The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Back in the 16-bit days, Nintendo was arguably the market leader with the SNES. Sure, Sega gave them a hard time with the powerful (and popular) Mega Drive, but Nintendo were constantly recognised for innovative and original gameplay, which set them out from the crowd.
However, by the time their successor to the SNES arrived (Nintendo 64), a new console manufacturer had entered the gaming scene – Sony. Ofcourse, more competition can lead to an in overall user base and generally an increase in profits. However, Sony’s Playstation was more than a match. In one short year, Sony had taken gaming to a whole new level – 3D, and had grown unbelievably popular with gamers. They had a lead over Nintendo. A lead that Nintendo has never, to this day, never managed to catch up with.
Nintendo made many wrong decisions with the N64, and it was these decisions that put them down in second place. So, this time round, Nintendo have had to truly pull out all the stops. What they did wrong before had to be corrected this time round. Let’s take a look!
Released around about a year before the N64, the Playstation (and Saturn before it) successfully managed to change the media we use to store games on – they used CDs instead of cartridges. Nintendo however, decided to stick with carts. This was a decision made by the bigwigs that was heavily influenced by Shigeru Miyamoto, who wished to stick with carts as the lack of loading times would make his games flow more like a story. Although loading times was a serious advantage carts had over CDs, this was far outweighed by the number of disadvantages.
Firstly, carts are very expensive to manufacture. Last time I checked, it cost over £5 to produce one cart, compared to less than 20p for a CD. This, in turn, meant Playstation owners could buy more games for their money.
Another advantage CDs had over carts was space – digital space. For example, you could fit about 10 copies of Super Mario 64 on one compact disc. Thankfully, the capacity of carts has increased over the years (I think Resident Evil 2 was stored on a 512 megabyte cartridge), but not to the extent of a CDs capacity.
Finally, storing sound on carts, for some reason, had an effect on the quality of sound playback. This is probably because developers had to record sound effects and music at a poorer quality to lower file sizes (to fit on the carts).
However, for the first time in a Nintendo console, the system will use discs instead of cartridges. Mini DVDs to be precise. Not only does this eradicate all the points made above, these discs actually hold over twice as much as CDs, and only have a diameter of 8cm compared to a CD’s 12cm! Although this has no real advantage, it’s something that neither PS2 nor X-Box-owners can boast about!
A follow-on effect of using cartridges was a lack of developers supporting the system. A pattern emerged where we’d get a must-have title come along once every 6 months or so and in-between these releases there would be a slow trickle of fairly average games to fill the space. The N64 was renowned as a difficult platform to develop for. We’re not talking as bad (or complex, as some will be happier in thinking) as the PS2, but this certainly put off a lot of less-experiences teams. A difficult platform to develop for often means sub-standard games or a lack of any. In the N64’s case, it was often a case of both.
One other factor that limited the number of games being released for the system was the format on which they were stored. As already mentioned, cartridges are so much more expensive to make. Cheaper manufacturing costs means more profit for all companies involved along with cheaper prices for gamers. With the advent of mini-DVDs, sub-£40 is a reality from launch.
One thing the PS2 really has going for it is a huge user base that is rapidly expanding. This is because Sony have just about all areas of the market covered, thanks to a wide range of titles available. For the ‘more mature’ gamer, there’s the likes of Devil May Cry and Grand Theft Auto 3, while for the less tall (read: younger) gamers among us, there’s titles like Jak & Daxter and Monsters Inc. to keep them happy.
Nintendo on the other hand, has a kiddy-image that simply won’t wear off. On the N64, games often got turned down for not appealing to their target audience and Nintendo themselves refused to make anything that wouldn’t get the ‘3+’ rating slapped on the box. Admittedly, Nintendo are still going to be providing the games that will certainly appeal to children on Gamecube, but this time round, they’ve let other developers cater for the older gamer. One developer which, it seems, could become key to Gamecube’s success is Capcom, who have already vowed to make the whole Resident Evil series exclusive to Gamecube.
