Sega Says ‘We Wouldn’t Make Games For An Inferior Console’

Craig Harris, who was previously part of IGN’s Nintendo editorial team, now a Sega employee, has stated that Nintendo has to “release hardware that’s of the expectations of the gamer today”. Harris believes that the company wouldn’t bring a game to Wii U if the hardware doesn’t match up to today’s platforms.

“I don’t think we would be bringing the game to a system that would be inferior to current systems.”


95 thoughts on “Sega Says ‘We Wouldn’t Make Games For An Inferior Console’”

    1. who cares if they dont make games for WiiU ,, they will suffer because of their loss , their only chance is mobile gaming x\ I only like Sonic and the others suck .

      1. The My Nintendo News post doesn’t explain it well enough. Looking at the source, Harris is talking specifically about Aliens: Colonial Marines and how they wouldn’t be making the game for Wii U if the hardware didn’t match their expectations. So this is pretty much proof that any “Wii U is inferior to current-gen” rumor is false.

            1. which his Sega boss wouldn’t have him make a game for new system which is inferior to the current gen.

    2. Well I have never liked sega I’m fine with that. Also I dot like sonic games :( but DKCTF make me love the wii U !! It’s just awesome !!!

    1. You not understanding his point. Sega is in financial problems right now making more one games on Wii U will drain a lot money out of them and it the games doesn’t sell the profit they earned are gonna be lower than the amount the spent for the development.

      1. Yes that’s reasonable they should try another consoles to make their sonic games and make the nice ones like bayonetta only for wii U.

  1. It’s funny how they made games for their own system during the 90′s if they doesn’t make games for inferior systems.. *ba-dum-tss*

      1. If they wouldn’t make games for inferior consoles, then why did they make them for Dreamcast? That was the last console Sega made before they decided to focus on software only.

      1. There are many ways to define inferior. It was more powerful than the competition but lack of sales and interest could define it as inferior. Anyway, I was only clarifying for “Anonymous” what “Firesplitter” was trying to say.

      2. Honestly, even when sega made the Saturn to ‘beat’ the N64, Nintendo always had the best hardware in said console generation until the wii came out. Kinda funny really. Even though the wii brought a new way to play, I always wonder why they chose not to stay in the lead on terms of their hardware.

        1. I think you tried to say Dreamcast instead Saturn, anyway, Sega built a powerful console, but they forget about other related stuff as divulgation, used media and the upcoming consoles.

          1. No, I did mean saturn. Though I may off a bit. And even though i’m replying to you, i’ll try to reply to everyone. XD Yes, I am aware that Sega still made powerful consoles regardless of what I said, but Nintendo still had a step up with their hardware specs.

            @Donzaloog: Good point. although it still would have been nice for them to keep up with hardware. At least they didn’t overdo it and kept the price low on launch Unlike PS3. XD

            @Paul: Gamegear and Gameboy have a significant difference in them with hardware, the part that made a difference: power consumption. While the Game Gear, on terms of graphics, had more power, the Game Boy had significantly more battery life. The screen also was much better. It may not have been back lit, but many GameGears today (including one of mine) eventually just stop displaying anything on their screen. Gamecube was more powerful than the PS2 and Xbox from the specs posted online, but I can honestly say that they didn’t push it to the fullest potential. Now, the DS vs. PSP argument is definitely true. I kinda forgot about it to be honest since I never used my PSP for anything other than Monster Hunter. XD

            @ranma: Like I said, I don’t deny that Sega had powerful hardware. I personally wasn’t a Sega fan as a kid, but as an adult today I can definitely say Sega was very good competition and sometimes I want Microcock to go away and for Sega to come back purely to bring that spice to the console wars. Thing is, if they can’t even make games like they used to, they’d fail instantly if they came back into the console industry.

            @Troll: Genesis and NES weren’t in the same generation of consoles. Master System and NES were. SNES came out later in the generation that Genesis was in. Same for N64 and Dreamcast. Not in the same generation. Gamecube came out later in the generation Dreamcast was in. Do I need to mention that when Nintendo wanted to make the first CD based console Sony and Phillips in a sense stole their hardware? I’d go through the whole story, but I’ve got a wall of text going on here. XD And finally, Carts, in my opinion, are much better than Discs. They load almost instantaneously compared to Discs.

            Very interesting points of view from most of you. I enjoyed the discussion!

        2. It was an experiment to get more non gamers into the industry. So to make the console as affordable as possible they cut back on the power of the console and mastered motion control. The gamble paid off, they won this generation by a significant amount.

