What were the life time sales for the PCE/PCEDuo

[SamIAm]

To me, the PC-FX is a fascinating mistake. It's like the Star Wars prequels - it's almost incredible how much they screwed up.

I don't want to spend all day translating or writing out all the points made in those Japanese essays I posted, but maybe the most common underlying assumption coming from those NEC/Hudson guys was that the next generation of hardware and software was going to form a dichotomy: one subdivision would be centered around realtime polygon graphics, and the other would be centered around streamed FMV. The terminology they used was "creation-type" and "storage-type".

Ordinary 2D action games, they said, could be done on the Arcade Card.

The baffling thing is, they kept talking about how the PC-FX was going to rule the "storage-type" side because it had the best FMV streaming technology. It's hard to say whether they were in denial or simply didn't do their homework, but it should have been apparent that the Playstation had a competitive enough MPEG processor, and the Saturn enough raw CPU power, to erase any kind of technological gap. AFAIK, there is literally no game concept that could be done on the PC-FX but not the Playstation or Saturn.

It would be one thing if the PC-FX actually did have much better FMV capabilities, but given that it didn't (and it actually had worse resolution), you have to wonder what they were thinking.

 

I mean, even though I'm sure 4th gen sales declined for everyone, and even if that 1.8 number is from very late 1994, selling only 120,000 systems in 1995-1997 is pretty bad, considering that they'd sold almost 1.8 million from 1988 to whatever point in 1994 that article was published in. I don't think that you can explain that whole decline just with that the next generation had started.  For sales from 1996 on, sure, that'd explain it there... but 1995?  There were still many major 4th gen titles released on all platforms in 1995 in both the US and Japan.  So yeah, my guess is that the PC-FX strategy debacle may have hurt them. 

According to the SegaBase article about the Saturn, by June of 1995, the Saturn had sold 1.3 million units and the PSX had sold 1.2 million units in Japan. Up until those two systems came out, I think the PCE-CD was the CD-ROM system. As soon as they did come out, though, consumers seemed to abandon the PCE quickly.

One thing that I remember happening around that time was that the Genesis and the SNES became so cheap that people who only owned one system up until that point could finally start to afford both, and the userbase swelled. People getting the systems for the first time were interested in new software, so games kept being made in significant quantities, and it was all-around a very "healthy" situation. By contrast, a Duo-RX was not a whole lot cheaper than one of the next-gen systems, and its user-base was small to begin with, so there wasn't the same potential for growth.

Between all that and the PC-FX going down in flames (I speculate that by June 1995, it had probably sold 50-70k systems), yes, the Duo probably didn't look particularly attractive at the time.

so I'm sure the Arcade Card didn't hurt NEC like the 32X did Sega in the US.

Oh, I definitely agree. I only think that if the PC-FX had been better, there would have been potential for the Arcade Card to damage its strength in a similar kind of way, even if to a lesser degree.

[Ray]

The baffling thing is, they kept talking about how the PC-FX was going to rule the "storage-type" side because it had the best FMV streaming technology. It's hard to say whether they were in denial or simply didn't do their homework, but it should have been apparent that the Playstation had a competitive enough MPEG processor, and the Saturn enough raw CPU power, to erase any kind of technological gap. AFAIK, there is literally no game concept that could be done on the PC-FX but not the Playstation or Saturn.

The Saturn also eventually got the Movie Card expansion in Japan which could play MPEG-1 VCDs, plus some very impressive FMVs in certain games,(i.e. Lunar SSS MPEG-ban) which definitely outclasses the PC-FX in FMV quality. VCD never caught on though, and neither did the Movie Card.

[Black Tiger]

The baffling thing is, they kept talking about how the PC-FX was going to rule the "storage-type" side because it had the best FMV streaming technology. It's hard to say whether they were in denial or simply didn't do their homework, but it should have been apparent that the Playstation had a competitive enough MPEG processor, and the Saturn enough raw CPU power, to erase any kind of technological gap. AFAIK, there is literally no game concept that could be done on the PC-FX but not the Playstation or Saturn.

If you'd done your homework, you'd know that the Playstation doesn't have an MPEG decoder.

It would be one thing if the PC-FX actually did have much better FMV capabilities, but given that it didn't (and it actually had worse resolution), you have to wonder what they were thinking.