There is one area in the videogame industry where Sony is unrivalled – marketing. The firm has poured millions, probably even billions, into marketing their Playstation brand over the years and it’s certainly worked. Throw the name ‘Dreamcast’ at your average punter, and you’re likely to get a rather bemused look in return. Stick ‘Playstation’ in the conversation, though, and you’re well away.
Admittedly, Nintendo aren’t as bad as Sega when it comes to marketing. They do acknowledge that the television broadcasting actually exists. Still, more marketing would have seriously helped the N64 and driven the name into people’s brains. Thankfully, Nintendo appear to have realised this and have promised to spend at least €100 million on the European launch period alone. More money on marketing usually means more profit in the long run, and this is a valuable lesson that, it seems, Nintendo have learned.
One final point I feel the need to raise – pricing. You could say the N64 was reasonably-priced when it was released for £250 in the UK. However, £70 for Turok: Dinosaur Hunter was a joke, as was £60 for all other games. Nintendo were aiming at a younger audience. It this was the case, surely Nintendo would have known kids wouldn’t have this kind of money to spend, unless it was a birthday or Christmas period.
However, it’s all so very different with Gamecube. At launch, the Gamecube will cost a measly £160 from retailers such as the one you’re visiting right now, which is £40 cheaper than the older, less-advanced PS2, and almost half the price of X-Box! What’s more, games are expected to retail at £40, compared to £45 for X-Box and a lot of PS2 titles! This could be one of Gamecube’s crucial advantages that draws in the crowds.
So, everything’s rosy for Nintendo then. The Gamecube has put right everything the N64 did wrong and now there’s nothing to stop the big N. Well, I’ll tell you right now you’d be rather stupid to think such. Not only has the PS2 user base grown to well over 25 million now (which gives Sony a massive head-start), new competition arrives in the form of Microsoft. However, we should look forward to this brewing console war with great anticipation. Lots of competition means better gaming as cheaper prices (unless Microsoft has anything to do with it). So, as a fellow Nintendo fan around here would say…
Here’s to the future!
The one, the only – Uncle Albert
However, by the time their successor to the SNES arrived (Nintendo 64), a new console manufacturer had entered the gaming scene – Sony. Ofcourse, more competition can lead to an in overall user base and generally an increase in profits. However, Sony’s Playstation was more than a match. In one short year, Sony had taken gaming to a whole new level – 3D, and had grown unbelievably popular with gamers. They had a lead over Nintendo. A lead that Nintendo has never, to this day, never managed to catch up with.
Nintendo made many wrong decisions with the N64, and it was these decisions that put them down in second place. So, this time round, Nintendo have had to truly pull out all the stops. What they did wrong before had to be corrected this time round. Let’s take a look!
Released around about a year before the N64, the Playstation (and Saturn before it) successfully managed to change the media we use to store games on – they used CDs instead of cartridges. Nintendo however, decided to stick with carts. This was a decision made by the bigwigs that was heavily influenced by Shigeru Miyamoto, who wished to stick with carts as the lack of loading times would make his games flow more like a story. Although loading times was a serious advantage carts had over CDs, this was far outweighed by the number of disadvantages.
Firstly, carts are very expensive to manufacture. Last time I checked, it cost over £5 to produce one cart, compared to less than 20p for a CD. This, in turn, meant Playstation owners could buy more games for their money.
Another advantage CDs had over carts was space – digital space. For example, you could fit about 10 copies of Super Mario 64 on one compact disc. Thankfully, the capacity of carts has increased over the years (I think Resident Evil 2 was stored on a 512 megabyte cartridge), but not to the extent of a CDs capacity.
Finally, storing sound on carts, for some reason, had an effect on the quality of sound playback. This is probably because developers had to record sound effects and music at a poorer quality to lower file sizes (to fit on the carts).
However, for the first time in a Nintendo console, the system will use discs instead of cartridges. Mini DVDs to be precise. Not only does this eradicate all the points made above, these discs actually hold over twice as much as CDs, and only have a diameter of 8cm compared to a CD’s 12cm! Although this has no real advantage, it’s something that neither PS2 nor X-Box-owners can boast about!
