I personally have not noticed the TurboGrafx-16 or DUO considered a failure in gaming circles like the Saturn frequently is. Both are considered elite hard-core gaming havens by real gamers, but in my experience only the TG16/DUO gets recognized as such. It is nearly impossible to find a thread about the Saturn that doesn't include the phrase "horrible mess," by comparison.
Wait a minute, did 1-up seriously base a multi-page article on multiple consoles on the opinions of Victor Ireland?!
There's other reasons for that. I LOVE the Saturn, but.. it was extremely difficult to develop for and properly optimize the hardware. It was expensive and difficult to consolidate making it more difficult for Sega to keep up with price drops, it was launched early with very few games in the US.
Simply put there's a lot more to complain about with the Saturn, it was a horrible mess, but that doesn't mean it also wasn't a great hardcore gaming system.
Yeah, I question that line every time I see it though. I think it is an exaggeration to say that the Saturn was overly complex to code for in comparison to contemporary consoles. The reality was that it was more time consuming to hand write 3D engines in assembly than it was to use Sony's C libraries for the PS1. Even with that difference though, many Saturn games were ported by a single programmer, that is a far cry from being overly complex.
For posterity, I hope the record gets set straight that Sega's not providing adequate C libraries as early as Sony did created the perception of the Saturn's complexity long before developers learned of any idiosyncrasies in the actual hardware design.
To me it is no different than somebody saying that the PCE/TG16 couldn't do parallax because it was too hard to implement. Not only do games in the existing library prove this statement false, we also know technically that the system could handle parallax through various means.