Another good example of how you can't judge consoles based on tech spec lists. PC-FX video typically looks better than the average VCD and only the Saturn running the MPEG card is comparable.

[SamIAm]

If you'd done your homework, you'd know that the Playstation doesn't have an MPEG decoder.

Excuse me. MJPEG/H.261 decoder.

Point still stands.

Another good example of how you can't judge consoles based on tech spec lists. PC-FX video typically looks better than the average VCD and only the Saturn running the MPEG card is comparable.

Bullshit. 

Tell me that when you've spent a dozen hours picking apart a PC-FX video frame by frame, recoding it, and comparing the level of macroblocking.

See for yourself. http://pc-fx.moemoe.gr.jp/colume04.html (NSFW)
PC-FX on the left, Saturn on the right.
These images were not captured by analog, but by decoding software. They are virtually RGB perfect, although the PC-FX ones must have been stretched.

EDIT: Here's a screen I just took via Mednafen of the same game. There is no added lossyness, and I've enlarged it to twice the original size (which was 256x232, as opposed to images you see in the link above that are stretched to 320x224 .



PSX (EDIT: Oops, I meant PS1) videos are generally higher resolution and higher framerate than PC-FX games. PC-FX cannot do video greater than 256x240 and there's not a single game that maintains a constant framerate above 12. Not to my knowledge, anyway, and I personally tested a good bunch of them.

Everything Square did, just as an example, is at or just shy of 320x240, and it's all a constant 15fps.




Lunar 2's video on the Saturn is 320x224 and 30fps.

[A Black Falcon]

PC-FX video is lower resolution and lower quality?  Looks like a pretty clear result there to me.  And those screenshots reflect it.  How about PC-FX versus 3DO or CD-i, though?  I mean, I'd think that the CD-i with MPEG cartridge could beat it; that system can do MPEG after all.  It may not have released in Japan though of course.  The 3DO is worse than that, but how about 3DO vs. PC-FX?  I don't know which one has the advantage there.


Also, 1.3 million PS1s and 1.2 million Saturns sold by June?  No, that can't be right... and SegaBase isn't the most reliable source either, for sure.  Here's what I can find from Sony: http://web.archive.org/web/20110722094946/http://scei.co.jp/corporate/data/bizdataps_e.html

This shows 1 million PS1s shipped (shipped, not sold) to Japan by the end of May 1995, 2 million by the end of December.  So you're right that 1995 PS1/Saturn sales in Japan were good, if shipments were like that, but the year also had plenty of major SNES releases too (and Turbo CD, Genesis, 32X, 3DO, and PC-FX, though those surely sold less), and shipments don't usually equal sales of course.

[Black Tiger]

You can't judge the quality of fmv of this level by select aspects and without real hardware. Not all video is the same quality in each game on each console for a variety of reasons. If you find good examples for each console, they still need to be the same type of original source, ie: film based hand drawn/painted animation, digitally painted and compiled animation, purely live action, etc. You can also tell if you're looking at a section of source material that contained artifacts from mixing clips, such as many game intros do.

That PC-FX screenshot looks to have been cherry picked to make the console look bad. Those other screenshots are jpegs. It doesn't make sense that Lunar EB would waste 30fps on 12fps animation. If that's true, then it could have been completely fullscreen, with no visible imperfections and animated slightly better at 12fps.

I no longer have a PC-FX, but going in thinking that it must be overrated, I was blown away by the quality of video in many games, but I might have only tried two or three dozen. I compared the best fmv I could find on PSX and Saturn and it was the overall balance in good PC-FX video that stood apart.

[SamIAm]

PC-FX video is lower resolution and lower quality?  Looks like a pretty clear result there to me.  And those screenshots reflect it.  How about PC-FX versus 3DO or CD-i, though?  I mean, I'd think that the CD-i with MPEG cartridge could beat it; that system can do MPEG after all.  It may not have released in Japan though of course.  The 3DO is worse than that, but how about 3DO vs. PC-FX?  I don't know which one has the advantage there.

That's going to be hard to compare without taking the time to research similar games between the systems, hunting up ISOs and configuring emulators to take clean screenshots. It could be a fun project, but I'll have to pass.

