Are there pictures, info on the Saturn 3D upgrade ?

I can't believe in a credible Saturn upgrade, especially one that so radically expands the system that it only uses the CD-ROM and controllers. Where is the bus that would allow for that kind of upgrade? Even if it was technically possible, a CPU, GPU and RAM would make the upgrade beyond the reach of consumers, especially after the fiasco that was the 32x. The market for the device would rely on an audience that had already bought the expensive Saturn.

My belief is that the expansion never really got beyond early R&D stages and a lot of the rumour stems from the Saturn's successor, which Sega were farming out to every man and his dog.

 

x

 

There were so many things done wrong back then that it would be easier to say what SEGA did right...

Back to the point, releasing an Addon for the Saturn wouldnt've been a bad idea at all if it wasnt becos a year ago they released a 32X and left everybody and their dogs with a useless console in hand. The PR blow, as the article says, was massive to say the least. I remember how back in the early days of the DC there were rumors about the console and box saying just "Dreamcast" becos nobody trusted nothing with the SEGA brand no more.

The RAM part while a good idea is also unrelealistic. Even while the DC was released RAM chips were still expensive, so a Saturn Addon with a total 40MBs of RAM would have been even more expensive that the console itself.

To put that in context, SEGA couldnt afford more than a total 26MBs in the DC, even when it was 1998/99 and prices were lower than back in 1994/95.

On the other hand there could be RAM ports left for future expansions. Nintendo did it with the N64 and it wasnt a commercial failure, althought it didnt do nothing either (sometimes it even made things worse).

The way I see it, this is what SEGA should've done:

1- Release the 32X in August 1994 in north america and europe. Avoid Japan since MD userbase there was irrelevant. Make it more 2D oriented (even to the level Saturn had) so anyone thinking about getting a Snes goes for a 32X instead (this is a major point since it was in late 94 when the Genesis userbase went down)

2-Support it until fall 1998, and replace the Genesis and Addon altogether with the neptune, but sell it like Genesis 32X (Megadrive 32X in europe).

3-After all this the Genesis should stay as the most popular console, so stick with the name and call the new console Genesis 2 (Gigadrive in europe and japan, which BTW was the name it was meant to have). Work around the Lockheed tech, the success of the Model2 back then should've been proof enough that it was the right thing to do (I dont understand how they didnt see it).

4-Delay the launch to Xmas 95/early 96, right before the N64 but after the PSX. Nobody was waiting for sony nor would with the Genesis32X being so popular, and the only people waiting for the N64 were Snes fans.

5-Release the "Genesis 2" and watch fans flow into the stores;-)

Ironic, since nobody used the CE SDK, cuz it sucked...

But on the other hand 3Dfx tanked shortly thereafter, so who knows.

 

x

 

All I'm saying is at least 4 years before that, since you have to plan in advance with these things (something thats released in early 96 needs at least a year and a half to complete).

If you mean the extra memory on Naomi, well thats my point: SEGA couldnt afford that notable increase becos of expensive RAM at the time, but we all know that in the arcade heyday there were no limits with costs...

 

I doubt there was ever a picture,all that exists is just some protos.I do recall (as Barcode said)an ad on an old Greek Gamepro magazine,I'm gonna try to look for it.

 

x

 

Although MODEL 3 has actual GPUs with their own geometry processors, which can produce polygons without bothering the CPU, unlike NAOMI which has the same PowerVR2DC accelerator that Dreamcast has, which relies on the CPU for polygon & lighting calculations. MODEL 3 also has more space for textures with its 64 MB texture ROM. Among other things, it can do anti-aliasing without a performance hit.

 

In my mind, a better timeline and hardware decisions by Sega would look something like this

MegaDrive / Genesis release in 1989 - Hardware is somewhat more powerful than the actual MD/Gen. Sega should have based it directly on the System16B capabilities with far fewer chips. System 16B was made in 1986, so 3 years of shrinking down to a consumer board seems right.

