Nintendo are a big company, of course, but they are pretty worried about the fairly hefty fall in their company's profits by about 37 percent. Even their usual fallback on the handheld market is now being threatened by Sony's new handheld Playstation, currently being readied for release over the next year, and their Pokemon franchise, which is slowing down of late.
The news is that they want to ditch the Cube and try again, but doing this would drastically affect their company image. This was a company founded on trust, when they took back faulty NES consoles without arguement and replaced them with new ones in Japan it made their sales jump through the roof.
Whatever way they decide to stay afloat, it looks bad for the true gamers who were hoping and believing that there could be room for 3 consoles in the market. E3 showed that some companies are cutting back again on their Gamecube titles, despite earlier efforts from Nintendo to gain support from big players like EA Games. We'll just have to wait and see what happens.
Hard drive - should always be optional.
And in stating it would be good for downloadable levels etc. you defeated Updated's stupid point about it needing a high speed port to run through. If it's only storing levels and save games, it doesn't need to be very fast at all, as any levels would be loaded to the RAM during play, defeating the purpose of a super-fast hard drive.
This *isn't* like a PC Updated, consoles don't need very fast hard drive transfer rates, because hard drive use isn't nearly as intensive in consoles - there's no reason for it.
Bah, the heat maketh me irritable.
A Memory Card 251 is only about £15, maybe less, and that offers plenty of space, then if you need more, a memory card 59 isn't exactly expensive as an extra card.
I don't want to have that extra expense added onto a console if there isn't any real use for it.
> I already told you: smaller discs = less loading time
> I don't think the discs and compression are a big hassle, it costs
> about 1 or 2 million to make a game, a slightly different format isn't
> going to put developers off from making money from a GC exclusive game
> or a multiformat game.
> The discs seem to be part of Nintendo's heavy anti piracy stance, this
> would account for their 'wait and see' attitude towards a harddisk
> since games could be ripped to a harddrive.
> The GC could possibly be 'entry level' as we have no idea what
> upgrades Nintendo have up their sleeve. The expansion pack for N64 was
> their first properly successful expansion, it extended the consoles
> life a great deal.
> Nintendo always make their machines with expansion in mind (hence all
> the extra bits on the NES, SNES, N64 and GC. They used this well with
> the NES in Japan.
> It'll be interesting to see what they have for the GC.
No, no, no, no. Obviously, less data will load faster on a similar speed CPU - less work for it to do. But this is missing the point. For a start, using a "non-standard" disc does effect developers. It always has done, and will always do so, especially when there is a clear dominant format (dvd) out there. Just look at history. PS1 Vs N64. Betamax Vs VHS. Sky Vs BSB. As for GC upgrades - don't hold your breath. Nintendo might see it as chucking good money down a loss making money hole. If they had always been thinking about a hard disc drive option, why only provide Serial sockets for expansion? Hard disc drives, optical drives, and so on only work best when used via a high speed interconnect - Microsofts HDD is built it, and Sony PS2 has the internal motherboard connection inside the expansion bay. Thats not to say, USB or even Serial can not be used - they can, but any serious company planning this would have put in high speed expansion.
I went back in time and killed myself.