Although there is actually a 3DO port of that game being compared in the link, and whose PC-FX screenshot I grabbed (Tokimeki Mahjong Paradise). I'll see if I can't get it to run in an emulator easily.

Also, 1.3 million PS1s and 1.2 million Saturns sold by June?  No, that can't be right... and SegaBase isn't the most reliable source either, for sure.  Here's what I can find from Sony: http://web.archive.org/web/20110722094946/http://scei.co.jp/corporate/data/bizdataps_e.html

This shows 1 million PS1s shipped (shipped, not sold) to Japan by the end of May 1995, 2 million by the end of December.  So you're right that 1995 PS1/Saturn sales in Japan were good, if shipments were like that, but the year also had plenty of major SNES releases too (and Turbo CD, Genesis, 32X, 3DO, and PC-FX, though those surely sold less), and shipments don't usually equal sales of course.

Yeah, I've often come across things in the SegaBase articles that I know aren't correct. But, on the other hand, the price of both the Saturn and the PS1 dropped $100 in June 1995 (I double-checked this fact elsewhere), so there may have been a rush of buying.

[SamIAm]

You can't judge the quality of fmv of this level by select aspects and without real hardware. Not all video is the same quality in each game on each console for a variety of reasons. If you find good examples for each console, they still need to be the same type of original source, ie: film based hand drawn/painted animation, digitally painted and compiled animation, purely live action, etc. You can also tell if you're looking at a section of source material that contained artifacts from mixing clips, such as many game intros do.

If you're saying we can't settle this without a thorough analysis of several types of identical high quality video sources fed through the best video encoders for each system and displayed on both real hardware and emulators, I guess you've got me.

But I do own real hardware, and I spent hours comparing videos when Esperknight and I put subtitles in Zeroigar's FMV. I still think that the resolution and the general level of macroblocking on PC-FX is poor enough that it does not stand out as superior, particularly against the Playstation.

A lot of 1995 Saturn games had crappy FMV, it's true. But that game used in the comparison in the link above came out in October 1995, and the PC-FX version in January 1996. I really don't see any reason to think that they would have used a lower-quality source for the PC-FX version.

That PC-FX screenshot looks to have been cherry picked to make the console look bad.

I downloaded the same game used in the comparison in the link above (which, by the way, came from a PC-FX fansite) and took a screenshot of the very first scene.

Those other screenshots are jpegs. It doesn't make sense that Lunar EB would waste 30fps on 12fps animation. If that's true, then it could have been completely fullscreen, with no visible imperfections and animated slightly better at 12fps.

Yes, they are JPEGs. But they are also quality JPEGs. I don't think you're going to see much difference in a PNG screenshot. Actually, they might look even better.

As for Lunar 2, all of the 3D rendered stuff, like the hallway leading to Lucia floating in her crystal in the intro FMV, moves at 30 FPS. Also, I think all the panning was 30 FPS. If you look at the "making-of" video, you'll see how Lunar 2's cells were animated on a computer.

I no longer have a PC-FX, but going in thinking that it must be overrated, I was blown away by the quality of video in many games, but I might have only tried two or three dozen. I compared the best fmv I could find on PSX and Saturn and it was the overall balance in good PC-FX video that stood apart.

Here's a screenshot from the fourth, and arguably highest production value, Anime Freak FX game.



It's much more flattering, to be sure. The color gradients are smooth and the lines are clear. But the resolution is still 256x232, it's still 12 fps, and there is still JPEG fuzziness.

Interestingly, the live-action footage on the same disc is a constant 30FPS, which is the first I've found on the system. It's windowed to 192x160, though.

[SamIAm]

I need to get going, but here's a screenshot of the 3DO version of the same game. The original resolution is 320x240, and again this is just doubled.



Here's the PC-FX shot again. (256x232)


...and the Saturn (320x224)

[SamIAm]

In the interest of fairness, I'll say this.

In motion, the Saturn port of that Tokimeki game seems to display more artifacts when there is lots of motion on the screen. I think this is because the Saturn is using a software MPEG codec rather than something JPEG based, so the more motion, the more quality loss.

Also, to my surprise, it seems that all of these ports update the screen at 30 fps when playing FMV. This is a bit ridiculous, because the anime itself doesn't call for that at all. It's fair to say that this company didn't take the greatest care in making the videos, and I would say that that PC-FX screenshot is indeed worse than the average PC-FX FMV.

