So, Sega's apparently going through a real rough patch at the minute. Amidst shutting down studios and laying off development staff, it's now rumoured that they may well have cancelled development on Bayonetta 2.

On the one hand, that in itself is pretty tragic. After all, Bayonetta is probably the stand-out hack-and-slash action game of this generation, and received more critical acclaim than any of its competitors. You'd think that if any game were to be given priority sequel status, this would be the one. Going beyond just Bayonetta, though, this is a real tragedy for the industry in general. Sega has said that they plan to focus on existing franchises and IPs now, along with digital sales, and this is pretty much a tragic 180 turn on everything they've been doing this generation so far.

Say what you will about their constant schedule of Sonic games, but Sega has probably been the one major publisher this generation to consistently focus and invest in original games and franchises. They published Condemned: Criminal Origins and its sequel, the aforementioned Bayonetta, Vanquish (probably the single most unique third-person shooter this generation), The Club, Resonance Of Fate, Alpha Protocol Valkyria Chronicles... at a time when virtually every other AAA publisher is being reduced to crapping out annual instalments of their biggest franchises, Sega seemed to be pretty serious about maintaining a varied, original lineup. You only have to look at their games roster for the previous generation to see how vast the spectrum of their range of games was. They published Jet Set Radio, for god's sakes...

And it appears that for all this, they're tanking. While ActiBlizzard rake in record profits with every COD installment, it seems that publishers which try to maintain at least a somewhat original lineup of games are doomed to make losses and end up shedding large parts of their development staff.

Is anyone else here disappointed that Sega seems to have been almost forced by the market to adopt a more conservative, homogenic approach to games publishing? Is it down to the fact that they're one of the only publishers not pushing out annual war shooters? Is this indicative of what it takes for a publisher to survive in the industry: less emphasis on originality, and more emphasis on copying the stuff that games are already buying in droves?

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Is anyone else here disappointed that Sega seems to have been almost forced by the market to adopt a more conservative, homogenic approach to games publishing? Is it down to the fact that they're one of the only publishers not pushing out annual war shooters? Is this indicative of what it takes for a publisher to survive in the industry: less emphasis on originality, and more emphasis on copying the stuff that games are already buying in droves?

Well, Paradox Interactive seems to be doing rather well and it releases mostly "Original titles": http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/magicka/1216907p1.html

GameSpy: How big of a chunk of your business right now is PC gaming?

Fred Wester: It's an overwhelming majority is PC. Over 95% is PC. And 97% of that is digital download. So we're pretty much all-in on the digital side, and there's been a transition in the past four to five years. It's been very quick. I think people underestimate how willing customers are to change if the service is right. If you take what Steam's doing for example, they've been the pioneers of PC gaming for the past years, and really shown that you can do some great services, and that people are willing to pay if the service is good. And that's something that we've been sort of piggybacking on that as well.

I might've bought Bayonetta, but they decided to not release it on PC so I decided it isn't worth my money or attention xD

We'll see how well they do with their upcoming "Aliens: Colonial Marines".

I wonder what that means for Shenmue HD? And the fabled Streets Of Rage 4 for that matter. Now that game I'd potentially kill for to get made.

So... I guess my wishes for a Vanquish 2 are hopeless, then?

I think this may be yet another example of why the $60 price point is too high. Think about it; yearly installments of games like CoD, Madden, and FIFA do very well at that price point, as do sequels, in all cases because they're known quantities; gamers can expect to get their money's worth on a blind buy. New IPs? Not so much, something that Sega seems to have learned the hard way; I mean, they've basically admitted they're going to cut down to just the proven cash cows.

They publish games from maybe two good studios, however their latest games and hardware are still kick ass. Plat doesn't have any contractual obligations to work with them, I don't care about whether Sega keep IPs much since Plat can still function as a good studio without them.

What I want to know is what was with Guilty Gear, they sell and then almost immediate assist Arcsys in publishing it on a rival platform. wtf lol.

No Bayonetta 2?!?

D:

That was an awesome game. It probably had some of the best combat system and controls in any action game I've played. Not to mention the protagonist has a really nice *cough* hairsyle *cough*

I really hope Bayonetta 2 doesn't get the axe. It was one of the best games of this console generation and it deserves to live on.

