More Next-Gen Console Smack-Talk

With the PS3 now out the door in Japan, Nintendo and Microsoft are engaging in what is essentially the last moment for smack talk before everyone's cards are on the table in the U.S. On Microsoft's part, they're complaining in Europe that they want to go head-to-head with the PS3, and can't until next year. Xbox EU Boss Neil Thompson says: "In a lot of ways we'd like people to put the system side-by-side and see whether people want a platform where they're paying for Blu-ray straight away." Meanwhile, Nintendo is taking shots at both companies, saying that the next-gen DVD format war is bad for consumers. Says Nintendo Canada's Pierre-Paul Trépanier: "I think forcing a decision on consumers would certainly not be part of Nintendo's strategy, because we want to get more people into gaming and we want to make it affordable. Forcing people to adopt a technology and a model that's proprietary and still not established is unfair to gamers."

Comments

I do not think it means what you think it means

[Control Group]

I don't see how M. Trépanier's comments qualify as "taking shots at both companies." He's saying that forcing unproven, proprietary formats on consumers is a bad decision. As far as I know, only Sony is "forcing" such a format. The HD-DVD add on to the 360 is just that, an add on, and won't even be used for game content (unless there's been news to the contrary that I've missed...?). So the 360 is using DVD as the medium for its core functionality (games), just like the Wii is.

(Or is it "Wii are"?)

Either way, I'm going to be one of the losers in line hoping for a Wii this weekend. Hopefully, the combination of deer season and a Wisconsin November will keep them short for me.

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[bym051d]

That's exactly what it means. But look at it this way, if Blu-Ray fails, your PS3 is still an incredible game machine. If HDDVD fails, your XBOX360 add-on is a useless piece of plastic. Obviously, Sony is pushing Blu-Ray because of the upside for their A/V business. Obviously Microsoft is doing the same with HDDVD since they're one of the founders (and because Sony supports the other).

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[HappySqurriel]

Nintendo is a very classy company by most standards and tends not to make (unreasonable) negative comments about their competition; in almost all cases of negative comments made by Nintendo about their competition you can interpret what they're saying as "We respect what are competition is trying to do, but we do not believe that this is the best strategy for Nintendo to try to achieve our goals at this time". On another note, it is always interesting to watch reporters get Nintendo to talk trash about Sony and Microsoft; you'll see someone ask Nintendo whether they think that it was a huge mistake for Sony to release so few PS3s in Japan and Nintendo would say "We understand the difficulty of maintaining a decent supply of systems, but our goal is to try to expand the market and we believe that the best strategy for that is to ensure that someone can buy our console in a store for the MSRP" ... or something like that

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[LWATCDR]

"But look at it this way, if Blu-Ray fails, your PS3 is still an incredible game machine."

But with the 360 you have the option of waiting to see how it will all shake out. With the PS3 YOU HAVE TO BUY the Blue-Ray.

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[Control Group]

But you're comparing the PS3 to the HD-DVD add on, which just doesn't hold water. If Blu-Ray fails, the PS3 is still a great games machine. If HD-DVD fails, the 360 is still a great games machine.

What you're doing is equivalent to: "if Blu-Ray fails, the PS3 is still a great games machine, but if HD-DVD fails, your Toshiba HD-DVD player is a useless piece of plastic." The two statements are unrelated, except that the HD-DVD add on for the 360 is cheaper than the Toshiba was in the first place - so, if anything, you're better off with the add on (assuming you've got a 360).

Sony opened themselves up for this by including the Blu-Ray drive as part of the core machine. MS avoided this by making it an add on. By the same token, of course, Sony has set themselves up to be successful if/when game developers start utilizing the extra storage capacity of the format, while MS has precluded themselves from so doing.

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[Aladrin]

The proper response was:

o_O i c wut u did thar.

It actually sums up everything you said and also jabs them a bit about their inability to think it through. I quite like it.

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[Chris Burke]

That's exactly what it means. But look at it this way, if Blu-Ray fails, your PS3 is still an incredible game machine. If HDDVD fails, your XBOX360 add-on is a useless piece of plastic. Obviously, Sony is pushing Blu-Ray because of the upside for their A/V business. Obviously Microsoft is doing the same with HDDVD since they're one of the founders (and because Sony supports the other).

And if neither fails? Then you have to buy the one you didn't get anyway, or miss out on half of the movies.

