Sega Vs Nintendo Debate

[mypanda]

http://qmu.org.uk/qmu/2006/11/09/seg...ntendo-debate/


Thursday 16th November, Lacuna Cafe, 7pm - the first of the 2006 QM Debates. The motion: “This house believes that Nintendo consoles have been more successfulthan Sega”.

For more information, or to take a place on an official team email Sarah-Louise on: sl.macadie [at] qmu.org.uk. As she said herself:

“if people want to see some hard-hitting cool-as-chuck-norris geekiness, they should come see what all the fuss is about.”


Jamie

[endless psych]

This house should have picked an arguement that sega might have a chance of winning...

[raymccoy]

Ah yes. 1993. I remember it well.

[poprock]

I don’t. Spent the whole year drunk or stoned.

[endless psych]

Pre debate thoughts...

No nintendo no Sony playstation - it started life as the SNES CD add on...
No nintendo no Pro evo... ISS had to start life somewhere...
Nintendo should win this on evidence of hand held console sales alone...

[Potatojunkie]

Not really much of a debate, is it? "This house believes that this number is bigger than this other number".

[endless psych]

Originally Posted by Potatojunkie

Not really much of a debate, is it? "This house believes that this number is bigger than this other number".

It does strike me as a bit pointless...

All the nintendo side have to do is come in with facts and figures and its pretty much over for the sega folk...

A far more interesting debate would be "which was cooler?"

[nevali]

‘We believe the hardware produced by this company who is still producing hardware is more successful than the hardware produced by a company who got out of that business years ago to concentrate on producing the games’.

Hmm, yeah.

[Potatojunkie]

Originally Posted by endless psych

A far more interesting debate would be "which was cooler?"

Then it would just be people airing their completely entrenched opinions[1] based on which consoles they owned as a child. Besides which, the answer is a fairly straightforward "Nintendo, duh"[2].



[1]Perhaps using an elaborate and hitherto undiscovered trench-ventilation system.
[2]Insert apologetic noises about how fucking immeasurably wonderful the Dreamcast is here.

[nevali]

The Dreamcast wins, sorry folks.

Shame you can't get hold of an Ethernet adapter for one for love nor money now, mind.

[endless psych]

Originally Posted by Potatojunkie

Then it would just be people airing their completely entrenched opinions[1] based on which consoles they owned as a child. Besides which, the answer is a fairly straightforward "Nintendo, duh"[2].

Aye, but that would be more fun then a debate that starts and ends with the following...

Nintendo profits for first six months of 2006- 298.82 billion yen.
Sega profits for same period - 932 million yen

[nevali]

Those figures aren't relevant to the debate: Sega didn't sell any consoles in the first six months of 2006.

[endless psych]

Originally Posted by nevali

Those figures aren't relevant to the debate: Sega didn't sell any consoles in the first six months of 2006.

I see...

Crucially I have misread the debate title and thought it read "This house believes nintendo to have been more succsessful then Sega"

Some more relevant figures then...

Master system - 13 million units vs. NES - 60 million units. - Nintendo Win.
Mega Drive - 35 million units vs. SNES 20 million units. - Sega Win.
Mega CD - 6 million units. (No real nintendo comparison) - Sega win (default).
Saturn - 10 million units. versus Nintendo 64 - 32.93 million units. - nintendo win.
Dreamcast - 10.6 million units versus Gamecube -21.20 million units - Nintendo win.
Game gear - 8.65 million units versus gameboy 69.42 million units - Nintendo win.

[mypanda]

It also depends on how you define success I suppose. Does commercial success dominate, or are other types of success valid?

[endless psych]

Originally Posted by mypanda

It also depends on how you define success I suppose. Does commercial success dominate, or are other types of success valid?

Well commercially is the only real way you can measure a companies success objectively. Subjectively there are all sorts of ways you can measure it - How highly though of is it in the retro gaming communtiy? for example... But at the end of the day Nintendo rule the roost financially...


Plus that essentially means you are debating what constitutes success with the exemplar case of Nintendo versus Sega... Is financial success and higher sales figures success or is prestige success?