Now, one more comparison: Der Langrisser

Unlike the Tokimeki game, Der Langrisser was made for the PC-FX first, then ported to the Saturn and Playstation later. In the Tokimeki game, you can see how the image was cropped and squished. Well, now you can see how the Saturn version is stretched.

These are straight from emulators, 2x enlarged, no added lossiness.

PC-FX (256x232)


PS1 (256x240)


Saturn (320x224)


PC-FX


PS1


Saturn


Yeah, the Saturn one looks pretty bad. Overall, though, the PS1 version looks just fine.

The whole point of all this is that the PC-FX did not have an FMV decoder that stood out in any way, and I think the screenshots of these games ported across the different systems show that. The 256 pixel horizontal resolution limit alone is pretty harsh. If it had had something actually higher than 320x240, and/or if if the compression was squeaky clean, THEN it would have stood out. 

Of course, it's all a moot point anyway, because FMV in the 32-bit era was the garnish, not the meat and potatoes.


EDIT: I went ahead and got real emulator screenshots for Chrono Cross and Lunar 2. See above. Lunar 2 has some graininess, but Chrono Chross looks exactly like the JPEG from before.

[Black Tiger]

Just because a console is outputting a particular resolution while fmv is streaming, it doesn't mean that the fmv is the same resolution. Tengai Makyou The Apocalypse IV features some of the highest quality fmv on the Saturn, but if you rip the video off the disc, the raw video it isn't nearly the same resolution as the Saturn is outputting. The screenshots posted so far were likely stretched by each console's hardware/emulation and who knows what else happens to the overall image before being displayed on real consoles. That's why still screenshots and emulator stats are misleading.

This 256 x 224 video is not actually 256 x 224 pixels:




Chrono Cross is a huge budget release using state of the art technology from the future and was released at the very end of 1999. A shot with very minimal movement in a clip using material which blends together artifacts is going to look best. But that game does have high quality fmv for that generation, as it should, all things considered. Lunar EB for Saturn was also released after the PC-FX had been discontinued and also likely had a much higher budget than any PC-FX game.

It's true that the PC-FX didn't have something magical like dvd quality video to stand a generation apart from other consoles around the same time, but the overall quality of the fmv did stand out at the time and is why people commented as much at a time when everything that wasn't Playstation was blindly trashed.

Battle Heat was released during the launch of both the Saturn and Playstation. Aside from the overall quality of the fmv, it also shows how well the PC-FX could handle shuffling around video clips in real-time gameplay. Blue Seed 9's battles on Saturn were still very impressive for the time, but Battle Heat does seem like it's in a league of its own by comparison.


Here's a dvd quality comparison I did before selling my PC-FX:


PC-FX fmv

Saturn fmv

Side by Side


*Something to take into consideration, is that the advertise trailer for TM:TAIV appears to suffer from the degradation of the edited original video. The un-subtilted versionsof the clips which appear in the trailer look better in-game. But this was the best footage I could put together to compare two similarly themed games with.

Kakutoden's footage looks as though the source material was blurrier and it might have been shot on film while TM:TAIV might have shot straight to video or have been rendered on a computer first.

Both games were recorded to dvd video from real hardware running authentic copies using S-Video.

[SamIAm]

What do you mean "rip the video off the disc"? Did you copy off the video files and play them with a custom video player?

Because if that's what you did, then the answer is probably that the video player used a different (but somewhat compatible) codec. When you are dealing with software codecs like the Saturn had, these things can happen. But an emulator is always using the same codec as real hardware, because it's getting the codec from the same place. So what exactly is the difference supposed to be between real hardware and emulation? What are you assuming isn't - and can't be - emulated?

Any conversion to a TV signal isn't going to change much, other than maybe to blur artifacts. And what else is there? This isn't like other areas of emulation where sprite priorities and raster effects can get screwed up. There are only plain images, entirely pre-drawn, and this is simply a matter of how much detail there is in each one.

