Jump to content
Multijointed Monster Maker

Buisness management of Nintendo and Sega

Recommended Posts

This has to do with production time used for 3rd party developers.

 

From playing games, looking at the ASM code and reading random stuff it seems like:

 

-SNES games had a more cramped production schedual

-SNES developers had more programmers working on individual games

-Genesis games were generally coded raw, while SNES developers tend to use prepackaged commercial engines that were limited and not very optimized

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You also forget, what the snes had in hardware the MD/genesis made up with a better and faster processor, Nintendo should have gone for a speedier version of the '816 (they were available), also, since the '816 had a 6502 fallback/emulation mode, Nintendo should have put in a built in 8bit nes mode (just like Atari put in a 2600 mode on the 7800) and stuck in a free cartridge adapter

 

Also the Snes wasn't as popular as it's 8bit brother or the genesis/MD (going by sales figures)

 

Perhaps if Nintendo had changed it policies on 3rd party software dev./publishing a lot earlier, i reckon the snes might have got a lot more 3rd party support

 

Also, nintendo were a bit backward about hardware extensions for the Snes (since it kept promising things like the cd upgrade for the snes, both the sony and philips planned ones, but failed to deliver, i guess that is why the MD/genesis wiped the floor with the snes)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not "forget" the CPU.

 

If all the slowdown is caused by the CPU running at 2.68 Mhz, then explain to me why NES games weren't plagued with slowdown if it ran at 1.79 Mhz?

 

 

Look into a usual SNES game's source code and you see a ton of:

 

-collision detection with unused sprites

-sprite attributes being manipulated multiple times before displaying them onscreen

-C written code

 

You don't see this type of stuff in NES, PCE or Genesis games.

Edited by Multijointed Monster Maker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You also forget, what the snes had in hardware the MD/genesis made up with a better and faster processor, Nintendo should have gone for a speedier version of the '816 (they were available), also, since the '816 had a 6502 fallback/emulation mode, Nintendo should have put in a built in 8bit nes mode (just like Atari put in a 2600 mode on the 7800) and stuck in a free cartridge adapter

 

Also the Snes wasn't as popular as it's 8bit brother or the genesis/MD (going by sales figures)

 

Perhaps if Nintendo had changed it policies on 3rd party software dev./publishing a lot earlier, i reckon the snes might have got a lot more 3rd party support

 

Also, nintendo were a bit backward about hardware extensions for the Snes (since it kept promising things like the cd upgrade for the snes, both the sony and philips planned ones, but failed to deliver, i guess that is why the MD/genesis wiped the floor with the snes)

 

I'm assuming you're speaking from the European side of things, but i can't imagine any failings of the SNES to be for a lack of "hardware extensions".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have often thought that is Nintendo had used the CD attachment Sony made for them we wouldn't have the PS3 at all. Sony would have used the work for Nintendo instead of themselves, it would have more then likely failed and they would have stayed out of that. As it is, they started the project, Nintendo backs out, and they have a good start for the PS1. Just the way I have always felt about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You also forget, what the snes had in hardware the MD/genesis made up with a better and faster processor, Nintendo should have gone for a speedier version of the '816 (they were available), also, since the '816 had a 6502 fallback/emulation mode, Nintendo should have put in a built in 8bit nes mode (just like Atari put in a 2600 mode on the 7800) and stuck in a free cartridge adapter

 

If Nintendo's attitude towards the SNES back then is anything like it is with the Wii, then that all wasn't likely, since the goal is to have the consoles make money on the hardware sales as well as the software sales, and at a reasonable price, which is literally counter to how the rest of the industry works. Everyone else either designs, and then prices according to what they put into it (resulting in horrifically overpriced hardware), or expects game license royalties to make it up. So, no, faster processors and a 'last generation' mode, especially at the time, would not have fit in with that.