So Instead of the relatively weak system Genesis was with that upgraded Master System VDP, there are are fewer limitations. Color is not an issue with over 1000 colors on-screen (somewhere between 1536 and 4096 depending on programming medthod) out of a 32,768 pallete (smaller palette than X68000 and NEO-GEO but still alot). And why not, the Genesis should have had more colors than the PC-Engine which could display upto 482.
sprites: 128 16x16 pixel sprites, upto 32 on a line. max sprite size: 64x64.
2 background layers (like the real Genesis and System16)

Some hardware scaling capability, just as the System16B board has. This Genesis can obviously handle exact ports of games like Shinobi, Altered Beast, Golden Axe, without downgrade. Also, while not as powerful as the 'X Board' that powers AfterBurner, ThunderBlade, etc. and other Super-Scaler hardware, Genesis can handle more respectible translations of those highend arcade games (as X68000 did)

MegaCD/SegaCD release in 1991 (in time to take on the SNES). Adds two more 68000 CPUs (instead of 1), a more powerful graphics chip (more colors, sprites, backgrounds) more powerful scaling & rotation chip. Has the same capability of the 'Y Board' that powers Galaxy Force II. Double speed CD-ROM drive. 1 MB RAM. 16 megabits (2MB) of CD-ROM buffer. Can handle any almost any 16-bit arcade game without downgrade. (Sega Super-Scaler, Capcom CPS1/2, Neo-Geo etc) Software revolves around lots of late 80s early 90s games, original action adventure games, shmups and HUGE RPGs, not FMV games. Thus providing the chance for much better success. With added graphics capabilities of this SegaCD, there is no need for a 32X. While SegaCD cannot handle polygons that 32X could (but not very well), the point of SegaCD is an advanced 16-bit machine, not polygons, which will be handled very well by the next-generation 3D-capable Saturn.

no GameGear handheld in 1991. Instead, Sega goes with a handheld based on a successful console, the Genesis, in 1994.

No 32X upgrade at all. Thus, the Genesis has 2 formats, Genesis cartridges and SegaCDs. instead of the 4 formats that actually happened in the real Sega timeline:
(Genesis carts, SegaCDs, 32X carts, 32X CDs).

Instead of two failed addons for Genesis, Sega has 1 relatively successful addon.


A redeveloped Saturn with full 3D launches in late 1996. Also giving lots of time for the SegaCD (1991) to do well with lots of RPGs which take time to develop. This way, Sega does not have a MASSIVE image problem of releasing lots of hardware only to let them fail and drop them a year or so later.

As Sega develops the next generation system, GigaDrive which evolves into Saturn with many changes (this really happened) Sega decides to continue evolving the Saturn after it sees, in 1993, what Sony is doing with PlayStation and after Nintendo's announcement of Project Reality / Ultra 64.

So instead of releasing the Saturn as they did in November 1994 in Japan and May 1995 in the U.S., Sega turns to Lockheed Martin to help finish Saturn's development by adding an extremely powerful, integrated single-chip version of the 3-chip Real3D/100 chipset. As well as a PowerPC 603e CPU from Hitachi. A single chip version of R3D/100 would be as good as the multi-chip version, just cheaper (possibly faster) and absolutely superior to the lousy i740 released years later for PCs. It's important for Saturn to be easily superior to the MODEL 2 board in every way, and roughly 1/2 as powerful as the MODEL 3 board, allowing very good translations of MODEL 3 games and heavily upgraded MODEL 2 games. Also attracting NAMCO to bring upgraded ports of System 22, Super System 22 games. Perhaps Sega could've worked out a deal with Matsushita, trading some translations of MODEL 2/3/Saturn games to M2 in return for some M2 games on Saturn.