        3. Well, if you look at any functional comparison between the Snes and the Megadrive/Genesis you’ll see that they were pretty evenly matched (different strengths and weaknesses but balanced overall).

          Also, let’s not forget that the Game Boy was less powerful than the Game Gear, the DS less powerful than the PSP, and, despite your claim, the Gamecube was less powerful than the Xbox.

          Nintendo has rarely, if ever, taken the lead in hardware spec. They have often succeeded in spite of this fact, but to assert that the Wii was their first underpowered console is just plain factually incorrect.

          1. The gamecube vs. xbox thing is always debatable. But no, Sega always had very good hardware. Pound for pound the saturn was more powerful than the ps1 (but much to hard to program for), and the dreamcast wasn’t too far behind the ps2 (Don’t believe me? Pop in Shenmue). I really don’t know what my point is, I’m tired lol. I would like to see sega make a comeback though. Sonic Adventure was awesome, I just don’t know what happened with sega after that. I suppose the death of the arcade in america has something to do with that. Those were the glory days, before non-gaming companies built systems by board meetings. I’m still waiting for my Dreamcast 2, and the space next to my Nintendo system will always be empty waiting for it.

    1. Genesis = 16 Bit NES = 8 Bit
      Dreamcast = Disc Based, Gamecube Level Graphics, Internet Connection. N64: Cartidge, 64 bit, no internet.

      1. Dreamcast did not have gamecube level graphics it was above N64 and below PS2. Gamecube had the best hardware of the generation, but using the mini disks is what limited what people could do with the system it did not hold as much data as regular DVDs, also I never understood why people always said that the Wii was just 2 Gamecubes put together since Gamecube was very powerful

  2. What would make the WiiU inferior, graphical potential, it doesn’t matter, graphics don’t make or break a game, sure it’s nice, but if the gameplay/story is crap, it doesn’t matter if you have the most realistic graphics ever, it’s just polished crap.

    1. *sigh* you sir are really a dumbass. Story is obviously important but the console doesn’t control that the devs do graphics however the console controls they want the best graphics possible if that lags behind the PS3 and Xbox 360 than we know the Wii U is a total piece of shit because the PS3 and Xbox 360 came out 6 years ago the Wii U comes out this year it should be doing laps around them. You understand why they don’t want to waste their time?

      1. no you are an idiot. best graphics possable? lmao! I can name a laot of games for both consoles with shity graphics and still were successfull. your just a fucking tool fixated on graphics like alot of gamers and fanboys are now a days.

        1. Learn to spell correctly before you attempt a rebuttal. It makes you look like a fool. Also you clearly don’t know what a fanboy is. Fanboys are not “fixated on graphics” as you say. Fanboys stick with a company/game series even if they make decisions that are not the most wise. Get your facts straight, learn to spell, and use proper grammar. Maybe people will listen to you if you fix these three flaws of yours.

        1. If graphics don’t matter, then Nintendo should make the WiiU 16 bit, right? *Then we could all play the next Smash Bros with amazing gameplay but with 90s technology! *sarcasm

          1. Allow me to make sense of this whole thing.

            Are graphics important? OF FUCKING COURSE graphics are important, it’s what the fuck we look at! Without graphics, we’re all playing black screens!

            Now. Are having cutting edge, Top of the Line, realistic, OH-MAI-GAWD-DAT-BLADE-OF-GRASS-IS-SO-PURDY graphics important? Depends on the game. Look at a game like DarkSiders II. It’s an open world you can explore. Of COURSE it has to look good, because no one wants to explore a world that looks like it was done in MS Paint….

            Now look at kirby. Imagine if kirby’s world was all brown and realistic.

            ……
            ……
            …..

            See what I mean?

            1. @Magi

              I know exactly what you mean. So many people can be ‘graphics whores’, but there’s a lot of ‘gameplay whores’ as well. Not every game should have ‘realistic’ graphics, like you said; it depends on the type of game it is. My thing is, I think Nintendo should make their WiiU years ahead of its time, in every aspect, graphics being one of them.

      2. I agree in that, the WiiU SHOULD be doing laps around the 360 and PS3, AND be keeping pace with the next Gen boxes.

        Nintendo fans… Yes, graphics are only one slice of the pie, but WiiU NEEDS TO BE BETTER than today’s consoles… A lot better. I think that’s what he is saying.

      3. You want best graphics, just get a PC. Don’t ever use the graphics argument for gaming, cuz you will lose. Every time.

