Still yearning for Dreamcast 2? You're retarded.

[Niode]

I just sound like some jaded Vietnam veteran here. You weren't there man, you don't know!

But I was there. I was there long before it. My first system was an Atari 2600 (my sister's) that we had as far back as I can remember, and the first we bought brand-new that I remember was our NES.

I just preferred the other controllers at the time. I felt PSX, Saturn, and Dreamcast controllers were all better feeling for me.

The N64 controller was leagues ahead of the PSX and Saturn's digital controllers at the time. It was revolutionary. I'll never forget playing Mario 64 on launch day, that feeling of real freedom in a game. That would have been impossible without the N64's controller. I just can't understand why anyone would dislike the controller, it's a great controller.

[aaron]

because it looks like a CLAW. a big, scary CLAW.

[Original_Name]

The Dreamcast was perhaps before your time. The guys (like me) that were there from day one absolutely adore it because the games were amazing at the time. Dreamcast is easily my most played console to date. I must have logged at least 300-400 hours in PSO alone. It has hands down the best good game to crap game ratio of any popular console ever. Given all the titles on the system and choosing at random you'd be hard pushed to find a game that isn't good.

As the person who shat on the Dreamcast first in this thread, I have to say I disagree. I was there. Day one. Over the course of time that I owned the system, I amassed at least 100 or so games. 12 controllers, so there was always a spare when one broke down -- being that there were so many arcade games, it tended to be the go-to party system. However over time, everyone (including me) tired of it. Most of the games are short, and relatively devoid of extra content to help extend their longevity. As I said in my post, many of them have not aged well at all. Crazy Taxi, which was initially very fun, I can barely sit with it for five minutes. Powerstone was initially very fun too for the first little bit, and then no-one wanted to play that either. (Even GameSpot agrees: "Expect to enjoy it immensely for the first week or two, but don't expect to find very much long-term fun.")

That was my main problem with the system. Everything had this initial glow, but only a very small number were able to last only a few months after purchase, let alone now. To me, all the Dreamcast represents is a sum of absolutely everything Sega did so very wrong in the last years of their hardware business. Really, now that I think about it, it's a sum of everything they did wrong with their software too. In the past 10 years, they've only produced a very small handful of worthwhile titles. It's sad.

I wouldn't want to take away from anyone else's love for the system - you like what you like for whatever reason. I just never felt the Dreamcast deserved this bizarre cult status it's attained, because the games are simply not what the fans make them out to be. It's no Neo-Geo, you know?

Wait... you just discredited the Sega Dreamcast on the basis of having too many arcade ports, then you turn around and praise the Neo-Geo? Haha, that's so weird.

I'll try and be fair, but I find most criticism against the Dreamcast a little bit difficult to comprehend... the console was around for about two and a half years, and in that time managed to amass a library which stands up favorably towards consoles which hung around for twice that time. Backed by a company that pretty much understood they had no chance of succeeding from the outset, no less.

It deserves that cult following because it's the most original and innovative console ever... seriously, it covered more ground than any other console and did it in half the time. Online interface and functionality, motion controls, voice-recognizing technology, and the VMU, and these all came into use in compelling ways in games across a wide variety of genres: Phantasy Star Online, Samba de Amigo, Seaman, NFL 2K1, Sonic Adventure, and Skies of Arcadia all made great use of these features. Not to mention games like Shenmue, Rez, Ikaruga, Seaman (once again), The Typing of the Dead, and Jet Set Radio which are all still totally fresh experiences in their own rights.

Your main gripe with the games seems to be that their sheen wore off rather quickly, but this can be said for the majority of games on any console -- only a very few will ever feel completely timeless. To your credit, many of the games were going out on a limb and trying to do things that were new or just plain weird as later efforts from other developers capitalized on the groundwork they laid, and have thus aged a little faster than most, but still many of the experiences remain completely distinct from any game released prior or since, and that's why they continue to captivate people to this day. Really though, I get the feeling that these timeless games you're comparing these Dreamcast games to were most likely released on a myriad of different consoles and time-periods. Most consoles amass about five timeless games in their standard five year lifetime... I'm pretty sure you'd be able to think of that many on the Dreamcast as well, which is a true testament to the ground it covered in those short years.

In terms of the games not having much replay value, I beg to differ... there's plenty of unlockable content in SoulCalibur, Sonic Adventure, Power Stone 2, Samba de Amigo, Space Channel 5: Part 2, Toy Commander, Marvel vs. Capcom 2, Rez, Jet Set Radio, Shenmue, and Phantasy Star Online. I've spent more hours with my Dreamcast than any other system, and not out of pure delusion, but because there's just so much to do and it never feels like a chore to me.

