Sega or Xbox - which was a better competitor to PS/Nin in the console market in your opinion?

Sega doesn't make consoles and faded away pretty early. Xbox still exists. Waddya think?🤭

^

Though prefer Sega. Xbox is a just a PC for plebs who can't slot a graphics card.

Scum.

Well yea.. Xbox is owned by one of the richest companies in the world. They can afford to keep it around.

Which by default makes Xbox a better competitor. Sega didn't have the resources to compete and made the decision to bail because they determined it was best for the company.

It doesn't matter in the end because consoles are not as relevant as they used to. Mobile and PC are the real behemoths.

This thread is so silly.

Solid should be ashamed.

Xbox. Xbox ain't doing so hot now, but the best direct competition that Sony ever had was the Xbox 360. That system was scalping Sony for a long time, until Sony just went all in on the games. I mean, we all romanticize Sega and all, but when Sony entered the race, Sega got slaughter. Xbox was at least able to keep pace with them for a generation.

@SolidGame_basic: Sega were basically dead men walking after 1996. 32X and Mega CD sold poorly, and were followed up by the Saturn and Dreamcast which never competed with Sony’s or Nintendo’s offerings. Sega only really ever had Sonic that stood up to Nintendo or Sony’s 1st party games and as such they were more or less out of the game in the mid nineties.
Xbox entered the market with a bang, offering a way more powerful, online console that had titles like Halo, Forza, Splinter cell, Dead or alive, Fable, Far Cry instincts and Riddick. That console established Xbox as a threat to PS and went head to head on the next gen.
Xbox console sales have trailed, but they are still Sony’s main competitor, because Xbox are pushing the narrative; subscription model, PC releases and GAAS titles are all on PS because Xbox forced Sony to follow suit.

Not sure if it was a serious post.

Just wrote a longer, convoluted post of what Pedro said succinctly.

Thus, agreeing. In bloated form.

So Xbox is a better competitor to Sony/Nintendo because Microsoft is richer than Sega, got it.

If you look at the list of games coming from Sony and Microsoft this year Sony has nothing to compete with.

Xbox gets my vote.

Xbox, all PS fanboys are super insecure about it.

Like Cup said, this is a silly thread, it's an insult comparing Sega to Xbox. What a sinful thread you made Solid😑😡

@davillain: how is it silly when the poll is 50/50 just bcuz your a mod doesn’t mean you have to be an asshole

@icrackurnuts: I tell it like it is. Never insult Sega like that.

What's wild about this comparison is Sega basically did Gamepass in the 90s. Look up the Sega Channel. It's absolutely wild that it happened.

Can't tell is TC is serious or just rekt?

I was a kid, but yes, I remember the Sega Channel!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_Channel

In April 1993, Sega announced the Sega Channel service, which would usecable televisionservices to deliver content.^[5]In the US, national testing began in June, and deployment began in December,^[6]with a complete US release in 1994.^[7]By June 1994, 21 cable companies had signed up to carry the Sega Channel service.^[8]US fees varied depending on location, but were approximatelyUS$15 monthly, plus a $25 activation fee, which included the adapter.^[7]The Sega Channel expanded into Canada in late 1995, with an approximatelyCan$19 monthly fee.^[9]During the planning stages of the service, Sega looked to capitalize on the rental market, which had seen some success with theSega CDbeing rented throughBlockbuster, and was looking to base the service's games and demos to sell more cartridges.^[5]

The people have spoken and it’s a close race!

@SolidGame_basic: you mean from your highly scientific poll? Lol.

@davillain: how did he insult sega exactly ?

Don't insult Sega. Sega made better games than the other 3 combined. Sega just made bad choices in the hardware market.

No other console in history had the amount of bangers the Dreamcast had in the 2yrs it had on the market. The Saturn is severely underrated, it was the king of fighting games and racing games.

The 32X and Mega CD were missteps for sure, but still had some good games, just not enough of them.

The Mega Drive was the bomb and easily shat all over the SNES, it wasn't even close.

Same for the Master System.

Game Gear was nice, but the tech wasn't the greatest, but for its time was good, just software support wasn't the best.

So, Sega is by far better than Xbox, and also better than every Nintendo device and especially anything Sony has ever made.

Sega forever baby.

Imagine coming home from work getting dinner ready then putting your kids to bed and have an hour or two to play games of a night and buy a console because of their ease to play. Those people (myself included) are scum to you.

You should go outside and meet some new people and maybe you will get a better (more accurate) understanding on people who have an actual life and have way less gaming time than you do.

But hey what would I know i'm just scum lol.

Sega had more of an identity that Xbox ever had.

Imagine looking your children in the eye and telling them you can’t slot a GPU and install the drivers in 2 minutes or less. Those children don’t deserve that

Both. 😂

Sega was in the console business for ~12 years while Xbox has been in the console business for 23 years and counting. 🤔

I don't think I could say Sega because PlayStation only ever beat the crap out of them.

Meanwhile, the PS3 vs X360 was arguably the greatest rivalry ever. Heck, that whole generation was a whirlwind.

Sega!

Sega has more of an identity than Xbox/PS/Nintendo and PC.

As for your other comment well, imagine sitting in your own filth on the shitter playing the Switch to get away from children, those children don't deserve that.

Sega.

Hardware wise, Sega were the pioneers of almost everything Xbox is known for.

Software wise, Sega's first-party output was far superior to Xbox as well.

This is not a fair comparison, as you're comparing Xbox in its prime to Sega past its prime. You have to compare prime to prime for a fair assessment:

• When Sega was in its prime, Mega Drive was the market leader for years and ended up second place.
• When Xbox was in its prime, Xbox 360 was in second place for years and ended up third place.

In terms of market share, prime Sega clearly performed better than prime Xbox.

Sega vs Nintendo was the best rivalry. Each had their own style, the console you bought had a dramatic effect on what types of games you would play. Xbox and Playstation are slightly different takes on the same idea. Sony did triple down on cinematic open world action games since last gen, but it's not a huge difference when they can only seem to pump out two or so a year.

Sega in their prime were in a distant 2nd place. Mega Drive sold 30m, while the Super N sold 49m…Mega Drive was not the market leader worldwide. They were second place for years and ended up collapsing due to poor hardware decisions (32x, mega cd) which meant they were never a serious competitor to Sony.
In terms of market share, Sega’s systems never came close to competing. Xbox 360 did, and even the much maligned Xbox one sold more than Segas best selling console which was sold at the height of the video game hype.

You are talking crap. None of Sega's consoles were sold at the height of the "video game hype" as you call it.

The Sega Mega Drive is reported to be between 30-40 million consoles sold while the SNES is 54 million.

Now compare that with the sales of the PS3 & Xbox 360 which are both at just over 85 million each. Please do some research before you talk out of your arse next time.

Neither.

It will be gadgets like the Steam Deck 2, and their portable rivals. Gives people what they want - a gaming machine without having to build it yourself, that will play the games they want at a reasonable price and an easy way to play on your holidays or business trips. If they wanted to play on an Xbox they would be already.

Of course if there was a comparably priced PC that would be competition.

The Mega Drive sold between 35-40 million. The 30.75m number is incomplete and doesn't include Majesco (Genesis 3), Tectoy (Brazil) or Samsung (Korean) models, which each sold millions. The only reason SNES won worldwide is because of Japan, where the Mega Drive was a flop (like Xbox) and SNES had a huge 14m lead. If you exclude Japan, then the Mega Drive sold slightly more overseas.

Do you understand what market share even means? Do you understand how percentages work? The console market today is much larger than it was in the 16-bit era, when an entire generation of Gen Z gamers weren't even born yet, so it's silly to compare sales figures directly like that. Market share means what percent of the market they controlled at the time.

Xbox 360 never came anywhere close to Mega Drive's market share. The Gen 7 market leader was the Wii, which was dominating the 360. The 360 was instead forced to compete for second place against the PS3, only to end up third. Don't compare the 360's distant third place finish to the Mega Drive's close second place finish.

Even with the Mega Drive variants, those numbers don’t top Nintendos….and if we then include Nintendo variants we have to add another 5.7 m consoles which puts the Mega drive into a distant second place in a two horse race….why you are trying to discount sales in Japan is beyond me.
360 sales were not a huge gap behind ps3 if at all, given that Xbox stopped releasing sales numbers at 85.4 m while ps3 sold 87.5m.

Regardless, the question was whether Sega or Xbox was a better competitor to Sony. Sega failed at the first hurdle with Dreamcast, while Xbox is still in the race.

No one is talking about retro consoles. The Mega Drive Mini also sold millions a few years ago. Back in the '90s, the Mega Drive sold between 35-40m, only 9-14m behind the SNES (49m). And that lead is entirely due to the 14m lead the SNES had in Japan. Sega fumbled the bag in Japan (like Xbox), but was otherwise the market leader in overseas markets.