Dexter111:

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Is anyone else here disappointed that Sega seems to have been almost forced by the market to adopt a more conservative, homogenic approach to games publishing? Is it down to the fact that they're one of the only publishers not pushing out annual war shooters? Is this indicative of what it takes for a publisher to survive in the industry: less emphasis on originality, and more emphasis on copying the stuff that games are already buying in droves?

Well, Paradox Interactive seems to be doing rather well and it releases mostly "Original titles": http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/magicka/1216907p1.html

GameSpy: How big of a chunk of your business right now is PC gaming?

Fred Wester: It's an overwhelming majority is PC. Over 95% is PC. And 97% of that is digital download. So we're pretty much all-in on the digital side, and there's been a transition in the past four to five years. It's been very quick. I think people underestimate how willing customers are to change if the service is right. If you take what Steam's doing for example, they've been the pioneers of PC gaming for the past years, and really shown that you can do some great services, and that people are willing to pay if the service is good. And that's something that we've been sort of piggybacking on that as well.

I might've bought Bayonetta, but they decided to not release it on PC so I decided it isn't worth my money or attention xD

We'll see how well they do with their upcoming "Aliens: Colonial Marines".

You ever try a Devil May Cry game on a PC without a controller? Good luck with that. Bayonetta would have been MUCH worse.

NameIsRobertPaulson:
You ever try a Devil May Cry game on a PC without a controller? Good luck with that. Bayonetta would have been MUCH worse.

Why would I play them without a controller? I play lots of games with a controller, the upcoming "Dark Souls" will likely also be an example of a console-port that shouldn't be played without.

I'm still not quite sure what about "PC gaming" suggests to people that it will have to be Mouse+Keyboard...

Aren't they making a new Sega Mario Kart with planes or spaceships or something like that?

Come to think of it, the only Sega game I own is Sonic Generations because its a good platformer, I'm not even a fan of Sonic. I could care less I guess, newer companies will fill the gaps like they always have.

Still have to get round to buying Bayonetta actually, everyone here seems to be a big fan of it. *checks online* Well the next time I get money I shall buy it in conjunction with something on Zavvi's 2 for £25 list (which has DX:HR on it for under £10!).

And it's a shame to see Sega like this, like you said, they seem to publish the most new IPs out of any of the major publishers, and the recent Sonic games are really good as well, so it's not even that their cash cow is particularly terrible either.

And by god, if the HD Jet Set Radio remake gets cancelled, I will rage.

No Bayonetta 2, no Vanquish 2...

Sad days. :(

Vanquish 2 in particular could have been really something. If they'd had the chance to fix the story and the horrid voice acting it really could have become one of the best games of all time, it's gameplay and scenery were really top-notch.

Well purely for Valkyria Chronicles I have to give credit to sega they took a risk and created the best game this generation and one of the best games ever. I was just dissapointed in the turn the sequel took and the fact they didnt release the 3rd one over here (and its on PSP which I own but it dosent feel like a psp game to me).

As for Bayonetta 2 I am dissapointed I bought Bayonetta finished it on normal and thought this is crap but put it on hard to give it a whirl and damn that was a good game the controls were so tight and excluding the absolutely atrocious story it is the best hack and slash game I have ever played even better than DMC and Ninja Gaiden which I thought impossible. Hopefully platinum will find another publisher because Bayonetta in particular deserves another chance.

What famous existing franchises can Sega focus on though sonic? they already do that, the virtua series? Shenmue? haha yeah like that will happen in fact I dont thing they have many huge IPs anymore they dont have a huge blockbuster IP like CoD or WOW and they dont have a massive collection of huge cult figures like Nintendo. All their IPS except sonic tend to appeal to a smaller select audience. I dont think they can afford to play it safe if they are gonna go its best to go out with a bang than just fade away, hopefully they will prove me wrong and reinvent themselves.

Also when they say they are focusing on existing IPS now why arent they going through with Bayonetta 2 then thats an existing IP cmon Sega make up youre mind.

Honestly, I haven't enjoyed any sega game in a really long time. Then again I haven't been playing many of them but still.
Although the Total War series is pretty awesome. Not that they had any real input.