Release is set for late 1996 to take on both the N64 and 3DO M2. This revamped Saturn with full 3D capability is a step above M2 just as M2 is a step above N64 and PS1. One of Sega's actual plans was close to this. A group of Sega managers wanted to cancel the Saturn just before its late 1994 launch, and focus on a new Lockheed-Martin designed console, probably for late 1996.

As others have pointed out, the new LMC design option would've been better than an addon which probably would've failed even if it was good. Sega could've kept was was good about Saturn (2D, audio), reduce the amount of chips by combining several of them (ditch the twin SH2s) and asked LM to put in a single chip R3D/100 and PowerPC 603e to be the main (and only) CPU.

It could've been feasible especially if Sega makes this decision in late 1993 or early 1994. Giving 2 to 3 years for technology to advance and the development of a low-cost R3D/100 on 1 chip n (instead of an addon-upgrade later). Memory prices also fall dramatically by late 1996 .

20 to 24 MB RAM for Saturn would've been possible. It would be needed also. this much RAM is absolutely critical so that enough polygons can be textured, so that it could have a proper Z-buffer and framebuffer with anti-aliasing. The 3DO M2 was at 8 MB (up from 4-6 originally) and 16 MB M2 variants existed for developers and arcade. The N64 got a 4 MB expansion but the N64 should've had 8 MB from the start. The PS1 had 3.5 MB RAM which was awfully small, and development systems had 8 MB from what I remember. So it goes without saying that if Saturn is to be the most powerful console of its generation, at least 20 MB is needed. The PowerPC 603 uses 4-8 MB of this and the Real3D/100 needs quite alot of memory itself. This will also allow Saturn to exist until 2000 or 2001 when the next-generation Sega comes out (instead of Dreamcast in 1998/1999).


In 2000 or 2001, a new 2nd-gen LM-designed Sega console is introduced, with much more power than what the Dreamcast was (there is no DC in my timeline). This system is at least as powerful as Xbox if not more powerful. whereas the Real3D/100 chip in Saturn is 1 geometry engine, 1 rendering pipeline, 1 texture processor, the new chip has a 4/8/16 configuration. 4 geometry engines, 8 rendering pipelines with 2 texture units per pipe. This will allow the new Sega console to last until at least 2007. performance is over 1 gigapixel fillrate ( over 2 gigatexels) 30-40 million textured, polygons/sec with anti-aliasing and all features on and lighting.
(Dreamcast's single pixel pipeline made it obsolete by 2000). The CPU is a custom PowerPC G4 variant (thus more powerful than Gamecube's G3-based Gekko). Memory is 128 MB RAM (maybe half SRAM, half DDR),. DVD, 56K + ethernet built-in. Instead of a Harddrive, some form of solid-state (maybe flash) drive is used, for both speed/streaming capability and reliability. The controller is actually very comfortable (unlike DC's) with dual analog sticks, a tilt sensor, removable color display unit that's 16-bit (based on Genesis, not an 8-bit unit like the VMU), and pressure sensitive buttons. Some of the cost is subsidized by Lockheed, Hitachi (or IBM) and Microsoft, in an all out effort to crush PS2. With the right mix of games and non-gaming applications, this console becomes the global standard "box" for entertainment and internet.


So in summary:

Master System - 1985 - powerful 8-bit system basicly as it was, but with more 3rd party game support

Genesis - 1989 - based on the System16B board - is not lacking in sprites, colors and can do some scaling nicely

SegaCD - late 1991 - major upgrade for Genesis as well as CD-storage. has more powerful graphics processors and two more 68000 (thus 3 total) to bring Galaxy Force II class graphics home (heavy amounts of scaling & rotation, lots of sprites)
much improved audio.