PC-FX FMV can only have 256 pixels of width, period. You could take the original Chrono Cross FMV - I mean the original lossless output from whatever workstations they were using, before it was encoded for the Playstation - encode it for the PC-FX using the best codec possible, and it would still not look as good because (320-256=) 64 of the pixels on each horizontal line would have to be eliminated, and the evidence I've shown indicates that the image would otherwise have about the same level of JPEG artifacts.

Your comparison videos are nice, but unless the source material is the same, you don't necessarily prove anything other than that more work was put into one than the other. Now, if you applied the same real-hardware recording method to Der Langrisser and compared the same frames like I did, that would carry some weight. But I'll be damned if doing so makes the PC-FX version look any better than the PS1's.

EDIT: I assume the mystery not-actually-256x224 GIF you added can be located on the disc, opened with some other program, and it will display at less than 256x224. Again, it's a matter of your other program using a different codec.

Or am I not getting what you were trying to say with that GIF?

[Necromancer]

I do think that there is merit to solid game support late in a system's life, though; the SNES had great years from 1994 to 1996, and later in Japan.  Of course that system released years later, though, but still, it's in the same generation...

Similarly, the Super Famicom was poorly supported for the first three years of its life (late '87 to late '90). 

If you look at each console's life span, the length of time they were heavily supported is remarkably similar, with the PCE actually being supported for longer (90% of its library over six years vs. five years for the SF).

And on the SNES, there was a place for major releases all the way until 1999!

An unfulfilled place?  If you look at what was released after '96, there's a couple goodies in '97 but nothing great in '98 or '99.

But yeah, as I said, best would be a Super System Card with more RAM on it, and no Arcade Card.  Trying to get people to upgrade again in 1994 was just too late in the generation...

The original system should've been a Duo-RX with built-in Arcade Card, built-in tap, SGX hardware, and cost $1000.  Woulda been a sure winner!

[Black Tiger]

What do you mean "rip the video off the disc"? Did you copy off the video files and play them with a custom video player?

Because if that's what you did, then the answer is probably that the video player used a different (but somewhat compatible) codec. When you are dealing with software codecs like the Saturn had, these things can happen. But an emulator is always using the same codec as real hardware, because it's getting the codec from the same place. So what exactly is the difference supposed to be between real hardware and emulation? What are you assuming isn't - and can't be - emulated?

Any conversion to a TV signal isn't going to change much, other than maybe to blur artifacts. And what else is there? This isn't like other areas of emulation where sprite priorities and raster effects can get screwed up. There are only plain images, entirely pre-drawn, and this is simply a matter of how much detail there is in each one.

PC-FX FMV can only have 256 pixels of width, period. You could take the original Chrono Cross FMV - I mean the original lossless output from whatever workstations they were using, before it was encoded for the Playstation - encode it for the PC-FX using the best codec possible, and it would still not look as good because (320-256=) 64 of the pixels on each horizontal line would have to be eliminated, and the evidence I've shown indicates that the image would otherwise have about the same level of JPEG artifacts.

Your comparison videos are nice, but unless the source material is the same, you don't necessarily prove anything other than that more work was put into one than the other. Now, if you applied the same real-hardware recording method to Der Langrisser and compared the same frames like I did, that would carry some weight. But I'll be damned if doing so makes the PC-FX version look any better than the PS1's.

EDIT: I assume the mystery not-actually-256x224 GIF you added can be located on the disc, opened with some other program, and it will display at less than 256x224. Again, it's a matter of your other program using a different codec.

Or am I not getting what you were trying to say with that GIF?

The PC Engine doesn't do 256 x 224 pixel fmv. The actual video is a lower resolution and is doubled one way or another. Some Sega-CD games do the same thing. Otherwise all 16-bit fmv games would be full screen.

At least one Sega Saturn video codec was available online years ago which let you remove and play raw fmv segments off of games which used it. I ripped the videos of at least TM: The Apocalypse IV, Lunar SSS and Saturn Bomberman.

[A Black Falcon]

Based on those screenshots it sure looks to me like the idea that PC-FX video is in any way better than PS1 video has been disproven, and that includes games released on both PC-FX and PS1.

Similarly, the Super Famicom was poorly supported for the first three years of its life (late '87 to late '90). 

There's a difference between a time when a system is actually available, and a time before its release, you know... :p

If you look at each console's life span, the length of time they were heavily supported is remarkably similar, with the PCE actually being supported for longer (90% of its library over six years vs. five years for the SF).

