A workable game download distribution business model...

[Deadmeat]

This is how a download-based game distribution business model might work for GB64;

1. New GB64 title releases in flash carts can be purchased at a store for $40.(Factory-loaded)
2. The players also have the option of downloading new games into their existing flash carts at the cost of $15, provided the GB64 is connected to a PC and the user provide a flash cart that previously contained another game.

The key to security is a cart decryption chip with a unique ID to which each game file will individually be encoded only for that specific decryption chip, making sure that it cannot be copied into another flash cart.

 

[PC-Engine]

What in the world are flesh carts? Do these flesh carts contain pornographic imagery or somthing?

 

[nondescript]

As I recall, those flash cards in the pictures are used to store episodes of Meitantei Conan for playback on the GBA.

Glad to see one of my favorites growing up is still alive and well. Shinjitsu itsumo hitotsu!

 

[MfA]

The key to security is a cart decryption chip with a unique ID to which each game file will individually be encoded only for that specific decryption chip, making sure that it cannot be copied into another flash cart.

Not even really necessary ... makes it more secure, at the cost of needing online encryption at the download sites. Even without it, it can be kept secure against all but chip level reverse engineering easily.

Since the factory loaded cards arent encrypted specifically for the device anyway, encrypting the entire game specifically for one device (as opposed to just the decryption key for a specific game) doesnt really buy you extra security.

 

[Evil_Cloud]

I don't think everyone wants to throw away their games for their carts just to play new games...

 

[jvd]

I would sign up if you can keep your already bought games on your hardrive while your not playing them.

 

[DeanoC]

GB64??

Your not thinking that GBA2 might be a portable N64 are you?

Thats not what I've heard...

 

[Squeak]

Yeah, with PSP lurking on the horizon, one should think that they would have to do a little bit better than “justâ€￾ a portable N64, to stay competitive. Maby something like at portable GC seems more likely?

 

[Deadmeat]

...

I don't think everyone wants to throw away their games for their carts just to play new games...

You can redownload your already purchased games since both flash cart and the server keeps a log of previously purchased titles for that cart. This is how iQue works; you can keep download any of previously paid-for games.

Yeah, with PSP lurking on the horizon, one should think that they would have to do a little bit better than “justâ€￾ a portable N64, to stay competitive. Maby something like at portable GC seems more likely?

1. Cost considerations : Nintendo can sell an iQue based GB64 for $99 without losing money, while SCEI is expected to lose $100 at $199.

2. Battery considerations : GB64 has no optical drive and a 330 Mhz chip to suck up battery.

3. Development considerations : Existing N64 development tools and experiences can be recycled, while PSP is a whole new ball game.

4. Memory considerations : At 12 MB, the PSP can only generate sub-DC quality graphics, since it is the memory capacity and not the CPU power that is the true indicator of a console's graphics capability. As long as GB64 has more than 8 MB, it will be competitive against PSP.

 

[Deadmeat]

...

In a way, a flash cart based distribution is more advantageous than a disc based distribution, because the flash cart allows the encryption of every individual copy while a disc based distribution can't be. Until now the obstacle to flash cart based distribution was cost; but with SmartMedia cards priced as low as $45 per 128 MB nowadays, such system can readily be implemented.

 

[notAFanB]

You can redownload your already purchased games since both flash cart and the server keeps a log of previously purchased titles for that cart. This is how iQue works; you can keep download any of previously paid-for games.

I don't want to redownload content I had previously since, I cannot envision having uber bandwidth in the near future. this might work for high bandwidth kiosks and/or local archive of purchased titles.

note that you are already making the demand that :

a. users have PC's

b. users have broadband.

c. users know what they are doing.

4. Memory considerations : At 12 MB, the PSP can only generate sub-DC quality graphics, since it is the memory capacity and not the CPU power that is the true indicator of a console's graphics capability. As long as GB64 has more than 8 MB, it will be competitive against PSP.

while it's true that CPU is an oversimplication when spec badgering, the same can be said of memory capacity where the system as a whole hasen't been considered

 

[Crazyace]

The interesting thing about the iQue is that you store multiple games on the flash memory card..
I assume that the files are keyed to the individual console, and can be copied freely from card to card..

 

[Squeak]

Re: ...

1. Cost considerations : Nintendo can sell an iQue based GB64 for $99 without losing money, while SCEI is expected to lose $100 at $199.

2. Battery considerations : GB64 has no optical drive and a 330 Mhz chip to suck up battery.

3. Development considerations : Existing N64 development tools and experiences can be recycled, while PSP is a whole new ball game.

4. Memory considerations : At 12 MB, the PSP can only generate sub-DC quality graphics, since it is the memory capacity and not the CPU power that is the true indicator of a console's graphics capability. As long as GB64 has more than 8 MB, it will be competitive against PSP.

