Why did the SuperGrafx fail so miserably?

[PunkicCyborg]

Why did NEC make so many versions of the  same console and so many crazy accessories? Who knows and that's what makes PCE so awesome is playing on them all and enjoying them. It's hard to say of the SGX was actually a failure or not. It's just another piece of the legacy and almost just another oddity like the Virtual Cushion and the Duo monitor.

[toymachine78]

Why did NEC make so many versions of the  same console and so many crazy accessories? Who knows and that's what makes PCE so awesome is playing on them all and enjoying them. It's hard to say of the SGX was actually a failure or not. It's just another piece of the legacy and almost just another oddity like the Virtual Cushion and the Duo monitor.

.     Exactly! They revised and released too much shit! I think that was a big cause of the failure in the US too.... And the horrible box art. From the box album alone the games look like shit.

[Otaking]

I think it was a terrible idea for NEC to scrap the Super Grafx. If they had developed more games for it and released it in the west I think history would of played out very different.

[ccovell]

NEC "cared" but they were inept in releasing the thing anyway.  It comes down to game companies not wanting to take a risk on it because gamers didn't care:

http://www.chrismcovell.com/secret/sp_sgxreactions.html

Code: [Select]

Maker & Comment prior to SGX launch:
IREM
Since we are at a time where we don't understand the system very well, we cannot say anything.
NEC Avenue
A machine without excess fat. Development will be interesting. But the machine's appearance...
Sunsoft
The price is slightly strange for something that only increases the amount of RAM. I had expected more secrets in there.
Taito
It's too early to comment. We hope to make games that use its powerful graphic functions.
Data East
Since we are at a time where we don't understand the system very well, we cannot say anything.
Naxat
Since it's early, it [SGX] is like a sheet of blank paper. But in terms of graphics, the current PC-Engine is good enough, I think.
Namco
We will watch the market calmly for a little while. We will enter [the SGX market] after considering it well.
Nichibutsu
Since the SGX is downward compatible with the PC-Engine, we are developing software aimed at the current PC-Engine.
FACE
Since the current PC-Engine market is growing, for the time being, we are concentrating our resources on the present PC-Engine.
Hudson
Since this is a big brother to the PC-Engine, it gives software houses a good chance to try. Development pays the maximum reward.

[esteban]

A lot of you are missing the point. It takes balls to recognize an irrelevant dud and cut your losses.

There was no need to fragment the PCE user base further.

We are lucky we got 5 games. 


SGX should have been an add-on combined with a PCE Pachinko Controller (PPC).

Good night.

[SamIAm]

Well said, esteban. I think "fragment" is a really important word, and it's easy to forget how anyone with a PCE could expand into the CD system, but anyone with a PCE who wanted a Supergrafx would have effectively had to accept the money they spent on the PCE as a loss.

When it came out in November 1989, PCE Hucards were in their glory days, and the CD-system had been around for a year and was gaining traction. Hudson and NEC had plenty on their plates already, as did enthusiastic PCE developers. And really, which system(s) makes more sense for Hudson to release their best stuff on?

The price was $400 and the technology wasn't really worth it. ccovell's post shows how unexcited devs were, and I think consumers were similarly indifferent.

I once read in Japanese that Aldynes was made in 1991 as a sort of "thank you" to all the people who bought the Supergrafx, with the implication being that they didn't expect much in the way of direct profit.

[TheClash603]

I think the advancements made possible by the CD system could be more easily sold to the consumers than the SGX.  With SGX the tagline would be something like, "we are now putting out essentially the same thing our competitors are."  With the CD add-on, the tagline was "YOU CAN'T GET THIS SHIT ANYWHERE ELSE!!!!"

The company was smart to realize they couldn't push two systems at once and I think they picked the right horse.  It's unfortunate the SGX ever came to market for the early adopters, but in hindsight it is fun to talk about.

[ClodBuster]

Lol, from looking at Chris' post, even NEC's software guys weren't confident in what their hardware department created with the SuperGrafx.

[rtyper]

basically for the same reason i got one at launch, it was backwards compatable with the PCE, it should have been a lot more powerful and seperated itself from the earlier models.
it worked very nicely with the cdrom2, but that was it.
it WAS in my opinion a step above the MD/Snes but the games still gliched and slowed down ala PCE (see GnG). then NEC lost it completely and released the craptastic (in my opinion) PCFX, epic FAIL.

[touko]

Look at GnG, the SGX is the best home version (i do not count the x68000) , and use the syndical minimum of the SGX hardware .
The VDC vram are empty, and don't use all the SGX capabilities because of hucard limitations .