Finally, you have to realize you're really in the minority when you say the Dreamcast represents everything Sega did wrong in hardware... it's pretty much the consensus that the Dreamcast is the quintessence of the potential Sega denied themselves with their lousy western business practices in years prior. The Dreamcast didn't fail because of the games, it failed because Sega didn't have money. While it's not hard to see how Sega got on peoples' bad sides, there was a two-year stretch during the Dreamcast period and immediately after where they were simply the best video game company that has ever been. Other companies may be considered better in the long-run over the course of ten/twenty years or so, but the quality/quantity ratio of Sega's output during that time will simply never be matched by anyone. Period.

Also, of course they haven't been as good in the past ten years -- they only have, what, 10% of their old personnel and were bought out by a pachinko company that serves as a front for the yakuza. The fact that they've made any good games is miraculous.

[irixith]

All I can say is that was a great post.

There's a certain clapping image I think you're entitled to.

Edit: ..and I think you're right, Sega did do an awful lot of experimental, innovative and just plain weird things with the Dreamcast. Some worked, some didn't, and overall it definitely contributed to a pile of games that haven't aged particularly well.

The reason I said it's no Neo-Geo is because those games just manage to ENDURE somehow. The gameplay never feels stale, and each and every one of them still manages to look pretty fabulous as the years go on. I don't get the same feeling with Dreamcast games, even the most special amongst them.

[Original_Name]

Haha, I really appreciate that! I was doing my best to come off without seeming like I was in a hostile nerd-rage, but you've gotta understand that the Dreamcast is my baby! Anyway, you don't have to love the Dreamcast and I won't think any less of you -- I just won't understand why you'd feel that way is all.

EDIT: That's fair. I guess it's kinda like the Sex Pistols of video game consoles... it endures more on the memory of what it was at the time than what it is now. To call it all style and no substance would be a disservice, but the substance always came in really strange ways that either you click with or you don't.

Ah, okay, the Neo comment is much more understandable now.

[emwearz]

The article actually made me laugh.

DON'T WATCH OLD MOVIES THEY ARE CRAP, ONLY NEW MOVIES WITH BETTER EFFECTS ARE GOOD!

That would have been impossible without the N64's controller. I just can't understand why anyone would dislike the controller, it's a great controller.

I agree, who cares what it looks like, put it in your hand and it just fits!

Of course it only works for a year before the thumbstick is useless, but thats not the point.

[MrEco]

I have to disagree on the N64 controller. It never felt good to me. The button placement seemed nonsensical and the analog stick felt really flimsy and was no fun to use.

[Czernobog]

I actually found the N64 controller really uncomfortable and found using the c buttons awkward. Maybe it just fits some of our hands poorly and some of our hands very well.

[Niode]

The Dreamcast was perhaps before your time. The guys (like me) that were there from day one absolutely adore it because the games were amazing at the time. Dreamcast is easily my most played console to date. I must have logged at least 300-400 hours in PSO alone. It has hands down the best good game to crap game ratio of any popular console ever. Given all the titles on the system and choosing at random you'd be hard pushed to find a game that isn't good.

As the person who shat on the Dreamcast first in this thread, I have to say I disagree. I was there. Day one. Over the course of time that I owned the system, I amassed at least 100 or so games. 12 controllers, so there was always a spare when one broke down -- being that there were so many arcade games, it tended to be the go-to party system. However over time, everyone (including me) tired of it. Most of the games are short, and relatively devoid of extra content to help extend their longevity. As I said in my post, many of them have not aged well at all. Crazy Taxi, which was initially very fun, I can barely sit with it for five minutes. Powerstone was initially very fun too for the first little bit, and then no-one wanted to play that either. (Even GameSpot agrees: "Expect to enjoy it immensely for the first week or two, but don't expect to find very much long-term fun.")

That was my main problem with the system. Everything had this initial glow, but only a very small number were able to last only a few months after purchase, let alone now. To me, all the Dreamcast represents is a sum of absolutely everything Sega did so very wrong in the last years of their hardware business. Really, now that I think about it, it's a sum of everything they did wrong with their software too. In the past 10 years, they've only produced a very small handful of worthwhile titles. It's sad.

I wouldn't want to take away from anyone else's love for the system - you like what you like for whatever reason. I just never felt the Dreamcast deserved this bizarre cult status it's attained, because the games are simply not what the fans make them out to be. It's no Neo-Geo, you know?

Wait... you just discredited the Sega Dreamcast on the basis of having too many arcade ports, then you turn around and praise the Neo-Geo? Haha, that's so weird.

I'll try and be fair, but I find most criticism against the Dreamcast a little bit difficult to comprehend... the console was around for about two and a half years, and in that time managed to amass a library which stands up favorably towards consoles which hung around for twice that time. Backed by a company that pretty much understood they had no chance of succeeding from the outset, no less.