Saturn aka Genesis 2 - mid 1996 - powerful 3D polygon console with single PowerPC 603 CPU (for ease of programming) Lockheed Martin single-chip version of the Real3D/100 chipset (750,000 polygons/s), 16-24 MB RAM - 4x or 6x CD-ROM, built in 33.6K modem, analog controller. powerful 2D capabilities also. no need to add on extra RAM, 3D ability, or modem all built in.
(Can handle Street Fighter III and decent version of VF3 and upgraded Daytona, VF2)

Genesis 3 - 2001 - a 2nd-generation 3D system with a new generation of PowerPC CPU, custom Lockheed Martin Real3D GPU (15 to 30 million polygons/s thus far more powerful than MODEL 3), 128 MB RAM, DVD-ROM, solid-state mass storage, 56k modem, ethernet/broadband, Microsoft OS, tools, API for ease of development. High cost of manufacturing such a powerful machine is spread across key strategic partners (Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Hitachi, IBM, NEC, Sega)

 

I've had similar ideas about SEGA, but my take is somewhat different.

First, get a Genesis with a better VDP and sound processor so it wouldnt be behind the Snes. Then in 93 release a lock-on cart with 2 SVPs, making it far more powerful than the FX chips from nintendo but at the same time much cheaper than an addon and more versatile since you can use it several games and without the price issues Virtua Racing and FXs games had.

The SegaCD, now I would change quite a few things there. First, get rid of the 68k and just add more chips to make the Genesis as powerful (if not more) than a AES. Now while shilpeed looked good the fact is that 3D at the time was lame, so a console with high-end 2D was a far better decision than just a bunch of ugly polys (plus if you wanted that you could get the SVP lock-on, and would've been cheaper). Instead of using more CPUs like you say I would concentrate on improving the CD part, using a better drive and more memory so loading times are short, specially with AES-sized games (the NeoGeo CD was extremely slow).

Now the 32X is tricky, since with a SegaCD with those capabilities I hardly see how this addon could provide a real leap that would justify its existence. Making it as powerful as a Saturn means making it almost as expensive too, and leaving the Genesis and SCD as little more than I/O parts (that or making it extremely difficult to develop, just like Saturn was).

And here comes the black beast: now, I agree 100% on you design, but in my opinion it should be called "Genesis 2" since after all that (the better Genesis and SCD designs) the odds are that SEGA is not only a market leader but a very respected brand too, and so the Genesis, therefore it would be better to re-use the name (like sony did/does) than to create a new one. But my major complaint is launch date: fall 96 would be a mistake since the delay would create the same situation nintendo had with its fans and the N64. For me the perfect date would be early 96, like between PSX and N64.

If we go for the Xmas 96 launch that means something has to be done with the spec gap between Genesis/SCD and nextgen consoles, and that means making something like what the 32X was.

Somehow I cant avoid thinking that SEGA launched the Saturn in japan becos "it was already there" but planned to release a completely different Saturn in the west, reason why they greenlighted the 32X even less than a month before Saturn's japanese launch and why Saturn was planned for a late 95 launch, if not 96.

From that perspective everything makes sense: the 32X, the real3D Saturn, the addon (in this case for japanese Saturns) everything. The original 32X launch date (september 94) was perfect for development and such, and would've hold the userbase in place until late 95 when the Saturn was released. Then the only thing SEGA had to do is replace the standard Genesis for Neptune and keep support for it well into 97 and even 98.

 

I think the name "Genesis 2" instead of Saturn is just fine, so long as it used the equivalant of LM Real3D/100 or some Real3D chip (not i740) that's more powerful than MODEL 2.

The use of a dedicated geometry processor, so the CPU doesn't have to transform polygons, either on-chip or on-board, is also very important. Overall 'Genesis 2' is to be more powerful than N64 and 3DO M2 combined
(750K polys vs 160K + 300~400K). Although for a machine of 1996 (be it late 96 or early 96) Genesis 2 is not going to be as powerful as the Dreamcast was. However 'Genesis 3' in 2000-2001, would not only be more powerful than Dreamcast, it's better/more powerful than Xbox, given that Genesis 3 has to last 6-7 years.


