Is memory size the true indicator of a console's capability?
- Thread starter DeadmeatGA
- Start date
- Status
jvd said:
I think you have a convoluted concept of failure, which is fallicious by very definition. Saying "All add ins fail" is like saying "All consoles fail" because even the PlayStation brand (the defacto success story thus far) has only been adopted by ~2.6% of the world's population.
Percentages are very good metrics for many things, they aren't in this case as a given company can define "sucess" as something as 'simple' and 'unboastfull' as "profit producing". General Electric doesn't produce many upgrades to their diesel-electric locomotives or thermonuclear devices, but they are very profitable in their small absolute numbers.
Similarly, a company like Sony can have a small percentage of the absolute electronics marketshare, but still be highly profitable. Saying that you need xx% of the market to be a "success" at a time t is retarded IMHO. As many Microsoft supporters have argued, todays "failure" to get a foot in the door is paying for tomorrow's vacation to Guatemala (Don't ask why I thought of that).
Similarly, when you look at what these devices set out to accomplish - it's clear that they're all introducing a technology that was (by in large) unavaliable or not wide-spread at the launch. Thus, their purpose isn't to set the de facto standard (in which case they'd just launch another console) - but rather to be an upgrade to the status quo and provide an incentive or "hook" to that given device. And in this role, I can hardly call many of these a failure as each introduced a unique facet to the martket dynamic. You seem to overlook that the market mechanics aren't static and that these products fullfill a new niche or an evolved defencieny. Many were misplaced, miguided and sucked (eg. basically anything Sega did) but any of them done by Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft can be classified a "success" to some extent.
Particularly Sony's BroadBand Adpator and Microsoft's XBox Live are definatly not failures IMHO, especially when compared against the humble PC beginnings that you so quickly overlook. In a few years, I wouldn't be surprised to see a Socom game giving Counter-Strike a run for it's money.
Things are much diffrent than before . I've been playing online text base games since my 2.4 baud modem. Then I started playing ultima online with a 19.8 modem. The graphics and game play were not for mass market and the set up required to run those games and the hardware were very expensive . The reason why i say all add ons fail is because they do. When a game is being developed the first things chopped off are add ons. If the broad band has 10% of the installed base on ps2 systems thats considered a un needed feature. Why develop a game for a hardrive that mabye only 500k people have. You already limit your sales to 500k.
marconelly!
Veteran
So what about playstation memory card? That was essentially an add-on (you had to buy it separately) but I think it was adopted by more than 50% of userbase. Or DS2 controller? Although that one was shipped with every sold console when it was introduced...
well a memory card is needed to save games so I don't really consider it an add on . I consider it a lets screw a customer for another 15-30$ of something they have to buy. But yea you can take it further and ask why normal controllers sell so well and are an add on . Of course that would be something a loser would bring upmarconelly! said:
zurich said:
You must understand that JVD is of the mentality that things just are; mostly because he believes them to be so. Kinda like those Roman Catholic pontiffs back in the 16th century.
His beliefs are among the most asinine possible, for if he was correct in his definition of "failure," there would be no forward progress. Any scenario that follows logically from what he's stated thus far would produce a static result since the probobility of reaching his elusive threshold that instantly makes something a "success" would never be reached.
And I'm still wondering why Electronics Arts, the biggest independent corperate developer of games, has shifted their entire product line to PS2 Broadband complience? I mean, the installed base is what? A "failure" for sure, but in absolute numbers it's "only" around 1.6% of the PS2s userbase. Apppearently they haven't sat in on one of JVD's lectures.
Heh of course your views are so much diffrent than mine . If anything we are made from the same mold . But yea I guess I can say that the sega cd was a success because one company made games for it .Vince said:zurich said:
You must understand that JVD is of the mentality that things just are; mostly because he believes them to be so. Kinda like those Roman Catholic pontiffs back in the 16th century.
His beliefs are among the most asinine possible, for if he was correct in his definition of "failure," there would be no forward progress. Any scenario that follows logically from what he's stated thus far would produce a static result since the probobility of reaching his elusive threshold that instantly makes something a "success" would never be reached.
And I'm still wondering why Electronics Arts, the biggest independent corperate developer of games, has shifted their entire product line to PS2 Broadband complience? I mean, the installed base is what? A "failure" for sure, but in absolute numbers it's "only" around 1.6% of the PS2s userbase. Apppearently they haven't sat in on one of JVD's lectures.
marconelly!