A follow-on effect of using cartridges was a lack of developers supporting the system. A pattern emerged where we’d get a must-have title come along once every 6 months or so and in-between these releases there would be a slow trickle of fairly average games to fill the space. The N64 was renowned as a difficult platform to develop for. We’re not talking as bad (or complex, as some will be happier in thinking) as the PS2, but this certainly put off a lot of less-experiences teams. A difficult platform to develop for often means sub-standard games or a lack of any. In the N64’s case, it was often a case of both.
One other factor that limited the number of games being released for the system was the format on which they were stored. As already mentioned, cartridges are so much more expensive to make. Cheaper manufacturing costs means more profit for all companies involved along with cheaper prices for gamers. With the advent of mini-DVDs, sub-£40 is a reality from launch.
One thing the PS2 really has going for it is a huge user base that is rapidly expanding. This is because Sony have just about all areas of the market covered, thanks to a wide range of titles available. For the ‘more mature’ gamer, there’s the likes of Devil May Cry and Grand Theft Auto 3, while for the less tall (read: younger) gamers among us, there’s titles like Jak & Daxter and Monsters Inc. to keep them happy.
Nintendo on the other hand, has a kiddy-image that simply won’t wear off. On the N64, games often got turned down for not appealing to their target audience and Nintendo themselves refused to make anything that wouldn’t get the ‘3+’ rating slapped on the box. Admittedly, Nintendo are still going to be providing the games that will certainly appeal to children on Gamecube, but this time round, they’ve let other developers cater for the older gamer. One developer which, it seems, could become key to Gamecube’s success is Capcom, who have already vowed to make the whole Resident Evil series exclusive to Gamecube.
There is one area in the videogame industry where Sony is unrivalled – marketing. The firm has poured millions, probably even billions, into marketing their Playstation brand over the years and it’s certainly worked. Throw the name ‘Dreamcast’ at your average punter, and you’re likely to get a rather bemused look in return. Stick ‘Playstation’ in the conversation, though, and you’re well away.
Admittedly, Nintendo aren’t as bad as Sega when it comes to marketing. They do acknowledge that the television broadcasting actually exists. Still, more marketing would have seriously helped the N64 and driven the name into people’s brains. Thankfully, Nintendo appear to have realised this and have promised to spend at least €100 million on the European launch period alone. More money on marketing usually means more profit in the long run, and this is a valuable lesson that, it seems, Nintendo have learned.
One final point I feel the need to raise – pricing. You could say the N64 was reasonably-priced when it was released for £250 in the UK. However, £70 for Turok: Dinosaur Hunter was a joke, as was £60 for all other games. Nintendo were aiming at a younger audience. It this was the case, surely Nintendo would have known kids wouldn’t have this kind of money to spend, unless it was a birthday or Christmas period.
However, it’s all so very different with Gamecube. At launch, the Gamecube will cost a measly £160 from retailers such as the one you’re visiting right now, which is £40 cheaper than the older, less-advanced PS2, and almost half the price of X-Box! What’s more, games are expected to retail at £40, compared to £45 for X-Box and a lot of PS2 titles! This could be one of Gamecube’s crucial advantages that draws in the crowds.
So, everything’s rosy for Nintendo then. The Gamecube has put right everything the N64 did wrong and now there’s nothing to stop the big N. Well, I’ll tell you right now you’d be rather stupid to think such. Not only has the PS2 user base grown to well over 25 million now (which gives Sony a massive head-start), new competition arrives in the form of Microsoft. However, we should look forward to this brewing console war with great anticipation. Lots of competition means better gaming as cheaper prices (unless Microsoft has anything to do with it). So, as a fellow Nintendo fan around here would say…
Here’s to the future!
The one, the only – Uncle Albert
Page:
Back in the 16-bit days, Nintendo was arguably the market leader with the SNES. Sure, Sega gave them a hard time with the powerful (and popular) Mega Drive, but Nintendo were constantly recognised for innovative and original gameplay, which set them out from the crowd.