1. Take a look inside iQue. Does that look ready to go portable to you? Besides it needs a separate powersupply, and the space taken up by the standard N64 button layout, is not ideal for a small handheld.

2. Notice that it says 1-333 Mhz and 1-166 Mhz in the specs, that must mean that the architecture is designed to scale its clockrate according to the task it is doing.
PSP could use solid state Memory Stick media, in either ROM or Flash ROM format for games, if desired.

3. I have a feeling, that most former N64 developers would rather not have to deal with a N64 based system ever again.
Another thing is that N64 as it is (or was), lacks a lot of hardware features that are pretty much standard today.

4. It depends on how the aforementioned texture compression is implemented.
DC had around -5 Mb available for textures.
With geometry and texture compression, PSPs 12Mb will go a long way, even when we're not considering the lower screen resolution.

 

[MfA]

For this kind of distribution system Id rather pay a few bucks more and get a HD based device BTW

 

[jvd]

The best move nintendo could make is a portable gamecube. Then put the gamecube tech into the gamecube 2 or whatever it will be called. Have the home system able to play gc discs and the portable media .

That way devs can not only make games for the handheld but they can also be played on the home system. They can then port the whole gc libary to the portable system. Instant launch library .

 

[Deadmeat]

...

a. users have PC's
b. users have broadband.
c. users know what they are doing.

Steve Jobs made the same assumption about music downloaders and he is now laughing all the way to bank....

The best move nintendo could make is a portable gamecube.

The cost of GC tech has not dropped low enough for Nintendo to implement it as a $99 handheld.(Nintendo is losing money on GC at $99 and the power consumption is still fairly high to run on battery) Plus N64 architecture and development environment was optimized for the cart format, whereas GC is strictly a disc-oriented architecture. This makes N64 a better candidate for GB64 than GC.

 

[Fox5]

I think an entirely new architecture(heck, why don't they just make something dreamcast based, a lot of research has already been done into making that portable) would be best for nintendo.

Anyhow, so what if gamecube uses a disc based format now, that could easily be changed to cartridge. They have harddrive based dev kits.

 

[notAFanB]

Steve Jobs made the same assumption about music downloaders and he is now laughing all the way to bank....

er to be fair it's not like the majority of users in 'that' aspect were lacking prior experirence in this matter. how can we make this assumption ofr the masses the casuals whom it's not a hobby, more of a way to pass the time?

besides your taking and established delevier medium, and an existing set of users whom are familar and can make the transition from free to pay for play rather easily.

 

[Clashman]

Re: ...

The cost of GC tech has not dropped low enough for Nintendo to implement it as a $99 handheld.(Nintendo is losing money on GC at $99 and the power consumption is still fairly high to run on battery) Plus N64 architecture and development environment was optimized for the cart format, whereas GC is strictly a disc-oriented architecture. This makes N64 a better candidate for GB64 than GC.

I'm going to disagree with this. For one, it doesn't have to be a 99 dollar handheld. It could well be a 150 or 200 dollar handheld if it's going to compete against PSP. Secondly, it is already possible to make the Gamecube "portable", as there is a mobile monitor and battery pack available for the device, which allows it to run for 2 and a half hours, and this is on 3 year old technology, so I think there's plenty of room to trim down power requirements. You also have ATI working with Nintendo, which is the king of mobile GPU's. Furthermore, you have better dev familiarity than an N64, (who wants to brush up on programming for an 8 year old system?), on a system that is more developer friendly to begin with. I also think that a Portable GC would help boost developer support for the GC, as you'd be developing for 2 systems, and not just one. It would drastically increase the GC userbase, and extend GC's life for several years, allowing it to eclipse the longeivity of PS1. And the biggest reason, IMO, and I've mentioned before, is that a Portable GC, (preferably not simply GC-based), would really give Sony a kick in the teeth. I personally feel that PSP would have a really hard time competing with a system that already has hundreds of games out for it, was a well known and documented architecture which games would simultaneously be developed for, and that, at least on paper, is somewhat more powerful than it, (higher resolution, more RAM, etc).

A GB64 would let PSP get in on the high end, and grab a sizeable marketshare as the hardware migrated downward on the price scale, and would be a more difficult and vastly inferior architecture to program for, with smaller margins, and a smaller market.

One last thing, are we even sure that Nintendo is losing money on a GC at 99 bucks? I don't doubt that they are, I just haven't seen any documentation of it. If you could point me in the right direction, it would be appreciated.

 

[Legion]

Using the N64's tech in the new GB doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Do we have any idea what the PSP (or for that matter Sony's marketing) are capable of? Would working through the N64's hardware problems really be worth it to Nity considering the tech could easily be vastly inferior?