but I'd like to be absolutely sure.
I found the issue of GamePro in which NHL All-Star Hockey is reviewed - November 1995. Very puzzling, since as I said the EGM article was written after the launch, so there's no reasonable way they could have made a mistake about the launch lineup. I'll definitely keep an eye out for any possible explanation for this error as I continue my gaming magazine reading; with any luck, EGM eventually printed a retraction of some sort.
EGM not reviewing Bug! in July is meaningless; they don't review Daytona USA, Worldwide Soccer, or Pebble Beach Golf Links in that issue either. The thing to keep in mind is that it was a surprise launch, so even if EGM were inclined to review every Saturn launch game, they may well not have had time to do so before the issue went to press.--Martin IIIa (talk) 20:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Oh, believe me, I know how meaningless it is in isolation (although EGM July 1995 does have "Team Reviews" of all three games you listed on page 114), and that's why I said we still needed to debunk Bug! However, Bug! doesn't seem to be commonly described as a launch game in any other source, and neither GamePro nor Game Informer were able to review it until August or September either, so it seems far more likely by process of elimination that the already-released-in-Japan (and reviewed with other launch games) Clockwork Knight was in fact the sixth launch title alluded to in SoA's press release. (I'd also have to take that press release as fairly ironclad proof of Pebble Beach's launch status.) GamePro, June 1995, page 29 does indicate that Sega announced VF, Worldwide Soccer, Pebble Beach, Clockwork Knight, Daytona, Panzer Dragoon, and Bug! as seven of ten anticipated first-party launch titles for "Saturnday" in September, so this could explain the discrepancy if Bug! wasn't quite ready in time for the surprise launch.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 20:43, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Yep, I just stumbled on those "Team Reviews" myself... Sorry about that. EGM reviewing sports games separately was something that started just a few issues before the Saturn launch, so I keep forgetting they do that. However, I think there's still a plausible reason why, if EGM, GamePro, and Game Informer didn't have time to immediately review every game included in the surprise launch, they would have picked Bug! as the one to leave for next month. First of all, all the other games we've mentioned are localizations of games which were already released for the Saturn in Japan, meaning that gaming journalists had already had plenty of time to familiarize themselves with them. Bug!, on the other hand, originated in the USA, so up until the launch they had only been able to see unfinished betas of the game. Secondly, Bug! is a very long and difficult game, whereas with the others it's possible to view nearly all of the game's content in an hour or less, especially when you've already had the chance to master the Japanese and/or arcade versions.--Martin IIIa (talk) 17:00, 1 May 2015 (UTC)