/v/ - Video Games

Sega would make games other than Sonic and Football Manager, and Nintendo would still be better off because Sega could never into handhelds.

>>13813817

Wrong

>>13813864

Wrong one.

>>13813874

>>13813874

Mate, it sold like shit. So did the Lynx, so did the Vita. The PSP is the only non-Nintendo handheld to ever sell well, and it still got outdone by the DS. And frankly, the PSP only sold well because of Europe sucking Sony's cock and because of piracy.

if nintendo was on top, they'd be bigger jews than EA. in the 90s nintendo was synonymous with predatory business practices specifically targeted at children.

they even had the hotline that was priced like a phone sex line that enouraged kids to call for tips. they sold non-functioning gimmicks to kids and didnt support their products.

nintendos "glory days" of the 90s is just nostalgia for forgetful people.

nintendo is actually a big reason many developers made games with steep difficulty curves and cryptic shit. nintendo encouraged this so people couldnt beat a game by renting it, or at the very least would have to buy a strategy guide or a subscription to their magazine.

sega was always better in this regard, but sega tried to nickel/dime people on the hardware.

NEC was the least jewish console developer in the 90s with the turbografx/pcengine. but it didnt sell well in the states, but it was nintendos biggest competition in japan. (where sega was the weird 3rd option that almost nobody chose)

>>13813817

>Sega could never into handhelds.

What's the superior 16bit handheld to the Sega Nomad from the same era? I traded my Game Gear up for a Nomad + SMS adapter.

The only thing you Nintoddlers' handhelds had over Sega was battery preservation through no or limited colors non-backlit LCD with weak Z80 based CPUs.

Saving this shit from 404ing.

I think the easiest way to approach this is if the major competitors to Sega/Nintendo simply never came into the market, and this is immediately important. The Sega Saturn ended up being rushed in the west in order to better compete with the Playstation, which ended up backfiring miserably. Had the Playstation never released, the Saturn would have most likely done better in the console market, perhaps keeping up with Nintendo. It's also worth noting that in the mid-90s, there were some that speculated that Sega would end up becoming bigger than Nintendo. For sake of argument, let's presume that Sega continued releasing consoles to this day, since that's a part of this hypothetical situation.

As Nintendo was, and still is, more focused on gimmicks, and Sega was more focused on technicals, odds are Nintendo would be relatively similar to how they are today, whereas Sega would be not too far off from what the PS4/XBONE currently are.

Speaking of the XBONE, the absence of the XBox line impacts the industry too. Halo would help popularize the current standard control scheme of shooters, and perhaps to a lesser extent, the popularity of console FPS games as a whole. Without them in the market, odds are the PC would still hold the lion's share of shooters.

RPGs would probably largely shift to Sega's control, due to the hardware limitations that started to show themselves in the N64 era. They'd make somewhat of a comeback in the Gamecube era as they did in this timeline, but still be a minority.

The handheld market would be very similar to today's market, with Nintendo duking it out with mobile systems, with Sega being an afterthought at best.

As to whether or not it would be as jewey, Nintendo would probably be in a similar boat as they are now. Amiibos would still be rampant, and they'd probably still be cracking down on fangames. Sega is much more difficult to say. Much of their positive PR has come off of the backs of the negative PR other companies have been receiving, the most notable recent example being Sonic Mania's existence. So whether or not they'd retain this or take a route more similar to the other consoles of today is up for grabs, as far as I know.