What should we use based on expenses? | |||
| Cartridges | 201 | 52.48% | |
| Discs | 182 | 47.52% | |
| Total: | 383 | ||
| CaptainExplosion said: Well why not? After all they've been pumping millions into games like Destiny and Grand Theft Auto V, so for them what's an extra $5? |
Well why so when you lose 8% of your revenue or you risk making your game 8% more expensive ?
That 8% difference can mean either breaking even or not in some cases ...
CaptainExplosion said:
How are SD cards more expensive? |
What? you think that because SD cards have a smaller footprint they are cheaper?
On amazon you can get a pack of 50 50GB bluray discs for a little under $80. That comes up to $1.6 per disc. And this is at retail. For publishers they probably spend no more than 10c on an actual disc. By the time you throw in packaging that goes up to around $3 per game. A 64GB Class 10 SD card Cost around $20. They come in sizes of 8,16,32,64....etc. Now the cost of just the card is probably no less than $5 when u take out the retailer markup. And they can't use less than a class 10, even that is stupid slow peaking at 10MB/s. Unless they use an SDXC card which peaks at around 90MB/s. But that's more expensive.
What people need to understand, is that if it were cheaper or better using carts of any kind everyone would use them. Only reason Nintendo has to use them is cause you can't fit a disc drive into a handheld console without adding unnecrary bulk.
CaptainExplosion said:
How are SD cards more expensive? |
Check out the production process, takes a lot of steps and a lot of people
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meWLIDX7N-M
A Blu-ray master takes some time yet after you have the stamper the rest is fully automatic. You can't beat insert truck with polycarbonate pellets here, get load of discs out on the other end.
Intrinsic said:
The problem is how you are looking at it. You arent thinking big enough. First off, look at internal drives. And not HDDs or SSDs. I'm talking M.2 drives. Those can offer transfer speeds (esecially in an optimized console enviroment) of at least 3GB/s. That is magnitudes better than what you can get from the fastest cart right now (~250MB/s) and better than what you can get from any SATA drive. Now why that is important is that if you can see that, then you will see that all console manufacturers have to focus on is getting the game into your box. Be it via a disc drive or via download. Cause all the games will be run off the internal drive at the end. Thats already happening now. Basically, the best and cheapest kinda "cart" to have is an M.2 drive as that isnt just better performing than acart but also can hold waaaay more. There is even a 16TB m.2 drive out there now. And as long as all a disc or cart represents is just a way of moving data to your console, then a disc will always be cheaper than a cart. |
It's not that i'm not thinking big enough. It's that i'm staying in the thread's topic.
| archer9234 said: Because carts have a lot of parts. If we're not talking about flash cards. They'd have to produce chips for ram and rom, boards etc. More stuff. It's easier to just make flash cards or discs. Plus, they're thicker. A console has to acomodate them. Like the NES front loader. Or they'll stick outside again. Flash memory is still too expensive, for 50GB games. |
I think when people today say "cartridge" they refer to flash memory, same like 3DS already have, not to N64 cartridge or something similar.
SvennoJ said:
Check out the production process, takes a lot of steps and a lot of people |
Thanks for that link. I think there are a lot of people that want carts to come back just for saje of it coming back. And those that look at the size or a cart today and go, that can't be too hard......
RolStoppable said:
The fact that most of their Wii U games would still fit on a DVD, so only few games for NX would require something bigger than 16GB cards. Plus Nintendo's entire history is one of keeping file sizes small. |
Hmmmmm, guess that means it would definitely be yet another nintendo console without third party support. If the WiiU hasnt shown nintendo why thats important I don't kkow what else will.
Back when PS1 and N64 competed discs cost like 20 cents and cartridges cost like 20 bucks to make, so there you have it.
RolStoppable said:
It's not a lack of third party support that is the cause for low Wii U sales. Additionally, you have to consider the big picture. A console that has a chance to get all the third party support would end up retailing in the $400 range, but that's a price that people wouldn't pay for Nintendo hardware. Consumer expectations greatly differ between Nintendo and Sony/Microsoft. The most important difference is the perception of hardware and software prices. The Sony/MS consumer doesn't mind paying a premium for hardware, but wants cheap games, and games that drop in price quickly. The Nintendo consumer considers software the true value of video games and sees hardware merely as a tool to play it, so it's software that can command a premium price while the hardware shouldn't be an obstacle to get to the games. The lesson to be learned from the Wii U is not that Nintendo needs more powerful hardware and a "normal" controller, or that third party support is important. Nintendo doesn't need powerful hardware, they don't need a "normal" controller and they don't need multiplatform games. Once you eliminate the premise "Nintendo needs multiplatform games" from the equation, Nintendo gains a lot of freedom in how they can design their next home console. Therefore, no need to use blu-ray or other optical media. |
Whats funny is that i actually agree with you. Hence why i say "nintendo will always nintendo".
Im not sure about them not Needing 3rd party support. I mean barring another Wii motion control lightning in a bottle phenomenon..... if they dont have third party suppkrt they are going to fail. This is what i think at least.