However, by the time their successor to the SNES arrived (Nintendo 64), a new console manufacturer had entered the gaming scene – Sony. Ofcourse, more competition can lead to an in overall user base and generally an increase in profits. However, Sony’s Playstation was more than a match. In one short year, Sony had taken gaming to a whole new level – 3D, and had grown unbelievably popular with gamers. They had a lead over Nintendo. A lead that Nintendo has never, to this day, never managed to catch up with.
Nintendo made many wrong decisions with the N64, and it was these decisions that put them down in second place. So, this time round, Nintendo have had to truly pull out all the stops. What they did wrong before had to be corrected this time round. Let’s take a look!
Released around about a year before the N64, the Playstation (and Saturn before it) successfully managed to change the media we use to store games on – they used CDs instead of cartridges. Nintendo however, decided to stick with carts. This was a decision made by the bigwigs that was heavily influenced by Shigeru Miyamoto, who wished to stick with carts as the lack of loading times would make his games flow more like a story. Although loading times was a serious advantage carts had over CDs, this was far outweighed by the number of disadvantages.
Firstly, carts are very expensive to manufacture. Last time I checked, it cost over £5 to produce one cart, compared to less than 20p for a CD. This, in turn, meant Playstation owners could buy more games for their money.
Another advantage CDs had over carts was space – digital space. For example, you could fit about 10 copies of Super Mario 64 on one compact disc. Thankfully, the capacity of carts has increased over the years (I think Resident Evil 2 was stored on a 512 megabyte cartridge), but not to the extent of a CDs capacity.
Finally, storing sound on carts, for some reason, had an effect on the quality of sound playback. This is probably because developers had to record sound effects and music at a poorer quality to lower file sizes (to fit on the carts).
However, for the first time in a Nintendo console, the system will use discs instead of cartridges. Mini DVDs to be precise. Not only does this eradicate all the points made above, these discs actually hold over twice as much as CDs, and only have a diameter of 8cm compared to a CD’s 12cm! Although this has no real advantage, it’s something that neither PS2 nor X-Box-owners can boast about!
A follow-on effect of using cartridges was a lack of developers supporting the system. A pattern emerged where we’d get a must-have title come along once every 6 months or so and in-between these releases there would be a slow trickle of fairly average games to fill the space. The N64 was renowned as a difficult platform to develop for. We’re not talking as bad (or complex, as some will be happier in thinking) as the PS2, but this certainly put off a lot of less-experiences teams. A difficult platform to develop for often means sub-standard games or a lack of any. In the N64’s case, it was often a case of both.
One other factor that limited the number of games being released for the system was the format on which they were stored. As already mentioned, cartridges are so much more expensive to make. Cheaper manufacturing costs means more profit for all companies involved along with cheaper prices for gamers. With the advent of mini-DVDs, sub-£40 is a reality from launch.
One thing the PS2 really has going for it is a huge user base that is rapidly expanding. This is because Sony have just about all areas of the market covered, thanks to a wide range of titles available. For the ‘more mature’ gamer, there’s the likes of Devil May Cry and Grand Theft Auto 3, while for the less tall (read: younger) gamers among us, there’s titles like Jak & Daxter and Monsters Inc. to keep them happy.
Nintendo on the other hand, has a kiddy-image that simply won’t wear off. On the N64, games often got turned down for not appealing to their target audience and Nintendo themselves refused to make anything that wouldn’t get the ‘3+’ rating slapped on the box. Admittedly, Nintendo are still going to be providing the games that will certainly appeal to children on Gamecube, but this time round, they’ve let other developers cater for the older gamer. One developer which, it seems, could become key to Gamecube’s success is Capcom, who have already vowed to make the whole Resident Evil series exclusive to Gamecube.
