I did a quick search to try and find that out a while ago, and the first thing I came across was:
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Sega
… which sounds realistic, although any part of it could be innacurate, of course.
All I know is it started as a board games company.Like monopoly…
That’s what I’ve been told anyways…
my knowledge on the matter of SEGA’s origins is that it was a merger of SEGA and Rosen Enterprise Ltd.
Rosen enterprises was started by an American whats-his-face Rosen. He noticed the potential to import electronic entertainments to the under-exploited japanese leisure market. So they imported electronic shooting ranges which were met with huge posisitve reception.
At some point Rosen Enterprises Ltd merged with SEGA, a company that built pachinko machines or something, i cant recall the memory is hazy.
They merged to make SEGA Enterprises Ltd which we now know as SEGA.
That comes from my memory of an interview with Rosen titled “Did you know SEGA was started by an Amwerican?” from Next Generation a few years ago. Unfortunately I dont have the magazine around anymore (shame cos it also had a nice artcile on the rise and fall of Atari, the old Atari not bought out Atari, Atari in name only of today)
The history of SErvice GAmes is a long and sordid one. Hopefully, Sega will return to a position of dominence where it can afford to experiment with new ideas once again (only the richest of companies can afford to be creative). I can’t help but wonder if Sega is on the way to becoming another EA, however. All I do know is that Sega shouldn’t put all its eggs in one basket (Japan in this case): Sega needs to starting acting like an international company again, lest it falls victim to the same shortsightness that wouldn’t allow it to see past Japan during the Saturn era, which incidentally, almost killed Sega.
One of the reasons why I hate EA and Nintendo is mainly because they both have a nasty, unapologetic habit of milking established franchises to death. EA is especially guilty of always playing it safe with liscenced games since those games are almost always guaranteed to sell thanks to the extant public awareness of their liscences.
There are no other reasons for making games than making money, or so I’ve heard. The sole reason for a games company’s existence is to make games in order to make money. My, we hardcore gamers are a fascinating breed; somewhere, somehow, we were led to believe that Sega was an exception to the aforementioned rule. Developing games for the sake of reaping monetary rewards seems rather pointless to me… unless that money is used to develop something truly worthwhile.
So to cut a long story short, even though Panzer Dragoon Saga would’ve sold more copies on the Playstation (outside of Japan), Sega has little to no incentive to remake it. We have a greater chance of playing a proper RPG sequel IMO, which is what we all really want anyway (don’t lie).
I would like to see a sequal but i would want it to explain more about the ancient age what happaned ect.
and as long as the origianl dragon was kept this time the dragon in ORTA really put me off the game,it was original enoguh but it spoilt the game for me.
Azel.
[quote=“Geoffrey Duke”]
One of the reasons why I hate EA and Nintendo is mainly because they both have a nasty, unapologetic habit of milking established franchises to death.[/quote]
Big difference between EA and Nintendo. Whilst Nintendo do continue to bring out games based on franchises, their games are actually decently playable. EA haven’t made a good game since the James Pond series back in the 16-bit era. And that INCLUDES Wipeout (which I don’t like), and also includes the ****ing FIFA series which, as everybody knows, has always ridden to the top of the charts because of it’s “real” players and advertising.
Sega have done this as well. Some people would say Sonic is being “milked” just now, with the Sonic Adventures being re-released on GC and Sonic Heroes being…poor, really. Square are also culprits, as I’m sure we’d all agree.
newgrounds.com/portal/view/158631 - The decline of video gaming. Enjoy.
But remember, I myself love the authenticy of Fifa, and it does make the game more enjoyable. Arguably the Pro Evolution series has a better game system, but the authenticy of Fifa for football fans is very appealing.
Very funny Arcie i watched the newgroups movie all i can say is come on BLUE dry like you meen it :-).
Lets just be glad that innovative gamers such as our selves might one day be begged by companys to help them create story lines and as soon as that happens we shall rule the earth 
Nah seriously im not the mad.
The best thing about the human mind is that it is never ending with thoughts and ideas, and even though some gaming series are simmilar such as the Castlevania series each game has its own twists that make it original.
So even though there are games with the same titles (Mario kart) each one has its own style.
And that is why games will never get boring.
Azeluk.
[quote=“Arcie”]Big difference between EA and Nintendo. Whilst Nintendo do continue to bring out games based on franchises, their games are actually decently playable. EA haven’t made a good game since the James Pond series back in the 16-bit era. And that INCLUDES Wipeout (which I don’t like), and also includes the ****ing FIFA series which, as everybody knows, has always ridden to the top of the charts because of it’s “real” players and advertising.
Sega have done this as well. Some people would say Sonic is being “milked” just now, with the Sonic Adventures being re-released on GC and Sonic Heroes being…poor, really. Square are also culprits, as I’m sure we’d all agree.[/quote]
I don’t think Sega has milked the Sonic franchise even half as much as Nintendo has milked the Mario or Zelda franchises.
The difference between Nintendo and Sega is where Sega will risk experimenting with new ideas often by starting new franchises, Nintendo will always develop something under the banner of an established franchise because it provides a firm safety net which minimizes any potential risks involved.
Which is why Nintendo are still making consoles.
Hey, I’m not anti-sega, I’m just playing Advocate El Diablo here.
Was Nintendo’s success worlwide any bigger than Sega’s when both the Saturn and the N64 died?
[quote=“Arcie”]Which is why Nintendo are still making consoles.
Hey, I’m not anti-sega, I’m just playing Advocate El Diablo here.[/quote]
I know what you mean.
I think we can safely say that Sega almost killed itself. The irony is Isao Okawa wanted to redeem Sega through the Dreamcast, but it only succeeded in further sullying Sega’s once respected reputation. At that point, Sega simply ran out of money, nevermind the fact that it was too little, too late anyway.
[quote=“Geoffrey Duke”]
[quote=“Arcie”]Which is why Nintendo are still making consoles.
Hey, I’m not anti-sega, I’m just playing Advocate El Diablo here.[/quote]
I know what you mean.
I think we can safely say that Sega almost killed itself. The irony is Isao Okawa wanted to redeem Sega through the Dreamcast, but it only succeeded in further sullying Sega’s once respected reputation. At that point, Sega simply ran out of money, nevermind the fact that it was too little, too late anyway.[/quote]
Yeah… the Dreamcast was killed by Sony’s hype machine (that made the dumbasses everywhere wait for a nonexistant console instead of buying one that was right there… and we all know that dumbasses are the majority of population) and Sega’s lack of money.
A DC unit with a DVD drive would… Oh well, sadly that doesn’t matters anymore… 