Or you wait until a dual-format player becomes available. Frankly I see both the PS3-as-Blu-Ray-player and xbox HDDVD add-on as dead-ends. Both have roughly equal levels of support and neither proponent is going to simply give up as soon as their opponent gains a slight market share advantage. Therefore we'll end up with a divided market, one part HD-DVD, one part Blu-Ray. At which point they either relax the license restrictions against dual-format players, or they accept that their formats will never become mass-market. The early adopters with enough money to blow on an HD setup today may be willing and able to afford two players, but no way will the average consumer buy an HD player that plays half of new releases nor will they shell out for two players to replace their one DVD. I expect that either dual-format players will be released, or HD formats will remain a niche market until at least the next generation.

Which means in terms of the current choices, I see the xbox hddvd as being the most useless, since all it does is play half of next-gen movie content. PS3, as you say, at least plays games. Which it could have done without Blu Ray, leading back into the "why does my PS3 cost so much?" discussion.

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[drinkypoo]

And if neither fails? Then you have to buy the one you didn't get anyway, or miss out on half of the movies.

Aside from exclusives intended to push one format or the other, do you really think that the majority of movies will be coming out on only one HD format?

Which means in terms of the current choices, I see the xbox hddvd as being the most useless, since all it does is play half of next-gen movie content.

All Blu-Ray does is play half of next-gen movie content (actually more than half) and allow developers to be lazy, wasting space. Any content that needs to be streamed off the disc usually has to be compressed, because the data transfer rate is slow (and these are first-generation, extra-slow devices) and if you want the data to come quickly, assuming you can decompress it quickly enough, compressing it to half the size is like doubling your transfer rate.

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[Chris Burke]

Aside from exclusives intended to push one format or the other, do you really think that the majority of movies will be coming out on only one HD format?

Right. The studios could also get around the fatal split-market problem by releasing all their movies in both formats. I notice that some already are released in both, but some of the biggest studios are backers of a single format. Multi-format releases are not a great solution anyway, because it increases costs for movie studios who have to press two versions, complicates supply management for the retailers and increases their shelf space requirements, and it complicates things for consumers because they have to buy the right version for their player (so they have to know and care what version they use, as do any friends/relatives intending to buy them an HD movie as a gift). Dual format players solve all these problems because consumers buy the one "next gen DVD player" and then don't have to care what format movies come in. This is why I think dual-format is what the market will settle on, because it's the only one that doesn't present extra barriers to acceptance.

All Blu-Ray does is play half of next-gen movie content (actually more than half) and allow developers to be lazy, wasting space.

The percentage of movies played isn't the point, it's that if you want to play Hit X you might need HD-DVD and to play Blockbuster Y you might need Blu-Ray.

But yeah, developers get to be lazier. Isn't that what all technology advancements are for? :)

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[Fozzyuw]

Props, to my fellow Wisconsinite. Where you around for the snow store that blew through the SE on Friday? Just to let you know, Wal-Mart has listed in their latest flyer that they will sell at 12:01am the day of. They also claimed (strangely enough) that all stores will have a minimum of 20 Wii's and 10 PS3.

Good luck. I'll be at Wally World only to pickup 2 extra controllers, since GameStop isn't pre-ordering them anymore and I stupidly thought the classic controller was a stand-alone, when it's just a Wii mote attachment (oddly enough?).

Cheers,
Fozzy

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[GreyyGuy]

If Blu-Ray fails, then there will never been an increase in Blu-Ray production, meaning that the component price will not drop nearly as quickly as expected (if at all), and it is possible that since it would then be a niche item that it might even increase in price. As would the games that need to be produced on Blu-Ray discs that no one else would be using.

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[Control Group]

Sure was; got to watch that roll through pretty much just in time for me to leave my office in Madison.

Good to know on Wal-Mart. Looks like I'll be doing what I did when I picked up my 360 (albeit a couple months after launch): find a Wal-Mart that's halfway out in the sticks and take my chances. I expect 20 Wiis to last a lot longer in, say, Dousman than in Madison.