  3. Nowadays it’s all hardware, hardware, graphics, power, hardware… don’t people realize that those are some of the least important parts of the game? Some of my favorite games have 8-bit or 16-bit graphics.

    Instead, focus on what can be done with the new controller to create an awesome new gameplay experience – that’s one of the most important aspects, some of my least-favorite games are only my least-favorite because they lack good gameplay.

      1. I agree with most everything you have said. However, I believe Nintendo made the new controller as a “selling point.” I however, think this is nothing more than a gimmick. The best kind of game was one with a “normal” controller and actually good gameplay.
        Nintendo obviously made the new controller as a focusing point of the new console, so obviously they’re going to have to show what it can really do. I, for one, am still not convinced with the giant touch screen controller idea. I hope Nintendo proves me wrong.

    1. He’s actually a really fun journalist (or was, anyways) and has always been a Nintendo fan. His reviews were some of the best reads on IGN Nintendo.

      The quote is taken out of context and twisted. Craig said that they wouldn’t be making “the” game — meaning Aliens: Colonial Marines — for an inferior system. This makes sense. SEGA was one of only a handful of consistent Wii supporters, but rarely did they downscale an HD game to get it on Wii.

      This quote is not proof that devs are growing ignorant to “what’s important” in a video games, nor is it a slight at Nintendo. Craig is just saying they wouldn’t port the game if it meant sacrificing better graphics, more rendering power, and sophisticated artificial intelligence.

  4. I’m very glad to hear this. They also said the Wii U version of Aliens will be the definitive one so I’m really psyched to see how it turns out.

    Man, people are really buying into that stupid “Wii U is weaker than the current gen” rumour from April fools week. That’s just sad. Reggie himself said the Wii U will run native 1080p. We have nothing to worry about, Nintendo will deliver at a reasonable price like they always do.

    Leave luck to heaven.

  5. I’m all for Nintendo but graphics do play a part. I like seeing a beautiful game because it really immerses you into the game. But like I said its all the parts put together that make a game including music, online capabilities, and story.

    But about the quote I think he means that, they wouldn’t make games for a system if it couldn’t keep up. Meaning Alien Colonial Marines wouldn’t come to Wii U but it will.

    On a side note: if the Wii U gives me any less of an online experience as the Xbox 360. I’ll be really disappointed. I need good online play, easy to add friends, and downloadable arcade games like the other systems get.

  6. I paused until I read the guy was from IGN previously. That douche isn’t a Sega exec, let alone reputable source. Move along folks.

  7. Note the “The” in there: He is referring to Aliens etc, not the company as a whole. Sega would usually not hesitate a second to bring out a Sonic game that uses as many of the Wii U controller’s gimmicks as possible. And they have the Mario and Sonic games that usually sell like Olympics tickets.

    1. But yeah – I can see what he means. Some games could run better or not. Sonic – they’ll attempt to make on any console.

    2. Thats a good example of letting the american branch of a japanese company design hardware. It almost would have worked if it was a year or 2 earlier…. not 6 months before the saturn. Maybe more games would have been released for it and people would have clearly seen the difference between it and the snes. But Sega made plenty of mistakes and their bottom line shows it now. Its a crying shame because I love sega. From Sonic to Virtual-On, it was always a blast. I guess they didn’t age well….

  8. But… Sega’s already developing for the Wii U.
    So, is he implying that it isn’t an inferior console? That’s how I’m reading into it until we get some clarification.

  9. Sega is already planning on WII U release games and Sega has also stated that Nintendo platforms are perfect for SONIC games so this guy is talking out of hiss ass

  10. Game devs won’t make games for a system that won’t be able to support them. Yes, there will be 3rd party games on the Wii U. Question is will they be 3rd party games that gamers are asking for? Nintendo is losing their grip… I hate to admit it but unless they bump up the Wii U’s specs (which it’s probably too late), they’re looking at a very disappointing release. The Wii U isn’t even considered next gen tech, other than the controller, which doesn’t even broadcast in 1080p like rumors said it would. Gamers today are looking for good games with good graphics and excellent gameplay. Unfortunately, game devs who make such games (3rd parties) won’t be interested in the Wii U because the next gen games will be too much for the Wii U to handle…. Nintendo won’t do well without GOOD 3rd party support… and I’m not talking Barbie’s Horse Adventures and all those other horrible games you see on the Wii’s shelf. I mean the games that most (and I hate saying this too….but…) MAINSTREAM gamers play.