BTW in my post before yours I mentioned that the MD/Genesis would be somewhat more powerful than it was, since it would be based directly on the System16B board. This gives Genesis more sprites, alot more colors (more on-screen than SNES) somewhat better audio and hardware scaling. The SegaCD upgrades the Genesis even more, to beyond SNES and beyond Neo-Geo levels of 2D performance.
I don't think anything else should've been released to upgrade Genesis beyond the SegaCD I described. Stop-gap measures usually fail. I suppose a cheap cartridge could be added to Genesis for SegaCD games, with some extra DSPs, but there should not be any 32X-like upgrades. The whole point of the powerful SegaCD is to upgrade the Genesis to high-end 16-bit arcade performance, but not 32-bit or 3D polygon capabilities, which arrive in 1996 with the Real3D-based Saturn (I mean "Genesis 2" heh).

 

The point of using the Genesis name is merely a market strategy, but it would only work had Genesis remained a big player in the market, since after the blow it took during 95 (it went from having 60% of the market in 94 to 30%) the name while not useless it wasnt as respected as it was before.

Plus theres the fact that at the time both SEGA and Nintendo liked to promote their consoles using the company's brand, and not the model brand like Sony and MS do today. Thats why all SEGA ads had the "scream" and Nintendo used the "Only for" slogan a lot.

Now if the situation in late 94 was SEGA scrambling to get a LM-based nextgen console becos their design sucked and the 32X was doing poorly (with all the developer and manufacturing issues) then the Saturn name is allright, mostly becos both the Genesis and SEGA names were compromised at the time.

About the DC, it was a last measure console where SEGA had to choose between risking everything to return to market or just go 3rd partie. Back then I wondered why SEGA didnt try to get into portables again, but now that I think about it, with the pokemon mania a new GG would've had a worse run than the DC (which had a good one, until SEGA's finances went belly up).

Is ironic how today the "hardware SEGA" of old is respected again...

Anyway, whats up with LM these days? the last thing I heard about them was about a kickass Antialias tech they were making for the military.

 

LM is no longer in the graphics biz AFAIK, at least not in the commercial sector.

They sold the Real3D division to Intel in the late 90s. After awhile Intel let them go (why I don't know exactly) and ATI soon picked up some if not most of the pieces.

It's a total shame Real3D did not bring their technology to the consumer market, not counting the i740 chip / Starfighter card which was a very lowend effort that lacked much of what made their other technology so good. What remained of Real3D got drawn into Nvidia and mostly ATI. Our modern 3D cards and consoles probably have some of the 'DNA' of Real3D's patents, IP and engineering talent, but exactly how and where I don't know.

 

The irony is that had SEGA used Real3D tech in the Saturn they would've been succesful enough to buy the company (since they were almost broke during late 90s and I'm sure LM wanted cash).

I know that there was a big legal battle with ATI over patents and such, and that they (ATI) opened an office in orlando to hire ex-Real3D employees after Intel fired all the employees.

Real3D is just another case of a great company going nowhere due to poor decisions made by the excecutive staff. The list is long, from Amiga and Commodore to SGI, and SEGA too, they were all companies that went down due to incompetent management.

 

No way possible for a consumer machine in '96. That kind of hardware would have been ridiculously expensive. I'd like to hear what you predict that would have cost back then.

Sega did what they could at the time. Same with Sony and Nintendo. The machines were not really that mismatched in power, it's just that the Saturn was the hardest to program for. If you compare the sales, they really weren't that bad compared to the Genesis, it's just that the PS1 sold so many more. If you use that comparison then the Saturn was a bit of a laughing stock. But that is down to Sony.

 

I can see it selling for $400 with a little loss for SEGA, but yeah it would've been expensive nonetheless.

The main problem with the Saturn (and it doesnt needs a PhD to figure it out) is that is way too complex for what it does. The raw power isnt that far off from PSX and N64, but the coding effort is, so if you wanted to make a game for Saturn what you needed was an excuse, not a reason.

