Nintendo's biggest screwup (sony snes cd)

Post Reply New Topic

just because you have the technology doesn't mean you should use it, or that the game would automatically be good because you used that particular technology. games like Bejeweled and Peggle are simple as hell and coded in Flash and they're huge hits.

we talking PS1 games on their own (the original discs) or for download on PSN? i dunno what the rates on PSN are, or what PS1 games are available for download in America. an SNES game on Virtual Console is $8 for the record. and to be fair i'm sure it'd be just as easy to make hi-res versions of PS1 games for download, but it doesn't seem many companies are interested in doing it.

whether or not a PS3 game can fill up a whole Blu-Ray disc isn't the point. the point is that using a huge storage capacity doesn't guarantee a good game. to me it's less of an indicator of quality. gameplay is at it's best when it's simple and addicting. you overload it with s**t then the developers get overloaded with a game's minutia rather than focusing on the core gameplay. saying a game is great because it takes up a whole Blu-Ray disc is like saying Andy Warhol's "Sleep" is the best movie ever just because it's 8 hours long.

YATY! I've just gotten my really interesting random fact for the day. I had no idea, wow, thats so cool.

The NDS Game Cards are memory sticks rather than cartridges. This make the games load quickly, but is quite expensive. The UMDs are covered with a shell to make them more durable.

Bejewled is a simple puzzle game, Zelda is a RPG game with a decent story and is known for it's atmosphere. It also takes quite a while to finish it. Allthough good technology can't make a crappy game good, it can make a good game better.



A SNES game is 15$ here in Norway. A PS1 game can theoreticaly be scaled up in an emulator. In an emulator, anisotrophic filtering and anti-aliasing can also be added.



I have yet to play a better game than Gothic II: Night of the Raven, which takes ~40 hrs. to solve and never gets repetitive. Zelda doesn't have the simplicity of Tetris, and thus voice-acting would make it better.

This is why I stick to PC games...

I would have to say the Wii is the biggest screw up nintendo is making. Some of the games are good, but most of it is shovelware. The PS3 or XBox 360 has many more quality titles, COD 4, Bioshock, Forza 2, Resistance Fall of Man, Rainbow 6 Vegas 1 and 2 just to name a few.

No the problem with the Wii is developers wrote it off and decided to get lazy, it's not Nintendo's fault that the developers were smoking pope dope its their own fault for smoking that crap. The PS3 and Xbox 360 have had duds too because developers were lazy Vampire Rain, Lair, Hail to the Chimp and Bullet Witch are very good examples.

The Wii was a problem because they tried to fix what was already good. Classic gamers are the lazy folk... moving anything beyond the hands is too much... waving your arms around like a dips**t is definitely too much...

However current controllers are a problem because they are so vastly complicated. Really do you need ten buttons for game, plus two analog sticks and a D-pad??? I like the Wii and apparently millions like the Wii. Now matter the outcome of this console war Sony and Microsoft have already suffered a major blow, people have seen how fun innovation can make gaming and they will have little choice but to push for a new innovative idea in the near future.

Well there is more expected from games today, people dont want to play games that your controlers only alow you to move, jump and shoot a fireball. Especialy on online shooters you need to have those 2 joisticks for eas of movement, 2 triggers for shooting and grenade, butons next to each trigers for suportive action, four more for jumping, melee, swaping and for other actions and then the D pad often for team actions. Its crazy some people say controlers suck for being to few butons compared to PC and some say they are too complicated. I realy dont know how the Wii would match these different movements. I have tried useing the Wii for different thing but I find it pretty difficult to reach all of the butons like the +, -, 1 and 2 butons, but I would not say it is a failure.

i thought it was phillips and when nintendo ditched it, phillips released the CD-I and a couple nintendo licensed games (a part of the original contract which ended up being a penalty for them bailing).

sony bought the hardware from phillips and that became the PS1.

Memory Stick you can only call storage medium made by Sony: Memory Stick as it's what they call them.
Memory is just volatile data that is stored switch locations by a source of electricity. Once the power has diminished, the switches are reset.
It's funny when people memory modules "Memory stick, sticks of RAM" OMG ... lol, DIMS "Dual In-line Memory Stick" ....
I'll need to stick my memory module into my memory stick ....

I could've sworn the NES was 16bit and the SNES was 32bit? This I must check out

nintendo was 8 bit and SNES was 16 bit. the super fx chip helped with upping the graphic quality but was never truly 32 bit.

Placing a 32 bit processor on a 16 bit bus is nothing new. The Intel 386SX ran in this configuration, as did many 3rd party 3x86 series processors. The video chip on the SNES accepted direct serial streaming of graphics, which several prototypes of the SNES-CD utilized to allow the SNES's old hardware to function mearly as a sprite, text and tile overlay unit. Nintendo eventually ditched this and went for a dedicated 32 bit processor machine (the same one in the VB, GBA and PSX) at which point Sony got frustrated and decided to bail out on the project.

To continue the project, Nintendo then founded partnership with Silicon Graphics, and found their 64bit integer / 32bit multi-integer hybrid systems to be quite ideal for 3D rendering. (Multi-integer functioning is like the MMX instructions on PCs.) This design became the basis of the N64. Unfortunately, they no longer had access to advanced compression technology owned by Sony and Phillips (the partner previous to Sony) which made CDROM media insufficiant with current drive speeds maxing out at 4x.

The whole design of the N64 would not have been a failure due to the lack of CDROM support if they had simply used flash-based ROM instead of EEPROM. The real problem was that, the system suffered from complex infrastructure not unlike that of the PS2 and PS3. Programmers at the time did not know how to use a mult-integer unit, or how to optimize code for RDRAM on a high-speed bus. This resulted in fewer 3rd party games, and the ones that came out being of significantly lower quality than games made for the system by Nintendo, who had far better optimization guides.

The biggest flop ever was The Virtual Boy. It fell dead on itself only about a year and a half after it's release, maybe even less.

From a quality standpoint Nintendo was right to retain cartidges. The tech wasn't perfected until the next generation. It's hard to argue the Playstation could touch the N64 in terms of AAA titles.

It killed them from a business standpoint, though, when 3rd parties jumped ship like crazy for the nee medium.