    I <3 Nintendo more than any other game company… but their making more disappointments with me since the Wii release. They need to STEP IT UPPPPPP BRUHHHH -.-

  11. if sega won’t make games for an inferior console, then why did they make games for the saturn???

    but seriously, who does sega think they’re kidding? they’re going to continue whoring out their most iconic character to any system that’ll take him just like the last couple generations. and if they want to say that they won’t put games on an “inferior console”, then companies that still make consoles should be able to tell sega that they won’t allow sub-par games to be on their console, so no more storybook games or games that looked like they took a week to develop like sonic 06

  12. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
    While some developer realize the problems of drastic hardware improvement, the exponential development costs, other, morons, who are unfortunately the majority, don’t realize that and trash talk.
    But a year later you can see them cry for 100 pirated games and how they ruined the game. Not the fact that you need to sell 5 million copies just to get the invested money back without a profit.

    In my most honest opinion, without any fanboyism included, MS and Sony are pushing the hardware to far. Nintendo is the one who keeps playing smart and thinks about it’s consumer and the most widely spread hardware.

    Sony released the PS3 in order to push their television sales. When the PS3 and xbox 360 came out, most people didn’t even have a LCD TV, not to speak about a HD one.
    But they released the consoles. You had either a choice to buy a TV for it, or let the console go to waste because your TV couldn’t show the huge difference.
    The Wii was perfect at that time.

    Now the average Joe has a 720p TV at best. A 1080p console would go to waste because the majority doesn’t have TV’s to support that. I don’t want to play extra for a bigger resolution which I can’t use. The extra cost would be just waste to me.

    The Wii U is perfect in that sense. It can play 720p at 60+ FPS without problems
    Also, add to that the fact that even 60$ is way to much for me, while games at my place cost around 90$ when converted from euros. Increasing the price of game because of the development costs would either force me to give up on gaming or go pirating games. I don’t wish any of those 2 to happen. But if the costs jumps, which will happen 100% if the hardware jump between consoles is huge, I will have no choice.

    But thanks God Nintendo is keeping a cool head so I don’t have to worry about this anytime soon. I will have my SSB, Zelda and Mario fix for the standard price.

    1. Well said, Kira. I agree completely. The world economy is in a bad place right now. Nintendo needs to consider this when pricing the Wii U. I think they’ll make a smart choice with that one.

    2. It’s because of Sony and Microsoft (but mostly Microsoft) that’s why console gaming is going to the dogs. Nintendo is like the only one who actually gives a crap about maintaining the integrity of console gaming. That’s why, even though nobody wishes it, they will always find new ways for people to game, whether it be through motion controls or touchpad gaming. You can argue that Sony and Microsoft support innovative gaming as well, and I’d tell you that they only added those things as an afterthought, because they realized too late that console gaming integrity is more important than doing everything that PC gaming has already done, like awesome graphics for instance.

    3. At this point I’m not sure it can be helped. Any way you look at it, even Nintendo will have to increase prices soon to meet gamer demands. Maybe not in the Wii U generation, but possible after that. It still may be the difference in paying $80 for a Nintendo game and $120 for a PS4 or 720 game, but its still there. I for one don’t mind paying $80 for a game, if its a good and well designed game. One thing I WON’T do is pay $80 for a half complete game that requires me to pay additional DLC prices for stuff that should have been included in the first place, nor will I pay $200 for a “special” edition game just because it comes with a map, t-shirt, tin-case, strategy guide, and whatever else. That extra cost should be to continue making great games, not giving us a bunch of stuff we don’t need, like as you said, 1080p graphics when there is barely a discernible difference from 720p, and the majority of people world-wide to not own high-def sets.

  13. For fuck’s sake, flickr, label your posts accurately. SEGA did not say this, an employee with no control over the company did.

  14. even if SEGA made games for the Wii U, I wouldnt buy them, normally it was “i wouldnt buy SEGA unless its Sonic”, but thats changed, because Sonic has gone SO MUCH downhill, now they just look like games where you just run around and dont really have an obstacles, emeralds, or bosses, the bad guys (from my experience) are on the side and the only obstacles are ledges or gaps where the solution is jump or use a spring. Put together a game for the wii u with classic Sonic gameplay and the graphics of the wii u (even though i like the old graphics better) THEN I’d buy it.

  15. Yeah because that totally happened with the Wii right? SEGA didn’t release any games on the Wii because it was technically inferior.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s