The Nintendo BOD could put Nintendo in real danger

#41iKhan88(Topic Creator)Posted 9/29/2013 8:55:00 PM
suprsolider posted...
Different hardware allows for more consumer choice, and allows for a greater variety of experiences. Back in the SNES days, each console was built with different hardware that actually changed the look, feel, and experience of games. That's no longer the case with modern technology.
===

Know I know you didn't live through those days.

Back in the SNES days it was about POWER. The SNES came out 2 YEARS AFTER GENESIS was released so of course the hardware would be different but both systems got identical games the whole generation because they were similar with the Genesis being weaker in areas such as color palette, sound but had a faster processor than SNES did.

What set the SNES and Genesis apart was the EXCLUSIVE SOFTWARE. Look at the best games for the Genesis and the best games for the SNES. What sold those consoles was the EXCLUSIVE GAMES ON THEIR CONSOLES.

So by this statement you DISPROVED your own theory while proving mine to be the correct one.
Bravo.

Next time, try talking someone who lived through those years and had both consoles.

Oh and don't give me that crap that they didn't share games. I can name dozens of multiplats on SNES and Genesis.

Such as Mortal Kombat 1-3, Maximum Carnage, Chuck Rock, Earthworm Jim, Boogerman, Clay Fighter, Mickey Mania, T2 Judgement Day, T2 the Arcade Game, Blackthorne, and so on. The majority of the games on the 2 consoles were multiplats but the exclusive games are what people remember the systems for.


Why so much salt?

Anyway, obviously exclusive software sells hardware, but there is no point to having software be exclusive unless there is some difference in the hardware. Those hardware differences in the SNES and Genesis gave developers reason to make exclusives and consumers reason to purchase the devices.

You are right though, I only experienced the tail end of the SNES era, but you could definitely see the effect of hardware with the N64 and PS1. Both consoles had hardware differences, one supported cartridges while the other CDs. And I actually preferred cartridges as a kid. You could save the game onto the cartridge without having a memory card, they didn't get scratched, and they had faster loading times (not I'm not saying cartridges are better, they arent, but in the 90's that was my perception as a consumer)
---
I am iKhanic. REBORN!
#42mini_blightPosted 9/30/2013 3:57:49 PM
suprsolider posted...
Um, no it didn't have great 3rd party support and that was because of the mini discs.

It would have done allot better if it used Standard DVD's and had more controller buttons on par with the other 2 consoles but Nintendo screwed up with their arrogance and piracy fears so that didn't happen.


Blaming proprietary formats again? Do you know what a UMD is? A cartridge? A CD? A DVD? A Bluray disc? A memory card? Format had nothing to do with it. Squaresoft put Final Fantasy games on 3-4 discs on the PSX. Some Xbox 360 games, like Final Fantasy XIII, have multiple discs, too.

How about that PS3? It brought forth a new proprietary format that lead to situations like Metal Gear Solid 4 requiring you install every chapter just because the PS3 could not handle all the data on the disc. GTAV needs a install in order to "work properly" on the Xbox 360. See, they don't give a **** about any hoops they have to jump through to make that stuff work. If there's a will, there's a way.
#43mini_blightPosted 9/30/2013 4:51:00 PM
darkjedilink posted...

No, we wouldn't. Third-party developers would go back to the excuse that Nintendo games sell so much better that there's no reason to try, which they've used since the waning days of the SNES.


Hey, that's the excuse they used on the Wii, too.

suprsolider posted...
.Nintendo would be doing the right thing for once since the Super Nintendo by making their consoles on par with the competition in all aspects.


The SNES was never on par with the competition. And no, it did not win that generation with power. Genesis outsold it for years.

Funfact: 16-bit graphics were the "last gen" tech of the early 90's. Arcades a the time were more 24-bit.

That generation was more of a draw. Sega had Europe. Nintendo had Japan. They split America. Nintendo pulled ahead in part because Sega switched to the 32X instead of supporting the Genesis after the Saturn launched.

Sega lost by an inch because they dropped the ball near the finish line. That's not a decisive victory for power. Sorry, Sony shills. You can stop swinging the corpse of the SNES at modern day Nintendo, now.
#44mini_blightPosted 9/30/2013 5:06:02 PM
suprsolider posted...
Know I know you didn't live through those days.


Actually, it sounds more like he did.

Back in the SNES days it was about POWER. The SNES came out 2 YEARS AFTER GENESIS was released so of course the hardware would be different but both systems got identical games the whole generation because they were similar with the Genesis being weaker in areas such as color palette, sound but had a faster processor than SNES did.


Back in the SNES days there was room to GROW. The law of diminishing returns was nowhere in sight. The SNES was also behind in tech when it finally released. A high-end console is something like the Neo geo.

What set the SNES and Genesis apart was the EXCLUSIVE SOFTWARE. Look at the best games for the Genesis and the best games for the SNES. What sold those consoles was the EXCLUSIVE GAMES ON THEIR CONSOLES.


So it wasn't about the POWER? Stop contradicting yourself.

Next time, try talking someone who lived through those years and had both consoles.


That's nice. Now I want you to point at the elephant in the room. This elephant is why the SNES/Genesis example/excuse doesn't work in these arguments.
#45anon_firePosted 10/1/2013 1:36:03 PM
Stop this pointless fighting. It's getting all of us nowhere!
#46mini_blightPosted 10/2/2013 12:27:42 PM
anon_fire posted...
Stop this pointless fighting. It's getting all of us nowhere!


The truth is never pointless.
#47Relias27Posted 10/4/2013 2:01:01 AM
NovaLevossida posted...
iKhan88 posted...
If we had 3 near identical consoles, with added competition from 1st and 3rd party Steam Machines, Nintendo would have fierce competition.


Man, that would be amazing. Seriously. If Nintendo released a comparably powerful system with all the features of modern non-Nintendo consoles, had the first party games on it, and also attracted the third party developers and gamers who buy third party games, they'd be set. If they had done that instead of the Wii U, launched a year earlier, and had a competent release schedule, I think they could have outright killed Microsoft fighting alongside Sony's PS4 and gave Sony some serious competition.


But Nintendo would never attract third parties even if they had a comparable console.. I mean really how many times have you heard companies complain that they cannot sell a game on a Nintendo console.. or skipped Nintendo not so much for the hardware and limited capabilities but just because Nintendo games sell on Nintendo systems.. so Nintendo is better off doing there own thing