As long as Platinum still functions as a studio (my FAVORITE studio) then it's all good.

ForgottenPr0digy:
I just beat alpha protocal not a very good game when it comes to gameplay wise but the storyline was interesting to say the less then I realize obsidian made it so it was a buggy nightmare.

I didn't really have problems with it being buggy (the PC version, at least), but it was kind of unbalanced and not quite finished. I really liked how some parts of the story and decision-making played out, and something that surprised me a lot is that I even ended up liking the gameplay more than DE:HR, other than the stupid hacking mini-game. After getting used to having hand to hand combat to fall back on if I occasionally screwed up with stealth in AP, every time DE:HR didn't let me punch someone with my superhuman bionic arms it made me want to find the game designer responsible for that decision and kick him in the junk.

It seems to have been a sad decline for SEGA ever since the dreamcast got out marketed by the ps1. It makes me sad because they made games that i recall fondly from my childhood, and now publish some of my favorite game series (total war and the football manager series).

In a perfect world, the big players would still be Sega, Nintendo, and Sony. And Microsoft would be focused on making a solid operating system rather than making shitty self-bricking game consoles. Unfortunately we live in a dystopian nightmare where most things suck, so no Shenmue 3 or Streets of Rage 4.

Sega just couldn't bounce back from those shitty addons and the incapable Sega Saturn. (Sorry Saturn fans, but it was vastly inferior to the PSX in every way.) Now Sega's trying to break into the online gambling business. It's a real shame, I'm curious as to what kind of system Sega would have come out with this generation if they were still a big-time company.

Zhukov:
Considering that all the games you listed were decidedly lacklustre, I'm having trouble feeling particularly bad about Sega's woes.

If they were to go the way of the dodo I doubt I would even notice.

I was wondering if I'd have to be the first to point this out, thank you Zhukov.

Shit, Sega's still around? I honestly thought they died out ages ago... guess the old company's got a few kicks left before it gives up. I doubt I will miss them when they do eventually go (or at least the Western Division - no idea how well Sega is doing in Japan), seeing as most of their products have either died horribly (Dreamcast) or just haven't been the best of games (70% of the Sonic Franchise), so they've attracted little of my attention over the years.

This news worries me somewhat.
The potential closing of a company, which has been around since before I was born, is never a good thing.
But it worries me as a minor Sega fan. If this situation leads to them not sending games to the West, such as Yakuza 5, which is in development, it would be a real shame.

King of Asgaard:
This news worries me somewhat.
The potential closing of a company, which has been around since before I was born, is never a good thing.
But it worries me as a minor Sega fan. If this situation leads to them not sending games to the West, such as Yakuza 5, which is in development, it would be a real shame.

/Way/ before you were born. Most people don't know this, but Sega has been around since the 50's. It was founded by an American businessman during the postwar reconstruction of Japan. Their first product was an automatic photo booth that took pictures suitable for the ID cards everyone needed for government aid at the time, and Sega actually stands for Service Games. If they go down, I'll be at least as sad that a gaming company that has been there longer than Atari has died as I will that the house of sonic is no more.

RJ 17:

Zhukov:
Considering that all the games you listed were decidedly lacklustre, I'm having trouble feeling particularly bad about Sega's woes.

If they were to go the way of the dodo I doubt I would even notice.

I was wondering if I'd have to be the first to point this out, thank you Zhukov.

I'd like to know what was so spectacularly wrong with the first Condemned game, or Vanquish, or Valkyria Chronicles. I thought all those titles were pretty damn well reviewed when they first came out. Or is this a case of "It's my opinion, so it must be right?"

Granted, not every title Sega has published has been a good game. That's what happens when you take risks with your properties. Sometimes they don't pay off. But it's still a far better approach for the industry in the long term than simply sitting on a few core titles and shitting out annual instalments.

It's not just about the Sega titles themselves, it's about what this represents. We gamers are constantly bemoaning the fact that publishers aren't focusing more on original titles, and instead keep rehashing the same ideas over and over. Yet the one major publisher which has tried to put an emphasis on original titles is now being forced to take the tried-and-tested cashcow route, simply because publishing original titles isn't profitable for them. You don't have to like Sega's games to see that this is still a terrible message that has just been sent to the rest of the industry. Don't bother investing too much in original games, because if you do, you'll just end up like Sega.