 

And backwards compatibility hasn't been a major seller for a console anyway. However, with that said, I certainly have very, very high standards for what I consider "good" backwards compatibility. The 7800 had it, as did the PS2. The PS3 does not, neither does the 360, given that the PS3 had it removed, and the 360 relies on emulation patches for each individual game, which often don't work quite right. I'd rather them just leave it out to start with if that's the case. I'm not sure about the Wii's, since I actually haven't looked into it, but I've heard a few good things about it.

 

Also the Snes wasn't as popular as it's 8bit brother or the genesis/MD (going by sales figures)

 

Sales figures don't matter much in the scheme of things. Nintendo was late to the 16-bit party, but they did do an amazing amount of catch up in that time, even if Sega did sell more consoles. All the hardware numbers mean is a certain number sold. It doesn't necessarily mean new customers, some were probably to replace consoles that had been damaged by accident or intent.

 

Perhaps if Nintendo had changed it policies on 3rd party software dev./publishing a lot earlier, i reckon the snes might have got a lot more 3rd party support

 

Funny, I thought they had a lot of third party support, much of it from people who had joined up in the more restrictive setup they had with the NES. They didn't start having a lot of third parties jump ship until they came out with the N64 in the face of the market going to optical media, like Square.

 

Any that left before then, I think were the ones that were either cashing in by getting around the Nintendo lockout system, or that put out a lot of bad product and built a reputation for doing so with the client base.

 

Also, nintendo were a bit backward about hardware extensions for the Snes (since it kept promising things like the cd upgrade for the snes, both the sony and philips planned ones, but failed to deliver, i guess that is why the MD/genesis wiped the floor with the snes)

 

From what I can tell, console "bolt-ons" have never seemed to deliver their promises when they actually shipped, either. Both of Sega's add-ons for the Genesis really didn't take off the way the core system did, especially the finicky 32X unit. My friend bought two of them new when they went on clearance, and I'm not sure he feels like he got his money's worth out of the deal. And the SegaCD was hampered by novelty of technology in terms of software support, there's a definite amount of crapware for it. And yes, I speak of this while having a SegaCD actually hooked up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have often thought that is Nintendo had used the CD attachment Sony made for them we wouldn't have the PS3 at all. Sony would have used the work for Nintendo instead of themselves, it would have more then likely failed and they would have stayed out of that. As it is, they started the project, Nintendo backs out, and they have a good start for the PS1. Just the way I have always felt about this.

 

That was the end result sure enough but there is a bit more to the story than that. From what I understand, the reason Nintendo backpedaled on Sony was over contractual disputes. There's a whole article here on the subject, from the start of the project to the advent of the Playstation: http://www.n-sider.c...p?contentid=231

 

Beyond that, though, it seemed like the two consoles went after two different genre markets. For fast-paced action games, sports, and fighting games, you almost exclusively went with the Sega Genesis (there were exceptions but as a rule, you went for Sega's machine).

 

But for slower-paced action titles, pseudo-3D games (racing, etc.), and RPGs, the SNES was king. Again, there were some exceptions to the rule.

Edited by rockman_x_2002
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Didn't I just play this same boss last level, only this time he is an aligator instead of a lion and shoots arrows instead of fireballs."

 

I think you are confusing the SNES for the TG-16. Not to say formulaic is a bad thing, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Not to say formulaic IS a bad thing, anyway.
I'll say it: formulaic is a bad thing. That's the reason there are so many crappy platform games that are all pretty much the same, except you play a lion instead of rabbit, or a mouse, or a chocolate candy, or...

 

Regarding Nintendo (SNES) vs Sega (Genesis) business management, Nintendo managed their projects many times better than Sega. Those "prepackaged commercial engines" may not result in the most efficient end result, and games may not be as finely tuned, but they allow games to be developed faster and provide more control of the process. Fast development and more control are excellent business tools in a competitive environment. Sega mismanaged a lot since the Genesis was introduced. In the end, though, when it comes to the resulting game library, it didn't matter much. A huge number of excellent games were produced for both the SNES and the Genesis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...