| twintail said:
Your willingness to shift blame away from Nintendo is impressive in terms of patrotism, and pretty silly at the same time. But what do I know? I have merely been presenting data that is far more correct than you have but clearly I am 'spinning things'.
Devs had no choice when NES and SNES were the only viable platforms to support. It is different with the PS1 because Sony were less controlling on software, and offered a medium that was both cheaper on licensing and with more storage to make games. A PS1 disc could hold like 600 MB. The most you got out of the N64 was 64MB. This was actually the major determing factor in how Nintendo lost 3rd party support the N64 cartierdigers just held too little data for what some devs were trying to make. The most well known of these is FF7, originally in design for N64 but moved to PS1 because of the CD medium. This is what defined the PS1/ N64 generation, not release dates. In fact, the best selling PS1 games did not release until 1996 (year of the N64 launch) and later. When it started to become a reality who 3rd party devs were supporting so did the tide for Nintendo change. N64 could have released with the PS1 and the outcome would be pretty much the same. N64 games cost devs more, thus costing more for consumers. N64 games held a vaetly limited space range compared to the competition. This was the problem with the N64. |
No you're trying to spin it to make it look like it's more accurate, you've accepted the notion because it's true PSP is the central factor in ending the GBA early it's not shifting the blame from anyone it's a fact, Nintendo would have held off the DS for much longer if Sony didn't enter the market, this is evident in how the GBA was originally meant to release at around the mid 90s or so but was delayed until the 00s, the was no competition so the was no urgency.
Nope developers had a viable choice they were called Sega and the Megadrive did very well, you should also look up the real differences between cartridge and discs it was never space it was price. Cartridges could hold any amount needed but the price was well too high.
If N64 had release with PS1 and Sega not messed up the Saturn the PS1 would have gone the way of many other consoles that tried to enter the market it would have been more likely for Sega to become market leader because consumers wouldn't have give it a chance at all. Sony were handed a golden ticket by the two big competitors in the market and utilized it well.
Soundwave
I remember that period well, PS1 in the UK took off with Wipeout in 95, 96 is when things really heated up true but at that point PS1 in sales was well ahead of the Saturn making it a more viable platform and giving developers more confidence in it.
I agree a CD drive would have helped a lot more but they weren't going to catch the PS1 by the time they launched I remember reading a magazine a month after the N64 launch, the PS1 was already heading to the 30m mark. The delay was harmful to them as ironically it was Sega cocking up that really hurt them as consumers had no alternative then the PS1 for 3D gaming unless you had serious money to burn for a Saturn, the Saturn also had an issue where the console only came with a scart something TVs at the time were only just getting accustomed to.
Because of the PS1's success developers were then more willing to avoid cartridges and the N64, it wasn't the format itself that was the cause of the PS1's success as that was an eventual contributor to it.