RolStoppable said:
It's not a lack of third party support that is the cause for low Wii U sales. Additionally, you have to consider the big picture. A console that has a chance to get all the third party support would end up retailing in the $400 range, but that's a price that people wouldn't pay for Nintendo hardware. Consumer expectations greatly differ between Nintendo and Sony/Microsoft. The most important difference is the perception of hardware and software prices. The Sony/MS consumer doesn't mind paying a premium for hardware, but wants cheap games, and games that drop in price quickly. The Nintendo consumer considers software the true value of video games and sees hardware merely as a tool to play it, so it's software that can command a premium price while the hardware shouldn't be an obstacle to get to the games. The lesson to be learned from the Wii U is not that Nintendo needs more powerful hardware and a "normal" controller, or that third party support is important. Nintendo doesn't need powerful hardware, they don't need a "normal" controller and they don't need multiplatform games. Once you eliminate the premise "Nintendo needs multiplatform games" from the equation, Nintendo gains a lot of freedom in how they can design their next home console. Therefore, no need to use blu-ray or other optical media. |
There are a lot of ways to get 3rd party support. Nintendo needs to find an approach that can get people invested and keep them moving hardware/software. The delay of the NX for a year is meant to get Nintendo's first party effords to cover a year or two without the WiiU droughts that killed the system after launch. Nintendo doesn't traditionally have the biggest 3rd party support (not since the SNES for home consoles or the DS for handhelds) but most people interested in Nintendo doesn't get that bothered by it. A weaker support is different from no support at all, though. I still think Nintendo should seccure all the japanese support they can because japanese games are the 3rd parties that best sell on Nintendo consoles, specially now that the casual bubble burst. Plus, most japanese-centric games don't need that much power to begin with.A 400$ console as powerful as the PS4K would just slow Nintendo down hard, because they wouldn't use that power, and 3rd parties might just ignore it again. Better focus on a PS4-level console and a WiiU-level handheld that use the same architecture and can play games. Make the system easy to port things, and you'll inmediately gain that JRPG market. And please, don't block online multiplayer under a fee, Nintendo is in no position to make those kind of moves. I don't care if their online services aren't as good as the ones on PS-Xbox devices, I buy a console to play, I have a computer for everything else.
Nintendo needs the system to sell well. The Wii, despite its weaker hardware, did get a ton of 3rd party support, it wasn't just the kind most gamers would have hoped for (most of the more core gamer-focused 3rd party titles on the Wii belonged to niche genres or were watered down ports of PS360 games). If the system sells well, 3rd parties will take the time to bring games to it. They like money.
| RolStoppable said: Like I said, to have a chance to get multiplatform games, Nintendo's next console would have to retail at around $400. That pretty much guarantees failure, so why even bother? Additionally, nobody can realistically expect that third parties would be on board, even if Nintendo ticked all the boxes as far as hardware, development, controller etc. go. When Nintendo sold 100m Wiis, third parties didn't think "we shouldn't count out Nintendo next time", hence why support for the Wii U was so lackluster right from the start with the majority of new 360/PS3 releases not coming to Nintendo's system. The current situation is that the Wii U is a big failure, so based on the past the only logical conclusion is that most third parties would ignore Nintendo regardless of what Nintendo does. So any attempt to make a console like Sony or Microsoft would have a 99.9% chance for failure, because if the system will lose out on many multiplatform games, why should it even be considered in a comparison to buy either a Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft console? A lot of people think that Nintendo ignoring major third parties would be a big mistake, but doing that would actually result in a much higher probability for success because of the aforementioned reasons. |
Its the classic case of the chicken and the egg.
Yes, having an enviroment that third partied can easily thrive would mean they come in at $399 or so to hsve a box that can matcj whatever sony or MS puts out. However, even with that third partied won't go there unless they believe their is a natketable install base. And if that doesn't exist, then nintendo will have to spend a lot of money to get their support.... basically pay third parties to make a nintendo version of most big games for at least a year or two. When the market feels there is content parity, then sales of the console will at lesst be mainstream and not niche.
Or dow what MS did, and pay Take2 a chuck of money to at least make sure the next GTA game is also on their platform.
The simple truth is that when it comes to the mainstream and the popular big AAA third party games, nintendo is just never in that conversation . They hsve zero mindshare, and that is hurting them.
A company can exist without thrid parties, but its just not feasible. nintendo doesnt even have up to 20M dedicated home console customers.
I dont know what they are going to do with the NX, but i think its safe ti assume they are trying to catch lighting in a bottle again, like they tried to do with the wiiU too; i only hope thst it works. I like nintendo, they introduced me to console gaming.
In the mobile space, they do have a lot better third party support than whats in their console segment, i think yhey are trying to combine both markets somehow. It could work, and it could also fail horribly.
So no, third parties wont ignore nintendo no natter what they do, real question is that is nintendo willing to do whst will make them listen? Sony did it, MS did it, nintendo feel they dont need to.
I say the next nintendo platform will fail without third party support that is at lewst better than what they currently have, i see ut points I just think that you , like nintendo..... are underestimating the value of third party games.
Think about this, in a year how many game ads are there? Every time an ad comes up and at the end of it you see PC,PS4 and XB1 boxes..... thats mindshare. Thats them being in thr gaming conversation. Thats another lost marketing opportunity for nintendo. Its honestly really bad.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