There is one area in the videogame industry where Sony is unrivalled – marketing. The firm has poured millions, probably even billions, into marketing their Playstation brand over the years and it’s certainly worked. Throw the name ‘Dreamcast’ at your average punter, and you’re likely to get a rather bemused look in return. Stick ‘Playstation’ in the conversation, though, and you’re well away.
Admittedly, Nintendo aren’t as bad as Sega when it comes to marketing. They do acknowledge that the television broadcasting actually exists. Still, more marketing would have seriously helped the N64 and driven the name into people’s brains. Thankfully, Nintendo appear to have realised this and have promised to spend at least €100 million on the European launch period alone. More money on marketing usually means more profit in the long run, and this is a valuable lesson that, it seems, Nintendo have learned.
One final point I feel the need to raise – pricing. You could say the N64 was reasonably-priced when it was released for £250 in the UK. However, £70 for Turok: Dinosaur Hunter was a joke, as was £60 for all other games. Nintendo were aiming at a younger audience. It this was the case, surely Nintendo would have known kids wouldn’t have this kind of money to spend, unless it was a birthday or Christmas period.
However, it’s all so very different with Gamecube. At launch, the Gamecube will cost a measly £160 from retailers such as the one you’re visiting right now, which is £40 cheaper than the older, less-advanced PS2, and almost half the price of X-Box! What’s more, games are expected to retail at £40, compared to £45 for X-Box and a lot of PS2 titles! This could be one of Gamecube’s crucial advantages that draws in the crowds.
So, everything’s rosy for Nintendo then. The Gamecube has put right everything the N64 did wrong and now there’s nothing to stop the big N. Well, I’ll tell you right now you’d be rather stupid to think such. Not only has the PS2 user base grown to well over 25 million now (which gives Sony a massive head-start), new competition arrives in the form of Microsoft. However, we should look forward to this brewing console war with great anticipation. Lots of competition means better gaming as cheaper prices (unless Microsoft has anything to do with it). So, as a fellow Nintendo fan around here would say…
Here’s to the future!
The one, the only – Uncle Albert
However, by the time their successor to the SNES arrived (Nintendo 64), a new console manufacturer had entered the gaming scene – Sony. Ofcourse, more competition can lead to an in overall user base and generally an increase in profits. However, Sony’s Playstation was more than a match. In one short year, Sony had taken gaming to a whole new level – 3D, and had grown unbelievably popular with gamers. They had a lead over Nintendo. A lead that Nintendo has never, to this day, never managed to catch up with.
Nintendo made many wrong decisions with the N64, and it was these decisions that put them down in second place. So, this time round, Nintendo have had to truly pull out all the stops. What they did wrong before had to be corrected this time round. Let’s take a look!
Released around about a year before the N64, the Playstation (and Saturn before it) successfully managed to change the media we use to store games on – they used CDs instead of cartridges. Nintendo however, decided to stick with carts. This was a decision made by the bigwigs that was heavily influenced by Shigeru Miyamoto, who wished to stick with carts as the lack of loading times would make his games flow more like a story. Although loading times was a serious advantage carts had over CDs, this was far outweighed by the number of disadvantages.
Firstly, carts are very expensive to manufacture. Last time I checked, it cost over £5 to produce one cart, compared to less than 20p for a CD. This, in turn, meant Playstation owners could buy more games for their money.
Another advantage CDs had over carts was space – digital space. For example, you could fit about 10 copies of Super Mario 64 on one compact disc. Thankfully, the capacity of carts has increased over the years (I think Resident Evil 2 was stored on a 512 megabyte cartridge), but not to the extent of a CDs capacity.
Finally, storing sound on carts, for some reason, had an effect on the quality of sound playback. This is probably because developers had to record sound effects and music at a poorer quality to lower file sizes (to fit on the carts).
However, for the first time in a Nintendo console, the system will use discs instead of cartridges. Mini DVDs to be precise. Not only does this eradicate all the points made above, these discs actually hold over twice as much as CDs, and only have a diameter of 8cm compared to a CD’s 12cm! Although this has no real advantage, it’s something that neither PS2 nor X-Box-owners can boast about!