That is somewhat true, but if you separate teh console and the addon, it goes like this:

Japan support lengths only.
SNES - 10 years (12/1990 - 12/2000)
SNES breakdown: Last normal cartridge release 1/2000; last NP release 12/2000
SNES Satellaview - 5 years (4/1995 - 6/2000,  but new broadcasts only ran until 3/1999; after that it was only reruns)
Genesis - 7 1/4 years (7 years first party)  (10/1988 - 12/1995 (1st) / 3/1996 (3rd, unless I'm missing something which I could be)
Sega CD - 4 1/6 years (4 years first party) (12/1991 - 12/1995 (1st) / 2/1996 (3rd))
32X - 10 months (12/1994 - 10/1995)
TG16 - 7 years (12/1987 - 12/1994, but only two releases in '94)
TCD - 8 years 4 months, plus one more game 2 years 2 months later (12/1988 to 4/1997, plus one more game in 6/1999)
TCD breakdown: regular CD games released between 12/1988 - 5/1993 (unless there's something later I'm not seeing) so 4 years 5 months
Super CD support: 10/1991 - 4/1997 (& 6/1999) so 6 years 6 months plus one more game 2 years 2 months later
Arcade CD support: 3/1994 - 12/1996 (with the 12/1996 game being the only 1996 release that supported the Arcade Card) so 1 year 9 months of regular support with 1 more game a year later

The SNES was supported for the longest amount of time.  Turbo CD is second (or technically first including Dead of the Brain, but that's got a big asterisk of "over two years after the previous release"), and the Genesis third.

An unfulfilled place?  If you look at what was released after '96, there's a couple goodies in '97 but nothing great in '98 or '99.

Sure, there were fewer in '97 to '00 than before, but the system was getting old by that point and newer systems were out, so you expect it.  Nintendo kept supporting the system anyway, though, maybe because of how the N64 wasn't doing well in Japan.  Of course though, continuing to release major SNES games can't have helped convince people to get N64s...

As for games, many of the major SNES games from '96 to '98 are on the Satellaview, and in the later '90s many were on Nintendo Power service cartridges as well -- that is, the rewritable carts people could buy and get games written on in store kiosks.  Pretty cool idea; it's too bad that they didn't continue it with the N64 and bring them out in the US as well, I think it could have been interesting.  By releasing stuff on Satellaview of NP they saved a lot in production costs, much like digital-download-only games.  Some games released on Satellaview or NP in '97 to '00 include Sutte Hakkun,  the eight volumes of Picross NP, the BS Zelda games, Shubibinman Zero (BS), the eight Picross NP volumes, Metal Slader Glory: Director's Cut, Wrecking Crew '98, Power Lode Runner, and Fire Emblem: Thracia 776.  Some also had normal cartridge releases later, including FE: Thracia 776, Wrecking Crew '98, and Sutte Hakkun, but others didn't.  There were also a couple of normal cart-only releases in '97 and '98, such as Kirby's Dream Land 3 and Kirby no Kirakira Kids (Kirby's Star Stacker SNES version)... those are mostly quality titles, regardless of what their budgets were.  Thracia 776 was the last major release from Nintendo (NP service in '99, cartridge release in '00), but after that they had some more Picross NP volumes and, last, Metal Slader Glory: Director's Cut (released preloaded on an NP cartridge), a remake of a Famicom adventure game.

Third parties had some games too, particularly in '96 through '98; after that it mostly dries up, yes.  But in '97 and '98 you do have a few third-party titles worth mentioning, such as Shubibinman Zero (Satellaview only release), Rockman & Forte, Super Bomberman 5, and some more.  I guess your response is that the SNES released later, so it makes sense that it was supported longer; really though, it's because it won, not because it released later.  I mean, the Xbox and Gamecube released well after the PS2, but they obviously weren't supportd as long!

The original system should've been a Duo-RX with built-in Arcade Card, built-in tap, SGX hardware, and cost $1000.  Woulda been a sure winner!

Have you already forgotten that the Sega CD, which released only three months after the Super System Card, has three times more RAM than the Super System Card does?  Get closer to Sega in RAM in '91 and they'd have had plenty for the generation.