> "equity has been damaged by 32x and Sega CD," and that Sony has "effectively leveraged their considerable equity from consumer electronics."
The second part is exactly it.
Sony was, and still is, in the best position to license 3rd party games for their consoles because of their extensive partnerships across several industries.
Even today Nintendo is left to survive off their own 1st party games.
I don't agree the 32x or Sega CD were ever the problem. Sure they lost money on those products, but they still had a very strong brand. I think they knew at the time that wasn't going to be enough to continue in this space and they just weren't going to beat Sony on 3rd party and Nintendo on 1st party on their home consoles which is why they started cutting costs. Today they are very far from a failed business and made a good call.
The SegaCD and 32x were most assuredly problems for Sega. They were both problematic with third party developers because their low sales made for a small addressable market. The 32x especially burned third party devs because the Saturn was announced right as the 32x was released.
If you were mid-development of a 32x game in November of 1994 you just found out a lot of the money you'd spend had been wasted. You'll either be releasing a game in a few months on a system with no future (32x) or have to spend extra money to port and release it on the Saturn.
The Saturn never got the sort of third party support that the PlayStation did. Square and Konami released system-selling games with Final Fantasy and Metal Gear Solid. That was in addition to second party games like Gran Tourismo which was a system seller as well.
> The SegaCD and 32x were most assuredly problems for Sega.
Yeah for Sega of America. Sega HQ back in Japan saw the writing on the wall when Sony started working on the PlayStation. Sony has always been massive compared to Sega or Nintendo at any point in time. Even Microsoft has had a tough time competing. This was not the hill Sega wanted to die on even if it meant not making consoles anymore. They're still worth billions, just not tens or hundreds of billions. They made the right choice to move on. The fact that fully grown adults still cling to childhood memories of what could have been instead of recognizing clear business decisions for what they were is a testament to their once genius marketing.
Both then and now Sony owns tons of intellectual property, can do whatever it dreams up hardware-wise, sell that hardware at very competitive prices, and has deep connections with just about every major publisher in the entertainment business. Just like how Sega pulled out of consoles, Sony made a similarly smart move by not bothering with its own streaming service. I don't believe they own their little experiment called Crackle anymore. Why bother when you still own the rights to a ton of stuff? Rights that they probably can't even sell if they tried because it would be illegal under anti-monopoly law. That's a better position than even Disney is currently in.
Sony is only as good as their third-party licenses. I'm can't think of a signature exclusive title for the Playstation franchise with a brand value anywhere near that of Halo, Sonic, Mario, or Zelda. I guess Horizon maybe, and the various JRPG franchises that tend to skip Xbox, but you hardly see them running a huge media blitz for the next Dragon Quest (at least in the US)
OTOH, Nintendo always has solid cards to play. They know they can bring out a Zelda or Mario game and a significant percentage of their buyers will grab it day 1.
Without a killer, propriatery IP, they're not only vulnerable to a weak patch of new titles, but they're also at risk of losing the "port war" -- if you can get the same games on PS and Xbox, or PS and PC, you'll get whichever one is better experience, cheaper, etc.
Are you kidding? Sony has a ton of major first party IPs. Uncharted, The Last of US, God of War, Gran Turismo, MLB, Ratchet & Clank are just a few that come to mind.
> "equity has been damaged by 32x and Sega CD," and that Sony has "effectively leveraged their considerable equity from consumer electronics."
The second part is exactly it.
Sony was, and still is, in the best position to license 3rd party games for their consoles because of their extensive partnerships across several industries.
Even today Nintendo is left to survive off their own 1st party games.
I don't agree the 32x or Sega CD were ever the problem. Sure they lost money on those products, but they still had a very strong brand. I think they knew at the time that wasn't going to be enough to continue in this space and they just weren't going to beat Sony on 3rd party and Nintendo on 1st party on their home consoles which is why they started cutting costs. Today they are very far from a failed business and made a good call.