A follow-on effect of using cartridges was a lack of developers supporting the system. A pattern emerged where we’d get a must-have title come along once every 6 months or so and in-between these releases there would be a slow trickle of fairly average games to fill the space. The N64 was renowned as a difficult platform to develop for. We’re not talking as bad (or complex, as some will be happier in thinking) as the PS2, but this certainly put off a lot of less-experiences teams. A difficult platform to develop for often means sub-standard games or a lack of any. In the N64’s case, it was often a case of both.
One other factor that limited the number of games being released for the system was the format on which they were stored. As already mentioned, cartridges are so much more expensive to make. Cheaper manufacturing costs means more profit for all companies involved along with cheaper prices for gamers. With the advent of mini-DVDs, sub-£40 is a reality from launch.
One thing the PS2 really has going for it is a huge user base that is rapidly expanding. This is because Sony have just about all areas of the market covered, thanks to a wide range of titles available. For the ‘more mature’ gamer, there’s the likes of Devil May Cry and Grand Theft Auto 3, while for the less tall (read: younger) gamers among us, there’s titles like Jak & Daxter and Monsters Inc. to keep them happy.
Nintendo on the other hand, has a kiddy-image that simply won’t wear off. On the N64, games often got turned down for not appealing to their target audience and Nintendo themselves refused to make anything that wouldn’t get the ‘3+’ rating slapped on the box. Admittedly, Nintendo are still going to be providing the games that will certainly appeal to children on Gamecube, but this time round, they’ve let other developers cater for the older gamer. One developer which, it seems, could become key to Gamecube’s success is Capcom, who have already vowed to make the whole Resident Evil series exclusive to Gamecube.
There is one area in the videogame industry where Sony is unrivalled – marketing. The firm has poured millions, probably even billions, into marketing their Playstation brand over the years and it’s certainly worked. Throw the name ‘Dreamcast’ at your average punter, and you’re likely to get a rather bemused look in return. Stick ‘Playstation’ in the conversation, though, and you’re well away.
Admittedly, Nintendo aren’t as bad as Sega when it comes to marketing. They do acknowledge that the television broadcasting actually exists. Still, more marketing would have seriously helped the N64 and driven the name into people’s brains. Thankfully, Nintendo appear to have realised this and have promised to spend at least €100 million on the European launch period alone. More money on marketing usually means more profit in the long run, and this is a valuable lesson that, it seems, Nintendo have learned.
One final point I feel the need to raise – pricing. You could say the N64 was reasonably-priced when it was released for £250 in the UK. However, £70 for Turok: Dinosaur Hunter was a joke, as was £60 for all other games. Nintendo were aiming at a younger audience. It this was the case, surely Nintendo would have known kids wouldn’t have this kind of money to spend, unless it was a birthday or Christmas period.
However, it’s all so very different with Gamecube. At launch, the Gamecube will cost a measly £160 from retailers such as the one you’re visiting right now, which is £40 cheaper than the older, less-advanced PS2, and almost half the price of X-Box! What’s more, games are expected to retail at £40, compared to £45 for X-Box and a lot of PS2 titles! This could be one of Gamecube’s crucial advantages that draws in the crowds.
So, everything’s rosy for Nintendo then. The Gamecube has put right everything the N64 did wrong and now there’s nothing to stop the big N. Well, I’ll tell you right now you’d be rather stupid to think such. Not only has the PS2 user base grown to well over 25 million now (which gives Sony a massive head-start), new competition arrives in the form of Microsoft. However, we should look forward to this brewing console war with great anticipation. Lots of competition means better gaming as cheaper prices (unless Microsoft has anything to do with it). So, as a fellow Nintendo fan around here would say…
Here’s to the future!
The one, the only – Uncle Albert
Uncle Albert wrote:
(I think Resident Evil 2 was stored on a 512
> megabyte cartridge
It was actually 512 Megabits, only cartridge of that size i think.