It deserves that cult following because it's the most original and innovative console ever... seriously, it covered more ground than any other console and did it in half the time. Online interface and functionality, motion controls, voice-recognizing technology, and the VMU, and these all came into use in compelling ways in games across a wide variety of genres: Phantasy Star Online, Samba de Amigo, Seaman, NFL 2K1, Sonic Adventure, and Skies of Arcadia all made great use of these features. Not to mention games like Shenmue, Rez, Ikaruga, Seaman (once again), The Typing of the Dead, and Jet Set Radio which are all still totally fresh experiences in their own rights.

Your main gripe with the games seems to be that their sheen wore off rather quickly, but this can be said for the majority of games on any console -- only a very few will ever feel completely timeless. To your credit, many of the games were going out on a limb and trying to do things that were new or just plain weird as later efforts from other developers capitalized on the groundwork they laid, and have thus aged a little faster than most, but still many of the experiences remain completely distinct from any game released prior or since, and that's why they continue to captivate people to this day. Really though, I get the feeling that these timeless games you're comparing these Dreamcast games to were most likely released on a myriad of different consoles and time-periods. Most consoles amass about five timeless games in their standard five year lifetime... I'm pretty sure you'd be able to think of that many on the Dreamcast as well, which is a true testament to the ground it covered in those short years.

In terms of the games not having much replay value, I beg to differ... there's plenty of unlockable content in SoulCalibur, Sonic Adventure, Power Stone 2, Samba de Amigo, Space Channel 5: Part 2, Toy Commander, Marvel vs. Capcom 2, Rez, Jet Set Radio, Shenmue, and Phantasy Star Online. I've spent more hours with my Dreamcast than any other system, and not out of pure delusion, but because there's just so much to do and it never feels like a chore to me.

Finally, you have to realize you're really in the minority when you say the Dreamcast represents everything Sega did wrong in hardware... it's pretty much the consensus that the Dreamcast is the quintessence of the potential Sega denied themselves with their lousy western business practices in years prior. The Dreamcast didn't fail because of the games, it failed because Sega didn't have money. While it's not hard to see how Sega got on peoples' bad sides, there was a two-year stretch during the Dreamcast period and immediately after where they were simply the best video game company that has ever been. Other companies may be considered better in the long-run over the course of ten/twenty years or so, but the quality/quantity ratio of Sega's output during that time will simply never be matched by anyone. Period.

Also, of course they haven't been as good in the past ten years -- they only have, what, 10% of their old personnel and were bought out by a pachinko company that serves as a front for the yakuza. The fact that they've made any good games is miraculous.

I... I think... I think I love you.

[Original_Name]

♥ @Niode.

EDIT:

Um... you guys mind if I do a little more Dreamcast defending? The Dreamcast's D-pad... it's kind of awesome. When people refer to it as a "cheese-grater," I immediately know they're using it incorrectly. Okay, so it's elevated and has a cross-shape without the diagonals "filled-in" like on the Saturn's pad, right? So the problem is when you're doing a Hadouken, say, placing your thumb at the very bottom of the D-pad and sliding it diagonally upward and "scraping" your thumb against the bottom edge of the right "arrow" of D-pad? Ow, right?

Okay, well everyone get out your Dreamcast controllers... see that little semi-spherical indention in the D-pad. Put your thumb in the center of the D-pad and center your weight around that indention. The pad of your thumb never needs to leave this general position. As in, your thumb doesn't have to go all the way to the bottom of the down "arrow" to input a "down command" or all the way to the end of the right "arrow" to input a "right command" -- just keep your thumb in that little indention and shift its weight. I promise you'll never scrape your thumbs up on a Dreamcast D-pad ever again.

Now -- I will say that although the Dreamcast's D-pad is tremendous if you know how to use it, there is a slight problem in design if people have to be "taught" how to use it -- these things should be more universally intuitive. Personally, I always "got" how to use the pad comfortably and effectively, but lots'a smart and experienced gamers get burned on it.

Anyway, it's one of my favorite controllers ever, unsurprisingly. It's really precise, too -- look at the "Controller" segment: http://www.destructoid.com/destructoid- ... 7743.phtml The mold of the controller doesn't fit some peoples' hands it seems (although you might try holding it by focusing your weight more on pressing the bottom-parts of the sides with the bottoms of your palms rather than gripping the back of the pad with your finger-tips/pressing the top of your palm under your pointer finger against the top-parts of the sides), but honestly, I sometimes feel like they molded the damn thing to fit my hands, so I'm in love with the thing.

EDIT EDIT:

One of these days I should get around to making video tutorials for holding the Dreamcast controller... and how to play Sonic R...