The topic is who was a better competitor to both PlayStation and Nintendo. You keep ignoring Nintendo, because it makes the Xbox 360 look worse when it came a distant third behind both the Wii and PS3.

You are wrong again the Sega Saturn was in direct competition to the PS1, then the Dreamcast came out it was competing against the PS2. So, Sega fought for 2 gens with Sony, but its poor decisions before the Playstation was a thing left them in a not so good financial position.

So please do some research on Sega before you post as you've made it very clear you know very little about them.

The only reason Xbox is on the market (let's not say race when Phil has already declared Xbox lost) is because MS is a trillion-dollar company.

@Jag85: I hope they do mini consoles for the Saturn and Dreamcast

Yes, you’re right. Saturn was Segas hope against PlayStation. But it didn’t fail because of a lack of finances. It failed because it was more expensive, harder to develop for than a PS, was way worse at 3d games, suffered from a bizarre conceptual advertising campaign and just didn’t get the same support from 3rd party devs.

Sega didn’t win against Nintendo in any race and utterly failed to compete against Sony. Xbox at least went neck and neck with Sony with the 360 and has the staying power to compete.

They did in places like the UK and Brazil. Minor, but this statement is wrong.

So many nubs on this forum. Learn2game

Damn..i didn't think being last was a competition...congratulations sony..you got it in the bag..

Yes, it was more expensive because Sega had big financial failures with the Mega CD & 32X and not doubt Sega thought that Sony wasn't a threat and tried to recoup some of those finances with the higher priced Saturn which bit them in the arse.

When we look at the OG Xbox it sold poorly compared to others and the 360 was so advanced ahead of the PS2 the graphics were night and day difference and released a year earlier than the PS3 which got it a lot of sales. When released at the same time as a Sony console the Xbox hasn't fared so well.

XB1 was around 60 million consoles behind last gen and its looking even worse this gen, MS money is keeping it on the market.

The Saturn was at least on-par with the PS1 in terms of 3D performance. The Saturn was just harder to develop for, so third-party studios struggled to push its 3D performance. But Sega's first-party and second-party studios were able to pull off 3D performance that could match or even surpass the PS1.

Sega was neck-and-neck with Nintendo for most of the 16-bit era, both competing for the top spot. In contrast, Xbox was getting dominated by Nintendo in Gen 7... Competing with Sony means nothing when both Xbox and Sony were getting dominated by Nintendo that generation.

Gen 4 (16-bit era)

1. SNES
2. Sega Mega Drive
3. PC Engine
4. Neo Geo

Gen 7

1. Wii
2. PS3
3. Xbox 360

Spot the difference yet? Mega Drive was second place and fighting for first place. Xbox 360 was third place and fighting for second place. Mega Drive was competing on a higher level than Xbox 360.

Sega by far.

I love Xbox too. Sega just brought their A game

@Jag85:

In Xbox's defense they came out swinging their first gen and reached second place above the gamecube but I will say its less impressive than sega since they had a trillion dollar mega corp bank rolling them lmao.

The Gen 7 comparison is a bit dis-ingenuous though, the wii and Nintendo are to be commended for breaking into a wider market but it's not really an apples to apples comparison as both the Kinect and Move offerings demonstrated. Xbox and MS have clearly kept Sony and PS more on their toes especially in Gen7 where for the majority of the time MS was the leader in the "core" gaming market.

Phffft, stupid question.

Muti-billion-dollar Phony bullied the little guy Sega making them exit the console biz whereas Muti-trillion-dollar MS is now just kicking the teeth in of that pathetic bully. ;o

Karma baby, it can be a biotch eh? lolol :P

Obviously Xbox since they still compete.

I prefer SEGA consoles over Xbox consoles though. Wish I had some of them. Got no need for any Xbox.

Had a friend who owned the OG Xbox. 95% of the games he played on it were SNES games, lol.

True, OG Xbox came second place, but it was a very distant second selling a small fraction of what the PS2 sold. That's like when Sega came second place with the Master System (above the Atari 7800 but below the NES). Yet the Master System was more impressive as it sold close to what OG Xbox sold in an era when the console market was much smaller and even beat the NES in a handful of PAL markets (whereas PS2 dominated Xbox in every market).

Sega took it to Nintendo with great marketing across the Americas and Europe. Xbox let themselves down by poor marketing.