What’s
> more, games are expected to retail at £40, compared to £45 for X-Box
> and a lot of PS2 titles! This could be one of Gamecube’s crucial advantages that
> draws in the crowds.
I Doubt GC games are gonna be any cheaper than X-box or PS2 games. You can get most PS2 games for around £30 online. While GC Games are starting at £40 online.
(I think Resident Evil 2 was stored on a 512
> megabyte cartridge
It was actually 512 Megabits, only cartridge of that size i think.
What’s
> more, games are expected to retail at £40, compared to £45 for X-Box
> and a lot of PS2 titles! This could be one of Gamecube’s crucial advantages that
> draws in the crowds.
I Doubt GC games are gonna be any cheaper than X-box or PS2 games. You can get most PS2 games for around £30 online. While GC Games are starting at £40 online.
If I remember correctly, it's only recently PS2 games have sold brand new for less than £40, and that's from Special Reserve. I've still seen games in competitors stores for £39.99 and even £44.99!
New X-box games on SR are £42.99
New GameCube games are £39.99
Ofcourse prices are likely to drop in the future, as you can see with PS2 games, they usually do.
New X-box games on SR are £42.99
New GameCube games are £39.99
Ofcourse prices are likely to drop in the future, as you can see with PS2 games, they usually do.
the console is cheaper, but the games again seem more expensive, its there "we have to have our own special discs" mentaility, dvd's are VERY cheap to make, manufacturing costs are very low now cos they have been around for a while and are used in a lot of applications, GC discs may again cause problems, but i hope the prices go down beacuse it renders the price cut of the console pointless.
If you read my message you'd notice GameCube games are cheaper than the X-box games, and it's the X-box games that use DVD!
Edgy wrote:
> If I remember correctly, it's only recently PS2 games have sold brand new for
> less than £40, and that's from Special Reserve. I've still seen games in
> competitors stores for £39.99 and even £44.99!
Yes, All new PS2 games are either £45 or £40 in the shops, but you cant compare these prices with the online GC prices. We dont really know how much normal shops will charge for GC games. I bought recent games such as Devil May Cry and Smackdown:JBI for £29.99 from Play.com.
>New X-box games on
> SR are £42.99
>New GameCube games are £39.99
Yes but AR are the only ones really charging that much. You go to Gameplay and they are charging £39.99 for most of the games...The same as the GC price.
> If I remember correctly, it's only recently PS2 games have sold brand new for
> less than £40, and that's from Special Reserve. I've still seen games in
> competitors stores for £39.99 and even £44.99!
Yes, All new PS2 games are either £45 or £40 in the shops, but you cant compare these prices with the online GC prices. We dont really know how much normal shops will charge for GC games. I bought recent games such as Devil May Cry and Smackdown:JBI for £29.99 from Play.com.
>New X-box games on
> SR are £42.99
>New GameCube games are £39.99
Yes but AR are the only ones really charging that much. You go to Gameplay and they are charging £39.99 for most of the games...The same as the GC price.
Edgy wrote:
> If you read my message you'd notice GameCube games are cheaper than the X-box
> games, and it's the X-box games that use DVD!
i was refering in contrast with sony, who created the DVD format, microsoft as do all other who use it have to pay in some distant way - sony.
Anyway GC should be cheaper as the discs, surprise surpirse hold less information...
> If you read my message you'd notice GameCube games are cheaper than the X-box
> games, and it's the X-box games that use DVD!
i was refering in contrast with sony, who created the DVD format, microsoft as do all other who use it have to pay in some distant way - sony.
Anyway GC should be cheaper as the discs, surprise surpirse hold less information...
El Burro wrote:
Anyway GC should be
> cheaper as the discs, surprise surpirse hold less information...
For most developers, 1.5 gigs will be more than enough space to hold the game data. I can remember reading an interview with the team who made Rogue Squadron 2 and they were saying that the actual game data only totalled around 200mb. They filled the rest of the space with out-takes from the films and also a 'Making Of...' feature.
Having said that, we will soon have our first multiple-disc Gamecube game in the form of Resident Evil. Tsk.