Aldynes, nothing fabulous, a simple use of the SGX second sprite layer and 2nd bckgnd layer, but IMO, is graphically poor in background department, because of hucard limitations .

1941 is the best for me, all VDC are full of datas,the game is full of sprites (with different patterns), and there is some backgrounds animations, i thing there are some heavy compression on it for pulling all that things on Hucard .
Even PCE is very limited by Hucard space, why sapphire use SCD+AC ??, why NG conversions do the same ??, why SF2 is only a 20 MB card ?? ..

The SGX capbilities, is not only a 2nd background layer + 64 sprites, it's also 64 ko of vram for more détailled backgrounds and animations .

[reson8er]

NEC "cared" but they were inept in releasing the thing anyway.  It comes down to game companies not wanting to take a risk on it because gamers didn't care:

http://www.chrismcovell.com/secret/sp_sgxreactions.html

Code: [Select]

Maker & Comment prior to SGX launch:
IREM
Since we are at a time where we don't understand the system very well, we cannot say anything.
NEC Avenue
A machine without excess fat. Development will be interesting. But the machine's appearance...
Sunsoft
The price is slightly strange for something that only increases the amount of RAM. I had expected more secrets in there.
Taito
It's too early to comment. We hope to make games that use its powerful graphic functions.
Data East
Since we are at a time where we don't understand the system very well, we cannot say anything.
Naxat
Since it's early, it [SGX] is like a sheet of blank paper. But in terms of graphics, the current PC-Engine is good enough, I think.
Namco
We will watch the market calmly for a little while. We will enter [the SGX market] after considering it well.
Nichibutsu
Since the SGX is downward compatible with the PC-Engine, we are developing software aimed at the current PC-Engine.
FACE
Since the current PC-Engine market is growing, for the time being, we are concentrating our resources on the present PC-Engine.
Hudson
Since this is a big brother to the PC-Engine, it gives software houses a good chance to try. Development pays the maximum reward.

Very interesting, this is the sort of thing I was hoping to come across. The comments by the developers are very telling (Even NEC Avenue itself!) and its not hard to see why so little software was produced by 3rd parties. "PC Engine is good enough!" was the consensus, and I suppose when that died out, the SF was there to carry the torch.  Even Hudson and NEC itself weren't interested in supporting it. Quite fascinating.

[Necromancer]

Even PCE is very limited by Hucard space.... why SF2 is only a 20 MB card ??

It's not technically limited to 20mb, so either they didn't need it and/or cost considerations kept it limited to 20mb.  Keep in mind that the SNES versions aren't any larger: SFII is 16mb and SFII Turbo is 20mb, though Super SFII and Alpha are 32mb.

[Arkhan]

I think it failed because really, the SCD games for PCE offered developers more bang for their buck than writing a SGX game.

CDs were/are cheaper to produce than ROMs/HuCards.   They also automagically offer more storage space by default.

What ccovell posted basically makes this even more obvious.

Why go balls deep into committing time to SGX development when fully awesome games are already being produced for the wildly popular PCE?

PCE game can be played on SGX also, so it's the most guaranteed thing ever.

and really, now, people may go "oh man imagine this game in 512 pixel widescreen with TWICE THE SPRITES AND SCROLLIES"

but I think at the time, the general population thought "f*ck YEAH, GAMES" 

The most impressive SGX game is probably Aldynes, and it isn't even that good, all things considered.

I can think of like 15 horizontal shmups on regular PCE that I would rather play.

[touko]

It's not technically limited to 20mb, so either they didn't need it and/or cost considerations kept it limited to 20mb.  Keep in mind that the SNES versions aren't any larger: SFII is 16mb and SFII Turbo is 20mb, though Super SFII and Alpha are 32mb.

Limited by cost is the same, how many hucards are > to 8Mb ??
Hucard format is best for nes/sms competition but not to compete in 16 bit category, when snes and MD can have easily 16Mb and more cartridges ..
For SGX development you need more storage than PCE if you don't want a PCE+ game like granzort or Aldynes.Sgx can do more than provide simple enhanced PCE games IMO .

The most impressive SGX game is probably Aldynes, and it isn't even that good, all things considered.

I think 1941 take more advantage of SGX hardware .
Aldynes seems to be a PCE game quickly ported on SGX .

[Necromancer]

You're making a bunch of false assumptions.  Hueys weren't exponentially more expensive to manufacture, nor were they limited in size to 8mb or even 20mb.