 

$400?! At least double that, and that is with a loss to Sega.

For example, in 1996 a $2000 Dell had these specs:

166- or 200-MHz Pentium Processor with MMX Technology & 166Mhz Pentium Processor
16MB of SDRAM (Synchronous Dynamic RAM) Standard (up to 64MB Available)
S3 Virge DX Video with 2MB Video Memory on the Motherboard
12X EIDE CD-ROM Drive (Optional)
2.1GB or 3.2GB Hard Drive
Creative Labs Vibra 16 Sound Card (Optional)

 

I completely disagree. Sega did not do the best that they could at the time with Saturn in late 1994 and mid 1995. Saturn was a mess of an architecture. It was the product of bad decisions. A huge amount of chips. Sony and Nintendo made better choices with their consoles, had much better price/performance for 3D visuals. Try to follow my line of thinking here: Lets say that Sony and Nintendo had come out with much poorer performing machines in 1994/1995 and 1996.

I, or someone could've then imagined / thought up scenarios in which they "had" come out with consoles that resembled the PS1 and N64. Then some people would say such machines would've been impossible. A PlayStation with decent 3D graphics @ 180,000 textured, shaded and lit polygons/sec, and a Nintendo 64 with roughly 1/4 the performance of an Onyx RealityEngine2 which cost over $100,000 is of higher performance than SGI's lower-end to midrange workstations costing $10,000 to $50,000, for $200. that sounds impossible! yet it happened.

Also looking at the arcade market, MODEL 2 in 1994 and MODEL 3 in 1996 offered the kind of performance found in million dollar flight similators for the low price of $15,000. those too should've been impossible.

Look at M2, although it wasnt released, the hardware was very real, and very powerful. It offered 2 to 3 times the performance of the N64 at a similar price and was to be released at roughly the same point in time. M2 was not the be-all-end-all, ultimate home hardware, as far as what was possible. Lockheed Martin had superior technology before 1996. They chose not to cost-reduce it (while keeping the performance) down to console price-points because they were not used to doing that, but who is to say it would've been impossible?

Knowing what the 3DO Systems team did with M2, if the effort had been made by Lockheed and Hitachi (the likely CPU provider) they could've beaten M2, not unlike how M2 beat N64.

We've seen staggaring cost/performance breakthroughs in the console industry time and time again. The PS1, Dreamcast, the PS2, the Gamecube, Xbox 360, Ps3, etc. What I am suggesting is not even revolutionary IMO. It would've been just a solid step in the right direction for Sega. It just didn't happen. I absolutely believe a Sega console with 1/3 to 1/2 of MODEL 3 performance (and better than Model 2) could've been released by late 1996 for $300, or at most, $400. A reasonable price. The Saturn was $400 without a game, $449 with Virtua Fighter. It wasn't state of the art at all, it just had a ton of chips. The 3D-capable Saturn or Genesis 2 that I am suggesting would've had fewer chips, more integration. Anyone could say that the PS1, N64 and M2 would've been impossible at the prices they came out at or were going to come out at, if say they had not happened, but years later someone like me thought up a scenario with their specifications, timeline and price.

See, you are thinking in terms of PCs. That's just wrong. Going by that way of thinking, all the consoles ever released over the past 20 years should never have happened. They all wouldve cost thousands of dollars.

 

you forgot to mention that Hitler won WWII...

 

Unfortunately, I also believe that a more or less economical hardware upgrade for Saturn had been just like a little "push" to this console and not a complete revolution. I doubt its power could have grown so much. Its architecture was complicated enough to make it even more complex... I bet Hideki Sato didn't agree about the plan from SOA and Lockheed.

Apart of that, it's not only about hardware, but also about making good software which allow the developers to get the best. SEGA should have dedicated more resources to that task since the begining.

PD: By the way, I believe in the existence of this kind of hardware, but not in its possibilities of success.