Anyway GC should be
> cheaper as the discs, surprise surpirse hold less information...
For most developers, 1.5 gigs will be more than enough space to hold the game data. I can remember reading an interview with the team who made Rogue Squadron 2 and they were saying that the actual game data only totalled around 200mb. They filled the rest of the space with out-takes from the films and also a 'Making Of...' feature.
Having said that, we will soon have our first multiple-disc Gamecube game in the form of Resident Evil. Tsk.
Ah, but remember, everyone said this about CDs - they'd never fill them in a million years, and then we get games like MGS needing 2, FFVI needing 3 and a whopping 4 for FFVII and IX! By my reckoning, that's 2.6gigs, less than a DVD but much more than an optical disc.
Apart from Piracy, there's no real advantage to optical discs (some would say piracy is an advantage). Oh, and don't say loading times, because that's a total myth. It has nothing to do with the discs. The only reason I can see for the optical discs is they are exclusive and the rights are owned by Nintendo. So guess what? They can charge for them and it coud potentially be the whole Game-Pak thing all over again.
Apart from Piracy, there's no real advantage to optical discs (some would say piracy is an advantage). Oh, and don't say loading times, because that's a total myth. It has nothing to do with the discs. The only reason I can see for the optical discs is they are exclusive and the rights are owned by Nintendo. So guess what? They can charge for them and it coud potentially be the whole Game-Pak thing all over again.
Turbonutter wrote:
> Ah, but remember, everyone said this about CDs - they'd never fill them in a
> million years, and then we get games like MGS needing 2, FFVI needing 3 and a
> whopping 4 for FFVII and IX! By my reckoning, that's 2.6gigs, less than a DVD
> but much more than an optical disc.
Apart from Piracy, there's no real
> advantage to optical discs (some would say piracy is an advantage). Oh, and
> don't say loading times, because that's a total myth. It has nothing to do with
> the discs. The only reason I can see for the optical discs is they are exclusive
> and the rights are owned by Nintendo. So guess what? They can charge for them
> and it coud potentially be the whole Game-Pak thing all over again.
I thought that the optical disc's used by the GameCube were actually produced by Panasonic, who therefore own the Proprietary license.
Oh, and if yo think any company veiw piracy as an 'advantage' you need your head checking Turbo. Sony, Microsoft and nintendo all make a loss on the actual base unit, and then make all the cash back on the games. So if you can buy copied games, where is there money going to come from. Yes they'll sell more consoles but there no cash in that my friend.
The consumer may view piracy as 'good' as you can get free games (this is why the DreamCast sold so well toward the end of it's life, everyone knew you could get the boot disc and games easily) but there ins't a single games compnay, no matter who big, that agree. And rightly so!
> Ah, but remember, everyone said this about CDs - they'd never fill them in a
> million years, and then we get games like MGS needing 2, FFVI needing 3 and a
> whopping 4 for FFVII and IX! By my reckoning, that's 2.6gigs, less than a DVD
> but much more than an optical disc.
Apart from Piracy, there's no real
> advantage to optical discs (some would say piracy is an advantage). Oh, and
> don't say loading times, because that's a total myth. It has nothing to do with
> the discs. The only reason I can see for the optical discs is they are exclusive
> and the rights are owned by Nintendo. So guess what? They can charge for them
> and it coud potentially be the whole Game-Pak thing all over again.
I thought that the optical disc's used by the GameCube were actually produced by Panasonic, who therefore own the Proprietary license.
Oh, and if yo think any company veiw piracy as an 'advantage' you need your head checking Turbo. Sony, Microsoft and nintendo all make a loss on the actual base unit, and then make all the cash back on the games. So if you can buy copied games, where is there money going to come from. Yes they'll sell more consoles but there no cash in that my friend.
The consumer may view piracy as 'good' as you can get free games (this is why the DreamCast sold so well toward the end of it's life, everyone knew you could get the boot disc and games easily) but there ins't a single games compnay, no matter who big, that agree. And rightly so!
Page: