Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame...

[Dittohead Servbot #24]

Due to the good response I got for the first episode of "Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame..." I decided to do another one (and possibly a whole series provided ESPN doesn't try to sue me! ). With the Sixth Generation of video game consoles around the corner at the dawn of the Millennium, Nintendo decided that their newest console (Project Dolphin, later to become the GameCube) was ready for a disc based format. But again, Nintendo made a controversial decision to not adopt the DVD format that had taken off the past few years, with their chief competitor, the Playstation 2, being the only Sixth Generation console with standard DVD playability (the Xbox required an optional accessory). Instead, Nintendo insisted that they wanted the GCN to be a "pure" gaming console and nothing else. Unfortunately for Nintendo, the new 1.5 GB Game Disc format though over double the size of CD-ROM and 1.5x the size of Dreamcast discs, was still dwarfed in size by the 8.4GB capacity of DVDs, which like the previous generation, handed the RPG genre to Sony on a silver platter (where the extra space for cutscenes/voice acting is most vital). Thus, Nintendo once again did not have as strong third party support as they did in the NES/SNES days (though they did somewhat better than in the N64 era), and Sony once more was the clear runaway winner in the "console wars". But now I present to you, the Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame the Nintendo GameCube for NOT playing DVDs:

 

 

5. CONSOLE AFFORDABLITY:

With the PS2 and later Xbox starting at $300 upon their release, Nintendo knew that to add DVD compatibility would drive up the cost of the GCN, and Nintendo clearly wanted their console to be affordable. Thus by sticking with their "games only" strategy, the GCN started at $200, which was not only $100 cheaper than their competitors, but was still much more powerful than the PS2 and almost as powerful as the Xbox.

 

4. FAILURE OF PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS:

Nintendo had clearly witnessed previous attempts at "luxury consoles" that tried to be jacks-of-all-trades back in the early 1990s. That is, consoles such as the 3DO and CD-I that tried to be a multimedia home entertainment console were not only too expensive (up to $700!!!), but didn't focus enough on the games to be taken as seriously as a gaming console. Though the PS2 was ultimately the runaway winner of the Sixth Generation, it was ultimately because of the library of games, NOT because it did "other stuff".

 

3. ANTI-PIRACY:

As Nintendo has always jealously guarded their copyrights and taken a very strong anti-piracy stance, they wanted to be sure that their GCN would be very hard for pirates to crack. They also knew that using the same ol' DVD format that everyone else uses would be cracked quickly by pirates. The result was a format that was very unique in that the discs spun the opposite of DVDs and the laser was read in the opposite direction of a standard DVD player. It is not surprising that by the time pirates had "cracked" the GCN so to speak, the GCN was on the tail end of its lifecycle anyway.

 

2. THE GAMECUBE IS A VIDEO GAME CONSOLE, NOT A DVD PLAYER:

Unlike Nintendo's competitors, Nintendo has always been first and foremost about games. Sony and Microsoft, in contrast, started out as home entertainment and computer software companies (respectively) and even today is their primary business focus, as if the video games are just a "on the side" venture by comparison. Nintendo reasoned that they had a major edge in their video game tradition and experience (the GCN was Nintendo's fourth console, PS2 Sony's second, Xbox Microsoft's first), not to mention all their blue chip exclusives (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, even SONIC for awhile) that would NEVER be on their competitors. Furthermore, by not worrying about multimedia gimmicks, Nintendo was able instead to create accessories focusing on GAMING that neither Sony or Microsoft even offered, such as the only wireless controller of the Sixth Generation (Wavebird), using the GBA as an additional controller for games that used it, and best of all, the Game Boy Player which added a HUGE library of both classic (GB/GBC) and current (GBA) games to the GCN's games roster. Like the N64, they also included standard four controller ports which once again the PS2 required an optional accessory.

 

1. MOST ALREADY HAD A DVD PLAYER:

By the time the GCN was released in 2001, the DVD format had been around for at least 4-5 years. Nintendo wisely figured that most who wanted a DVD player already HAD a DVD player, either as a traditional DVD player, DVD drive on a computer, the PS2, or perhaps all three!! Thus Nintendo felt it was useless to drive up the cost of the GCN and waste resources on being yet ANOTHER DVD player and focused their energies where they felt it counted, on the games.

[ThelonelyAlien]

Due to the good response I got for the first episode of "Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame..." I decided to do another one (and possibly a whole series provided ESPN doesn't try to sue me! ). With the Sixth Generation of video game consoles around the corner at the dawn of the Millennium, Nintendo decided that their newest console (Project Dolphin, later to become the GameCube) was ready for a disc based format. But again, Nintendo made a controversial decision to not adopt the DVD format that had taken off the past few years, with their chief competitor, the Playstation 2, being the only Sixth Generation console with standard DVD playability (the Xbox required an optional accessory). Instead, Nintendo insisted that they wanted the GCN to be a "pure" gaming console and nothing else. Unfortunately for Nintendo, the new 1.5 GB Game Disc format though over double the size of CD-ROM and 1.5x the size of Dreamcast discs, was still dwarfed in size by the 8.4GB capacity of DVDs, which like the previous generation, handed the RPG genre to Sony on a silver platter (where the extra space for cutscenes/voice acting is most vital). Thus, Nintendo once again did not have as strong third party support as they did in the NES/SNES days (though they did somewhat better than in the N64 era), and Sony once more was the clear runaway winner in the "console wars". But now I present to you, the Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame the Nintendo GameCube for NOT playing DVDs:

 

 

5. CONSOLE AFFORDABLITY:

With the PS2 and later Xbox starting at $300 upon their release, Nintendo knew that to add DVD compatibility would drive up the cost of the GCN, and Nintendo clearly wanted their console to be affordable. Thus by sticking with their "games only" strategy, the GCN started at $200, which was not only $100 cheaper than their competitors, but was still much more powerful than the PS2 and almost as powerful as the Xbox.

 

4. FAILURE OF PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS:

Nintendo had clearly witnessed previous attempts at "luxury consoles" that tried to be jacks-of-all-trades back in the early 1990s. That is, consoles such as the 3DO and CD-I that tried to be a multimedia home entertainment console were not only too expensive (up to $700!!!), but didn't focus enough on the games to be taken as seriously as a gaming console. Though the PS2 was ultimately the runaway winner of the Sixth Generation, it was ultimately because of the library of games, NOT because it did "other stuff".

 

3. ANTI-PIRACY:

As Nintendo has always jealously guarded their copyrights and taken a very strong anti-piracy stance, they wanted to be sure that their GCN would be very hard for pirates to crack. They also knew that using the same ol' DVD format that everyone else uses would be cracked quickly by pirates. The result was a format that was very unique in that the discs spun the opposite of DVDs and the laser was read in the opposite direction of a standard DVD player. It is not surprising that by the time pirates had "cracked" the GCN so to speak, the GCN was on the tail end of its lifecycle anyway.

 

2. THE GAMECUBE IS A VIDEO GAME CONSOLE, NOT A DVD PLAYER:

Unlike Nintendo's competitors, Nintendo has always been first and foremost about games. Sony and Microsoft, in contrast, started out as home entertainment and computer software companies (respectively) and even today is their primary business focus, as if the video games are just a "on the side" venture by comparison. Nintendo reasoned that they had a major edge in their video game tradition and experience (the GCN was Nintendo's fourth console, PS2 Sony's second, Xbox Microsoft's first), not to mention all their blue chip exclusives (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, even SONIC for awhile) that would NEVER be on their competitors. Furthermore, by not worrying about multimedia gimmicks, Nintendo was able instead to create accessories focusing on GAMING that neither Sony or Microsoft even offered, such as the only wireless controller of the Sixth Generation (Wavebird), using the GBA as an additional controller for games that used it, and best of all, the Game Boy Player which added a HUGE library of both classic (GB/GBC) and current (GBA) games to the GCN's games roster. Like the N64, they also included standard four controller ports which once again the PS2 required an optional accessory.

 

1. MOST ALREADY HAD A DVD PLAYER:

By the time the GCN was released in 2001, the DVD format had been around for at least 4-5 years. Nintendo wisely figured that most who wanted a DVD player already HAD a DVD player, either as a traditional DVD player, DVD drive on a computer, the PS2, or perhaps all three!! Thus Nintendo felt it was useless to drive up the cost of the GCN and waste resources on being yet ANOTHER DVD player and focused their energies where they felt it counted, on the games.

You do make a few good points but you kept saying them over and over. You kept bringing up the cost it would be. I also have to say is that Gamecube didn't have the only wireless controller. I have two different ones for the xbox. And why do you call it the GCN, shouldn't it be the Nintendo Gamecube, Hence NGC.

 

ThelonelyAlien

Edited May 7, 2010 by ThelonelyAlien

[Vic George 2K3]

I wonder if someone will come up with a similar "Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame" topic defending Sony's stand of sticking with DVDs.

[+FujiSkunk]

And why do you call it the GCN, shouldn't it be the Nintendo Gamecube, Hence NGC.

 

"GCN" is Nintendo's official abbreviation, standing for "Game Cube from Nintendo."

 

You can't blame Dittohead for that one.

[Seob]

The ps2 might not have been the "best" console graphic wise, but hey, what does that mean anyway these days. Since you already said innovative games or different use of hardware is what's selling a console. (Look at the Wii, Big old N did good on this).

The reason i bought a ps2 was because of the games. Since i'm not that into zelda or mario games (i can like them, but N is just trusting to much on these to, spinning out a zillion of knockoffs), i'm more into racing, fps and gta styled games. Sony's machine just had those, and a lot of people i knew had them, making lending a game easier.

I almost bought a gamecube instead of a ps2, but only because of Star Wars rogue squadron. Then i did the math, one game i like and maybe a few other vs a lot of games i like.

Now i own all of the last gen consoles, and love all of them, for the games they have.

 

Besides only in Japan the ps2 was largely sold because it had a dvd-player. Asia had already been more of a platform for video-cd/laser disc, so it took the dvd medium more time to become the no 1 movie platform in Japan. So when the ps2 was released in Japan, the sales of dvd movies went up because the ps2 had a dvd player. And since sony also has movie companies it only makes sense they include a dvd player, providing a bigger platform for selling there dvd movie titels.

In Europe, don't know America, a lot of households already owned a dvd-player or would buy a cheaper dvd player instead of a ps2 to watch movies. Since most of the movie viewers in Europe already had made the move to dvd-players before the ps2 came on the market, because video-cd/laser disc did never catch on that well, and dvd was a huge step forward versus the then no 1 movie seller vhs tape.

 

For the cd-i / 3DO, they where just a little to early on the market. The cd-i in the first place was never intended to be a game console, but more of a multimedia platform. But since the videogames sold better then the other media that was made for the platform, Philips shifted there focus more on the gaming side of the console. Thus showing the shortcomings of the platform as a gaming machine. 3DO was just to expensive.

 

Nintendo was smart enough to use a unconventional optical disc, thus making piracy more difficult. If only they where smart enough to do this for they're portable consoles. I mean making it harder to crack.

 

Maybe if Nintendo had used a other style for they're console it would have sold better. It just looked to kiddy with the purple and handle bar.

[Dittohead Servbot #24]

I wonder if someone will come up with a similar "Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame" topic defending Sony's stand of sticking with DVDs.

 

I think you're missing the point of the "Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame" format. Your suggested topic of the PS2 having DVD playability was not a controversial decision at all. But Nintendo's decision to NOT have DVD playability in the GCN was a controversial move (though not as much as their decision to use cartridges for the N64) and thus I explain the top five reasons why it may have not been such a bad move after all. As you know, these topics I made were inspired by the ESPN show, and here's a sample of what that show covers:

 

*The NCAA for not paying its student-athletes

*The Hall of Fame for keeping Pete Rose ineligible

*Bill Buckner's error for the Red Sox losing the World Series

*Dan Marino for not winning a Super Bowl

*NCAA football for not having a playoff system

 

So my idea was to use that format for the video game world and cover controversial decisions or questionable actions by video game companies and give the Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame the decision that was made.

 

BTW, if anyone has any suggestions as to what I could cover (I already have one waiting in the wings but I don't want to say it until I make that Top Five Reasons page), feel free to let me know, preferably via a PM so as to keep this topic on-topic.

[high voltage]

Bit of a contradiction here:

 

[[Though the PS2 was ultimately the runaway winner of the Sixth Generation, it was ultimately because of the library of games, NOT because it did "other stuff".]]

 

[[2. THE GAMECUBE IS A VIDEO GAME CONSOLE, NOT A DVD PLAYER]]

 

 

Pretty sure the GC would have been 'only a video game console' even with cheaper to manufacture DVDs.

[kool kitty89]

I wonder if someone will come up with a similar "Top Five Reasons You Can't Blame" topic defending Sony's stand of sticking with DVDs.

Don't you mean Microsoft?

 

 

As for lack of DVD on the GC, it's almost certainly all cost related, lots of added cost for patents and licensing (especially if you're supporting DVD video), using a custom implementation and no DVD video support saves a LOT. (like with the Dreamcast -though they probably should have included VCD support out of the box... the saturn had the add-on and it really could have been a selling point in Asia)

 

Like with CDs, Sony owned a fair amount of the patents for DVD so it was much less of an issue. (and indeed, pushing a cheap DVD player benefited them for proliferating the format)

 

Had Sony wanted to go cheaper, they probably would have gone with their double density CD format. (slightly higher capacity than GD-ROM at 1.3 GB, and very similar to GC disc/mini DVD)

 

 

 

Of course there was the deluxe GameCube made by Panasonic with DVD video support.

 

 

 

Lack of DVD video support on the wii is a bit baffling though, as licensing should be very cheap. (and it could be treated as an add-on player purchased separately)

Edited May 8, 2010 by kool kitty89

[kool kitty89]

While I already expressed that it was almost certainly about cost over anything else, I will address some other points:

 

4. FAILURE OF PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS:

Nintendo had clearly witnessed previous attempts at "luxury consoles" that tried to be jacks-of-all-trades back in the early 1990s. That is, consoles such as the 3DO and CD-I that tried to be a multimedia home entertainment console were not only too expensive (up to $700!!!), but didn't focus enough on the games to be taken as seriously as a gaming console. Though the PS2 was ultimately the runaway winner of the Sixth Generation, it was ultimately because of the library of games, NOT because it did "other stuff".

Again, CD-i wasn't a game console, games were secondary... (it was THE first VCD player) 3DO is a different case and while game oriented the entire concept was different from that, but in the end it was the business model which killed it. (being a multimedia machine with VCD capabilities didn't hurt and didn't ad to the price -separate add-on, indeed it likely contributed significantly to its lifespan in Asia) Had Panasonic+3DO used a Playstation-like business model for the 3DO it would have been much more successful, though arguable whether it would have stood against Sony or not. (then again, 3DO might have had the M2 out by the time the PSX was really taking off)

Trying to be a multimedia machine didn't kill the 3DO, trying to use the business model of a consumer electronics such as VCRs and CD players did though. (it should have been though of as a game console with multimedia capabilities, with the latter as a selling point, but not the main focus of the platform -the Saturn had a separate VCD module too and the PSX did from a 3rd party in Japan iirc)

 

As Nintendo has always jealously guarded their copyrights and taken a very strong anti-piracy stance, they wanted to be sure that their GCN would be very hard for pirates to crack. They also knew that using the same ol' DVD format that everyone else uses would be cracked quickly by pirates. The result was a format that was very unique in that the discs spun the opposite of DVDs and the laser was read in the opposite direction of a standard DVD player. It is not surprising that by the time pirates had "cracked" the GCN so to speak, the GCN was on the tail end of its lifecycle anyway.

Well the GC wasn't one of the longest lived game consoles out there... (compared to market leaders like the 2600, NES, Genesis, SNES, PSX, PS2 -still in the mainstram market)

 

Using full-sized DVD would not have compromised security at all, the exact same mechanism could be applied to full-sized DVDs, and the drive would have no trouble reading standard DVD movies and such (playing them would require the necessary software), rumors about nintendo using a custom disc/drive format (like it being read backwards) were false, it's pretty much a common miniDVD with a special key burned onto it out of the range of the writable surface. (possibly a custom data format too, but that would not hinder reading standard DVD video on the same drive)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panasonic_Q

http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/2703/gcpanasonicqqx4.jpg

(obviously that's more expensive than the main console would have been with such features, still it could have easily added another $100 to the launch price -and not really help attract customers who already had DVD players)

 

2. THE GAMECUBE IS A VIDEO GAME CONSOLE, NOT A DVD PLAYER:

Unlike Nintendo's competitors, Nintendo has always been first and foremost about games. Sony and Microsoft, in contrast, started out as home entertainment and computer software companies (respectively) and even today is their primary business focus, as if the video games are just a "on the side" venture by comparison.

I think "on the side" is a bit of an understatement for Sony at the very least, I'm not sure on the actual figures, but I'd bet a huge portion of their net revenue in the PS1 and PS2 peak years were from games. (whether they made up more than %50 of revenue or profits at any time, I'm not sure, or if that had the higest portion of revenue of any single division... Warner Communications with Atari ended up with more than 50% of net revenue coming from video games by 1982, though that's a bit of a different case)

 

Also remember that the Xbox needed a peripheral to support DVDs, unlike the PS3. (that move may have allow them to pass on some of the DVD video related licensing fees onto the remote package rather than hindering the base unit)

 

Nintendo reasoned that they had a major edge in their video game tradition and experience (the GCN was Nintendo's fourth console, PS2 Sony's second, Xbox Microsoft's first), not to mention all their blue chip exclusives (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong, even SONIC for awhile)

Sony had the huge advantage of vast 3rd party interest as well as 1st party publishing (some commissioned games from third parties as well as 2nd parties like Psygnosis). There are relatively few sonic exclusives on the GC (fewer if you count wii ports), and most of those were late titles, like Shadow the Hedgehog. (Sonic Adventure and Adventure 2 were on Dreamcast, and Adventure DX was on PC as well, modifications from the Dreamcast originals are relatively small -far more handheld exclusives for Nintendo though)

Xbox got their killer app buying Bungie though... (good for MS, bad for Bungie and fans of their games, especially PC/Mac users, Halo delayed and modified -delayed particularly long for the PC/Mac release, and Bungie producing a string of sequels without the breadth of other projects they once developed)

 

that would NEVER be on their competitors. Furthermore, by not worrying about multimedia gimmicks, Nintendo was able instead to create accessories focusing on GAMING that neither Sony or Microsoft even offered, such as the only wireless controller of the Sixth Generation (Wavebird), using the GBA as an additional controller for games that used it, and best of all, the Game Boy Player which added a HUGE library of both classic (GB/GBC) and current (GBA) games to the GCN's games roster.

Yes, they pulled another Super Gameboy, and that is nice (and one of the key broken points of compatibility with GC on the Wii), and the WaveBird is quite nice, but I really think none of that was facilitated by not using full DVD, it wouldn't have taken any additional engineering, just added to cost of the base unit.

 

Like the N64, they also included standard four controller ports which once again the PS2 required an optional accessory.

That was a dumb move on Sony's part and one major reason I don'y care for the PS2... Every other major console released from 1996 onward has had 4 (or more) onboard controller ports (or built-in wireless support). N64, Dreamcast, PS2, Xbox. Only one sticks out like a sore thumb...

 

1. MOST ALREADY HAD A DVD PLAYER:

By the time the GCN was released in 2001, the DVD format had been around for at least 4-5 years. Nintendo wisely figured that most who wanted a DVD player already HAD a DVD player, either as a traditional DVD player, DVD drive on a computer, the PS2, or perhaps all three!! Thus Nintendo felt it was useless to drive up the cost of the GCN and waste resources on being yet ANOTHER DVD player and focused their energies where they felt it counted, on the games.

DVD players were still expensive and a lot of people still didn't have them. That was part of the idea with the PS2, not just entice users with the DVD capabilities for highly competitive cost, but also proliferate the format in general. (which was in Sony's best interests)

We didn't get a DVD player until a good bit later once decent quality players could be had for $100 (on sale, at least), we had DVD capabilities since the late 90s, but that was via a PC with DVD-ROM drive and composite/S-video out of the video card to our entertainment system.

 

 

 

And why do you call it the GCN, shouldn't it be the Nintendo Gamecube, Hence NGC.

 

"GCN" is Nintendo's official abbreviation, standing for "Game Cube from Nintendo."

 

You can't blame Dittohead for that one.

 

I hate that abbreviation... I either use GC or spell the word... GCN always seems like GameCube Network or something...

Edited May 8, 2010 by kool kitty89

[mbd30]

Somewhat off topic and PS2 related: I'm baffled that a new PS2 still sells for $99. It's 10 year old technology. Shouldn't the price for a new one be half that by now?

[Seob]

How many of you use the 4 ports on the systems often? Because controllers are expensive, and only a few titles supporting it, and you need four friends to play anyway. Plus on small screens the display was so little you almost had to sit right in front of the screen to see what you where doing. I did play 2 player games often, because that is doable on smaller screens and less expensive.

[kool kitty89]

How many of you use the 4 ports on the systems often? Because controllers are expensive, and only a few titles supporting it, and you need four friends to play anyway. Plus on small screens the display was so little you almost had to sit right in front of the screen to see what you where doing. I did play 2 player games often, because that is doable on smaller screens and less expensive.

TONS of N64 games have 4 player simultaneous, that was a HUGE selling point and a reason I rented it for several birthday parties prior to that in the late 90s. (got ours in '99). We got most of our controllers used or aftermarket. (and have more than 4 for N64 and GC each) GC also has tons of party games, even the Xbox has quite a few 4-player games.

 

4p split-screen can be a bit cramped, but not too bad on a 20" or larger TV. (all our game consoles were hooked to the 27" Trinitron in the family room, and most friends had similar set-ups with the main, family TV in the entertainment center -not small TVs in their rooms or such -I only knew a couple kids with their own TVs)

 

To this day I love party multiplayer and do that more often than online multiplayer for the most part. In fact, there's often cases where 4 players is too few, namely when I've got at least 3 friends over and we're playing such a game (say one of the SSB games) and my little brother joins in or I have more than 3 friends over: we have to take turns... even with 4 controllers. (Brawl doesn't support more than 4 players, in fact I don't think the Wii does in spite of lacking the limit of physical ports)

 

 

Fond memories of goldeneye, and even 4-player split-screen Halo on my friend's Xbox.

Edited May 8, 2010 by kool kitty89

[Austin]

Somewhat off topic and PS2 related: I'm baffled that a new PS2 still sells for $99. It's 10 year old technology. Shouldn't the price for a new one be half that by now?

 

Same here.. My original-model PS2 has been showing signs of wear 'n tear, and I thought about buying a slim to replace it.. But for $100? Seriously? Wasn't the PS1 down to $50 (or something along those lines), ten years after it was released? Erm..

 

How many of you use the 4 ports on the systems often? Because controllers are expensive, and only a few titles supporting it, and you need four friends to play anyway..

 

I think the Game Cube and Nintendo 64 are actually more widely known for their multiplayer games.. So many people have fond memories of this, thanks to many AAA games that had a heavy emphasis on the multiplayer aspect (Goldeneye, Smash Bros., Perfect Dark, Mario Kart, etc. on the N64; Smash Bros., Mario Kart, the Mario Sports titles, etc. on the Cube, just to name a few).

Edited May 8, 2010 by Austin

[Tom-Lynx]

How many of you use the 4 ports on the systems often? Because controllers are expensive, and only a few titles supporting it, and you need four friends to play anyway. Plus on small screens the display was so little you almost had to sit right in front of the screen to see what you where doing. I did play 2 player games often, because that is doable on smaller screens and less expensive.

I use all four ports all the time. I always thought that game consoles that did not ship with 4 ports built in were always designed with incredible stupidity.

 

 

 

 

[Tom-Lynx]

They always say hindsight is 20/20.....

 

Looking back, I will go out on a limb and state that the lack of DVD playing compatibility didn't even hurt the GameCube. Anybody who wanted one got one anyway and it ended up not being a major factor. It never evolved beyond "it would have been nice to have."

 

I have a Panasonic Q and I've played DVD movies on it maybe twice -- ever.

[Seob]

I never used dvd playback on any of my consoles. I used bluray on my ps3 once because my ps3 came with a bluray movie. Don't have a larger full hd screen anyway. I was a real early adapter on the dvd movies. Got a player when they cost around 400 dollars, and only a hand full of movies where available. It was the time before there was a standard dvd case. I have a lot of early dvd cases in different from styles.

 

On the 4 port subject, i don't have a lot of friends, and most of them are pc players. So when i play with them it was more on local lan.

A friend and i play a lot 2 player driving games on our ps2's.

Edited May 8, 2010 by Seob

[chrisbid]

piracy should be the number 1 reason, nintendo has always been the most vigilant anti-piracy video game company

 

 

and the simple reason the cube was a distant third was its lack of a killer app. grand theft auto iii and halo drove console sales for sony and MS. in the current gen, sony and ms have failed to relased a generation-defining new game experience, while nintendo produced wii sports.

[kool kitty89]

I use all four ports all the time. I always thought that game consoles that did not ship with 4 ports built in were always designed with incredible stupidity.

 

Well, for early consoles it's less of a big deal, and even on to the NES and SMS a lot of games that would merit it (like arcade beat-em-ups and such) would tend to have excessive flicker like that. For MD/SNES there's probably more of an argument for it though, then there's the TG-16/PC Engine with 1 controller port, but the standard multitap (necessary for ANY multiplayer) had 5 ports on it. (would have been nice if they'd included all 5 ports standard on the US model given how much larger it was... that and AV ports -for the super compact Japanese model it made more sense, the System was exceptionally successful in Japan -especially the CD format)

 

For the saturn or PSX one could argue a bit more for such, but especially any post N64 console is the biggest issue.

 

I never used dvd playback on any of my consoles. I used bluray on my ps3 once because my ps3 came with a bluray movie. Don't have a larger full hd screen anyway. I was a real early adapter on the dvd movies. Got a player when they cost around 400 dollars, and only a hand full of movies where available. It was the time before there was a standard dvd case. I have a lot of early dvd cases in different from styles.

We were fairly early adopters too (1998 I think), but did it via a PC (similar with Bluray actually, though not early), and yeah we've got a few in standard jewel cases. (and a fair amount in those paper/plastic hybrid cases too, but I think they still might use those)

 

On the 4 port subject, i don't have a lot of friends, and most of them are pc players. So when i play with them it was more on local lan.

A friend and i play a lot 2 player driving games on our ps2's.

 

Console gaming is a different case though, but for me I was 7 when the N64 came out in the US, and 10 when we got ours (rented it several times prior including several birthday parties).

However, we also had a fair amount of PC games and indeed I did some LAN gaming at home (usually 2 or 3 player, in particular I played Episode I Racer, though we had that for N64 too, it was a lot more convenient on the N64 though, except the lack of assignable controls)

 

But following that on the GC, Xbox, Wii, (still N64), etc I still end up playing such with my friends or at their houses too, that and a LAN set-up isn't as fluid as it used to be. (I haven't tried too recently but after changing licenses on 2 computers, changed the server twice, running 3 different OSs -vista 32, vista 64, XP pro, and XP home, etc) Our PCs are not anywhere near current gaming standard anyway, so it would mostly be older games.

 

 

piracy should be the number 1 reason, nintendo has always been the most vigilant anti-piracy video game company

More than piracy, but unlicensed 3rd parties, nintendo wanted control and didn't want people profiting on their hardware without taking a cut. (and they really exploited that control when they had it strongest in the late 80s to '91/92)

 

However, piracy has nothing to do with not using full DVDs or supporting DVD video... they could have easily used the same security system for full sized DVDs as they did miniDVDs. Cost is the only factor, a moderately more expensive drive for the full size disc (stronger motor and larger case design -though they could have simply made it flatter like DC), but mainly a license for DVD video would be the main cost.

Of course, there was a DVD compatible GC as Panasonic's Q. (and Wii uses full sized discs, but still has no DVD video support -evne though licencing should be cheap and it could be passed on to a downloadable media player you buy on the shop channel)

 

 

and the simple reason the cube was a distant third was its lack of a killer app. grand theft auto iii and halo drove console sales for sony and MS. in the current gen, sony and ms have failed to released a generation-defining new game experience, while nintendo produced wii sports.

Huh? The GC had quite a few killer exclusives... Sony just followed up their previous dominance with even stronger hype and marketing, growing off the previous success, and MS roaring in too. Granted they lacked Mario Sunshine for a fair bit, but they had Rogue Squadron II at launch and SSBM before chrismas.

Edited May 8, 2010 by kool kitty89

[Video]

piracy should be the number 1 reason, nintendo has always been the most vigilant anti-piracy video game company

 

 

and the simple reason the cube was a distant third was its lack of a killer app. grand theft auto iii and halo drove console sales for sony and MS. in the current gen, sony and ms have failed to relased a generation-defining new game experience, while nintendo produced wii sports.

I wouldn't say distant third, it was behind for sure (though embarrassing at that with "teh evil taht is Microsuck" newcomers taking second over them ) But it's not like Microsoft sold even 10 million more consoles or anything.

 

The problems with the argument over DVD and Game Cube, is that the Game Cube used DVD format media. Like it or not, it's just a mini DVD player. Hardware wise, the mini DVD cost Nintendo MORE than a full sized player would have. Everything else is just (free) software, that's why any easily hacked Wii can play DVD's

 

I don't think it was a big deal, I already had a PS2 and a Xbox, both of which played DVD's, and a computer drive (no actual DVD player for me at the time) So it's not like it was needed. The big thing for me was using the tiny discs, and then using the stupid full size DVD cases. A mini CD case, or a DS case would have been cool though.

 

The above poster was right though. The Cube simply lacked the games. Yes it had some good ones, but over all, the library was quiet disappointing. In fact, if it wasn't for the Gameboy Player, the cube would have been relegated to the junk pile in my closet, where all the broken unloved crap is. That's where my Wii is right now, as it's not compatible with the only thing I used on the cube.

 

Anyhow, can I blame them? Yeah, more expensive minidrive, dvd's weren't completely saturated yet, and the Cube, like the Xbox could output a better picture qualaty than the PS2 could (I'm assuming that last one) so they sorta lost out.

[kool kitty89]

I wouldn't say distant third, it was behind for sure (though embarrassing at that with "teh evil taht is Microsuck" newcomers taking second over them ) But it's not like Microsoft sold even 10 million more consoles or anything.

It was second in Japan, MS barely made a blip on the JP market... (360 has been FAR more successful in terms of sales)

 

Though if you remove Japan from western sales, then the GC is closer to distant third. (given how poorly Nintendo and MS did relative to Sony, it makes you wonder how Sega might have done had they hung on longer -they sold around 1/2 as much as the GC iirc, but were on the market for MUCH less time... they would have had a price advantage and game library advantage too -at least initially- and don't forget some significant titles on the other platforms were Sega...) That's another topic though.

 

Hardware wise, the mini DVD cost Nintendo MORE than a full sized player would have. Everything else is just (free) software, that's why any easily hacked Wii can play DVD's

Is it really more costly than full sized DVD drives. (that makes no sense) Now, they could easily have saved cost by using non-standard data and file formats as well as a custom drive controller, just buying the mechanism. Like CDs, the DVD format was heavily patented and thus meant lots of added costs, at least early on. On top of that, if you add DVD video capabilities, you add the cost of licensing required for that as well. (unless you limited that to a peripheral or software add-on and pushed the added cost onto that)

Sony had a huge advantage of owning a fair amount of those patents and they dumped the price on top of that. (as with the PSX)

 

If a full sized drive mechanism was truely cheaper, that makes no sense... (if mini DVDs were cheaper, they could have used both)

 

I don't think it was a big deal, I already had a PS2 and a Xbox, both of which played DVD's, and a computer drive (no actual DVD player for me at the time) So it's not like it was needed. The big thing for me was using the tiny discs, and then using the stupid full size DVD cases. A mini CD case, or a DS case would have been cool though.

Manuals would be sacrificed though, some complain about manuals in DVD cases being too small (compared to some nice full-sized manuals in old PC games), DVD cases facilitate average game console sized manuals, going smaller limits that though. (like those meant to fit in jewel cases...)

Plus, you can fit 2 GC discs in 1 case. (albeit you get more storage space on 1 DVD than 2 GC discs...)

 

The above poster was right though. The Cube simply lacked the games. Yes it had some good ones, but over all, the library was quiet disappointing. In fact, if it wasn't for the Gameboy Player, the cube would have been relegated to the junk pile in my closet, where all the broken unloved crap is. That's where my Wii is right now, as it's not compatible with the only thing I used on the cube.

I was satisfied with the couple dozen (roughly) games we got, and that's omitting a fair number of big titles (no RE games, no F-Zero, no Mario Kart, no Metroid prime II)

We got our cube in 2004, so a decent library already built-up. (rather like the N64 in '99) Plus we had PC to supplement that. (and PS2/Xbox got a lot more PC ports or multiplatform titles than GC did)

 

Anyhow, can I blame them? Yeah, more expensive minidrive, dvd's weren't completely saturated yet, and the Cube, like the Xbox could output a better picture qualaty than the PS2 could (I'm assuming that last one) so they sorta lost out.

The Dreamcast even had a graphics advantage over the PS2 in texture quality and antialiasing. (it also has 480p -via VGA- for nearly all games, much like the Xbox)

[Video]

Is it really more costly than full sized DVD drives.

 

I don't know about the software licensing, though if Microsoft could (at the time) release a device for $30 (what I originally paid for my DVD remote) that had the licensing software chip or whatever in it, rather than on the console, I can't see that as very expensive. I was referring more to the drive itself though.

 

With a full size drive, they just get (deposit maker here) to make drives for them, with essentially, off the shelf parts. Same housing, same track, same carriage, same motor, same laser etc, etc, etc, that everybody else used. When they went with the smaller drive, they had to get smaller housings, tracks, and gears, maybe a smaller carriage...and unless there was some massive minidrive market that I was unaware of, that would involve either modifying existing parts, or having special parts made....and while probably not a lot per unit, it would have cost more than just plopping a full size drive in....even if the system itself wouldn't physically accept 5" discs.

[kool kitty89]

Is it really more costly than full sized DVD drives.

 

I don't know about the software licensing, though if Microsoft could (at the time) release a device for $30 (what I originally paid for my DVD remote) that had the licensing software chip or whatever in it, rather than on the console, I can't see that as very expensive. I was referring more to the drive itself though.

 

With a full size drive, they just get (deposit maker here) to make drives for them, with essentially, off the shelf parts. Same housing, same track, same carriage, same motor, same laser etc, etc, etc, that everybody else used. When they went with the smaller drive, they had to get smaller housings, tracks, and gears, maybe a smaller carriage...and unless there was some massive minidrive market that I was unaware of, that would involve either modifying existing parts, or having special parts made....and while probably not a lot per unit, it would have cost more than just plopping a full size drive in....even if the system itself wouldn't physically accept 5" discs.

 

yes, but going custom can save in the long run if it facilitates skating certain licensing/patent royalty overhead, once economy of scale kicked in, it shouldn't have much mattered. But I don't see why they couldn't have used a mix of off the shelf and custom parts... (laser, gears, track, etc could be pretty standard, just cropped, with a more limited track length -and obvious custom drive controller, but that's advantageous for a full sized drive too -remove overhead)

 

Again, I don't see why else they;d have used the mini drive. (they could have gone with a wider, flatter, dreamcast like form-factor otherwise) If it was a marketing gimmick, it was rather stupid...

[Vic George 2K3]

I'm not defending the Playstation 2 or the X-Box for what they chose to do. I mostly bought the Playstation 2 for DVD player capability and original Playstation game compatibility, since the X-Box was Microsoft's first entry into console gaming and the Gamecube was Nintendo's first system with an optical drive. It was an interesting side trip away from owning a Nintendo console, but frankly the only thing I like best about the Playstation 2 is its controller setup. There was hardly any games for it that had the same appeal to me as a Mario game or a Zelda game.

[kool kitty89]

For me it's a bit of the opposite: I know of a good amount of PSX and PS2 games (including multiplatform) that I line, even with the moderate experience I've had the systems, but I hate the controllers... I can use them, sure, and the triggers are more usable than the SNES, but that's not saying much... The analog sticks are OK, but not my favorite (I prefer ridged and/or concave thumbsticks, preferably with a bit more resistance), the D-pad is marginal and far too low profile similar with the buttons which are also too stiff (it's the only controller I've used to easily sore my thumbs with the buttons or D-pad: ideally the buttons should be moderately tall, fairly short throw, mushy/soft but responsive, broad and preferably concave -not until playing Sega consoles more recently did I find they have some of the best buttons and D-pad arrangements, well not so much the SMS, but the MD/Genesis and the Saturn -not so much the original western saturn pat though, buttons were fine, d-pad and triggers were not so much and the 3D controller has the best triggers, Dreamcast was a step back from the 3D controller other than the analog triggers perhaps)

The grips are not particularly comfortable and too short, at least now (better 6+ years ago when I was under 14), the original dual analog seems better (longer handles and concave sticks) but I've never used one to find out (buttons and d-pad are the same though). The layout isn't bad, though I prefer 6 face buttons personally (and possibly the upper left analog stick like on the xbox and old Gravis Xterminator), of others based ont he layout, Thrustmaster's dual power is great (or similar ones using that molding -I know there's one lacking the analog sticks) buttons are convex but mushy enough to not be painful to use, D-pad is good, though it differs among models, and analog sticks are fine. (the plastic case itself is the big part though, very comfortable -though I found it actually felt better after removing the satin finish -I had to as one of mine had started to degrade and get sticky for some reason)

 

I could go further still with comparing other controllers, but I'm repeating myself from other discussions, and going way off topic. (in general, stock sony gamepads are my least favorite -for gamepad type controllers, not getting into things like the intellivision-)

 

 

There's plenty of decent 3rd party controllers though, but since we had a GC last gen at home, we generally stuck with that, but we've always done a fair bit of PC gaming too, and that included several prominent PS2 games. (like Silent Hill 2 and 3, and usually with that thrustmaster gamepad )

 

The Xbox and PS2 seemed to have a lot more multiplatform titles or initial exclusives that ended up getting ported, particularly to the PC, I know there are exclusives, but the GC seems to have more (particularly in relation to the total library), maybe that's just due to my perspective though.

[otaku]

I never had a problem with my gc not having a dvd drive. That said I love that my ps3 has bluray!