Veteran
Well, you would be surprised how many people don't buy them, and don't give a crap that they can't save games. There are many kids I know that just rent games or play more arcadey stuff that they can beat in one sitting.
Right good , not going to argue this point into the ground. If you want to consider a memory card an add in go ahead. But you know I don't consider them an add in and when you read my comments you will just have to take note of what I believe are add ins . IF you agree or not its not my problem .marconelly! said:
Megadrive1988
Veteran
Shenmue on Saturn, as it was, is not all that impressive IMHO.
It would have been impressive if it had been designed on the Real3D-100 chipset, assuming the upgrade for Saturn used that, or something similar to it (better than Voodoo 1 or PowerVR PCX2) which would have given the Saturn better than Model 2 graphics.
It would have been impressive if it had been designed on the Real3D-100 chipset, assuming the upgrade for Saturn used that, or something similar to it (better than Voodoo 1 or PowerVR PCX2) which would have given the Saturn better than Model 2 graphics.
marconelly!
Veteran
Well, if your definition of add-on is a device that most people have no interest in and that is supposed to be purchased separately, of course it's not going to reach 50% of user base
)Impressive against what yardstick?
Shenmue Saturn does show off the HW well... but it may not have been indicative of a final game... I've seen some initial tech demos on PS that are stunning,
but end up being scaled back once full gamecode (AI/physics/scripting) replaces canned animation.
Shenmue Saturn does show off the HW well... but it may not have been indicative of a final game... I've seen some initial tech demos on PS that are stunning,
but end up being scaled back once full gamecode (AI/physics/scripting) replaces canned animation.
Not to be a spoilsport, but this quote really ends this whole discussion here!
The more RAM you have, the easier you can achieve great results. With limited RAN you have to work harder, but great results can still be achieved.
Memory add-ons are not widely used, because they (as someone said) split the userbase, meaning that if a developer makes a game that requires the memory pack, their potential sales group instantly becomes much smaller. Which means they have to make the game the normal way, and just include enhanced features/graphics for memory pack owners. Which ultimately means the developer needs to work on two versions of some of the game, which is not a good idea.
Add-ons such as the Broadband Adapter are very different, as they don't split the userbase - they simply add a new one (a smaller, sub-one) for online gaming.
The Dual Shock was not an add-on. It was simply another version of the existing controller, and to my knowledge only one or two games (Ape Escape is the only one I know) in the PSOne gen required it, so Sony could get away with it. You could play all the latest games right at the end of the gen perfectly with the original controller.
I think the point about the memorycard being brought up as an add-on is because the first games on PSX did not require it at all. It was then, when games became way more complex and required the use of some device to save game. Even on SNES, despite the ability to save games on the cartridge itself, you could get through most of them without saving. Looking at games on PS like Final Fantasy VII, it becomes literally impossible. I'm sure, that's one of the reason why 99.9% of the games require a memorycard today (well, they don't, unless you want to complete the game).
To me, add-on all depends on how the maker manages to integrate them into the market. You can have successful add-ons, no question about that.
To me, add-on all depends on how the maker manages to integrate them into the market. You can have successful add-ons, no question about that.
Considering memory cards also added portability and transferrability, I can't see them as an "add on" so much as an evolutionary change. Carts that NEEDED to be able to save games already had that capacity, and memory cards simply centralized it so that all games would use the same source, and was also a NECESSITY for any system moving off cartridges to begin with, as you couldn't precisely toss save chips onto a CD. It was a necessity, and a much better choice than a locked-size chip built into the console itself.
It was a necessity, and a much better choice than a locked-size chip built into the console itself.back to topic.................??
i think, until processors are fast enough to handle extensive procedural rendering techniques, memory will always be the limiting factor, therefore the main reason a console is more "capable" than others with less memory...
and of course the fact that usually a console is rather balanced, means that the console with more memory would have processors that are somewhat more powerful than the ones in consoles with les memory.... this has been the case so far...
i think, until processors are fast enough to handle extensive procedural rendering techniques, memory will always be the limiting factor, therefore the main reason a console is more "capable" than others with less memory...
and of course the fact that usually a console is rather balanced, means that the console with more memory would have processors that are somewhat more powerful than the ones in consoles with les memory.... this has been the case so far...
- Status