Sega are responsible for publishing some of my favourite games of all time, and they're all games that came completely out of left-field, and wouldn't have been touched by any other publisher. Both Otogi games, Jet Set, Golden Axe, Out Run... if Sega isn't there to publish titles like these, who else can we look to? You honestly think EA or Activision are going to invest in left-field games that aren't derivative shooters or sport sims? You think Ubisoft would publish something like Bayonetta without ripping out campaign sections to sell back to us as DLC, and shoe-horning in a needless multiplayer segment?

When was the last time you saw a Sega game that was flagrantly advertising day 1 DLC? When was the last time Sega bitched about used game sales, and how gamers are all a bunch of ingrates? When was the last time Sega charged gamers extra for on-disc DLC? Make no mistake, Sega was one of the few AAA publishers who actually seemed to be on the side of gamers. Don't expect that to remain now that they're having to make money any way they can.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

RJ 17:

Zhukov:
Considering that all the games you listed were decidedly lacklustre, I'm having trouble feeling particularly bad about Sega's woes.

If they were to go the way of the dodo I doubt I would even notice.

I was wondering if I'd have to be the first to point this out, thank you Zhukov.

I'd like to know what was so spectacularly wrong with the first Condemned game, or Vanquish, or Valkyria Chronicles. I thought all those titles were pretty damn well reviewed when they first came out. Or is this a case of "It's my opinion, so it must be right?"

Granted, not every title Sega has published has been a good game. That's what happens when you take risks with your properties. Sometimes they don't pay off. But it's still a far better approach for the industry in the long term than simply sitting on a few core titles and shitting out annual instalments.

It's not just about the Sega titles themselves, it's about what this represents. We gamers are constantly bemoaning the fact that publishers aren't focusing more on original titles, and instead keep rehashing the same ideas over and over. Yet the one major publisher which has tried to put an emphasis on original titles is now being forced to take the tried-and-tested cashcow route, simply because publishing original titles isn't profitable for them. You don't have to like Sega's games to see that this is still a terrible message that has just been sent to the rest of the industry. Don't bother investing too much in original games, because if you do, you'll just end up like Sega.

Sega are responsible for publishing some of my favourite games of all time, and they're all games that came completely out of left-field, and wouldn't have been touched by any other publisher. Both Otogi games, Jet Set, Golden Axe, Out Run... if Sega isn't there to publish titles like these, who else can we look to? You honestly think EA or Activision are going to invest in left-field games that aren't derivative shooters or sport sims? You think Ubisoft would publish something like Bayonetta without ripping out campaign sections to sell back to us as DLC, and shoe-horning in a needless multiplayer segment?

When was the last time you saw a Sega game that was flagrantly advertising day 1 DLC? When was the last time Sega bitched about used game sales, and how gamers are all a bunch of ingrates? When was the last time Sega charged gamers extra for on-disc DLC? Make no mistake, Sega was one of the few AAA publishers who actually seemed to be on the side of gamers. Don't expect that to remain now that they're having to make money any way they can.

Eeeeeeeeasy there, tiger. No one's trying to take away from the fact that YOU like Sega and it's games. But if anyone's using the "It's my opinion so it's right" argument, it would be you my friend.

Just because you LOVE Sega and many of the games they make doesn't mean that EVERYONE loves Sega and many of the games they make. It's a simple equation, really:
Step 1: make games people like.
Step 2: because you're making games that people like, people buy the games.
Step 3: profit.

Now if you wanna get into an argument about what kind of message this sends to developers about taking risks and yadda yadda yadda, that's a completely different conversation, though I have made the same argument before that you're making now: gamers piss and moan about cliche and contrived things and yet piss and moan even more when a developer tries something new (i.e. Dragon Age 2). But the simple math is that as much as you're pissing and moaning about what the gamer community is doing to developer's like Sega, the simple fact is that if their games aren't selling they're not selling...this means they're not making money...which means they've less to invest in new products.