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[Kuukai]

Actually, the medium used for core functionality is irrelevant. Nintendo's games have been on weirdass proprietary media since... forever... The only "format-pushing" is in the movie-playing function. Really though, each company has a decent justification: Microsoft isn't forcing you to buy it, and Sony's games will actually use it. Yes, the motive behind each offering is ultimately to get you to buy a bunch of movie discs in their format, but if you just ignore the entire format war you won't be too hurt. The Blu-Ray is a huge part of the cost of the PS3, but extra space might actually add to the gameplay experience... (No real telling either way yet, but it does have greater potential than DVD imo)

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[el_gordo101]

and it complicates things for consumers because they have to buy the right version for their player (so they have to know and care what version they use, as do any friends/relatives intending to buy them an HD movie as a gift)

In my opinion, this is the number one stumbling block for both formats. This was a problem with VHS and Beta when they came out as well, but people had an easier time discerning the two as the physical size of the tapes were quite different. You could tell aunt Martha that your VCR used the "big" tapes (VHS), not the "little" ones (Beta). With HD-DVD and Blue-Ray the medium itself, as well as the packaging materials, is identical in size, shape and appearance. Hell, throw in current DVD and CD media as well. At first glance they all look alike, they are nothing but shiny metallic discs, all the same size! The new format war is going to stifle acceptance and sales of both types of HD media as the public is not going to be able to figure out what the hell they need to buy.

Re:I do not think it means what you think it means

[Chris Burke]

The new format war is going to stifle acceptance and sales of both types of HD media as the public is not going to be able to figure out what the hell they need to buy.

I completely agree. The only way it will work is if Joe Blow can walk into Best Buy and ask "What do I need to buy?" and the clerk can say "Buy one of these players, they play everything" and then he never has to care about formats again -- until of course the Powers That Be decide we need to re-purchase our movie libraries once again.

lets hope

[thejrwr]

lets just hope that the wii will have some good games, i could only find 5 games that i liked and those where muti-system anyway

Re:lets hope

[thejrwr]

edit:
lets just hope that the wii will have some good games, i could only find 5 Gamecube games that i liked and those where muti-system anyway

Re:lets hope

[Anonymous Coward]

Wulfram 2 -- Free Online 3D game, Runs on a PII !

You know, after the release of the Wii, I will never look at the acronym for the Pentium II the same way again.

Re:lets hope

[AKAImBatman]

i could only find 5 Gamecube games that i liked and those where muti-system anyway

I wasn't aware that Star Fox, Mario Party, Smash Brothers, Mario Kart, and F-Zero had been ported?

Re:lets hope

[thejrwr]

reminds me of Windows XP, *think chat smiles* XP

Re:lets hope

[thejrwr]

i do and i dont, i only like the older ones, the new "Wind Waker" kinda sucked

Re:lets hope

[HappySqurriel]

I don't know what types of games you like ... but here is a list of games that were pretty good

• Star Wars: Rogue Squadren 2/Star Wars: Rogue Squadren 3
• Super Smash Bros: Melee
• The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker
• Eternal Darkness
• Resident Evil 0
• Super Mario Sunshine
• Pikmin
• Animal Crossing
• Metroid Prime/ Metroid Prime 2
• F-Zero

None of those games were on the PS2/XBox 360 and all of them were enjoyable ...
Many games (like Resident Evil 4 and Soul Calibur 2) were best on the Gamecube ...

Re:lets hope

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd rather it was actually affordable.

Re:lets hope

[Anonymous Coward]

muti-system = ? ID10T.

Re:lets hope

[Anonymous Coward]

If none of the games that you like on a Nintendo console are produced by Nintendo themselves, then I'm afraid that your taste in games is terrible.

Re:lets hope

[Chris Burke]

Yeah, I remember way back when I first heard about it on IRC, they said "My dad just installed a beta Windows XP" and I said "Yeah, I hate windows too".

it still amuses me to think of it as "Windows Blech!"

Re:lets hope

[7Prime]

Not to mention, it had two of the best RPGs of the generation: Tales of Symphonia and Skies of Arcadia (sure, a DreamCast port, but only after the DreamCast had died, and was greatly improved).

Re:lets hope

[cableshaft]

Of the exclusives, I found four worth the purchase:

Super Mario Sunshine
Zelda: Four Swords
Super Smash Brothers
Mario Party 4

Then there were four others that were multi that i just happened to get for the GC:

Sonic Mega Collection
Viewtiful Joe
Alien Hominid
Super Monkey Ball 2

If I had paid more than $100 for the system I probably would have been really disappointed with my purchase. But I played these enough that I got my moneys worth, and some of the multi-platform titles were exclusives when I picked them up, and had influenced the purchase of the console. That said, that's still pretty bad considering I bought about three or four times more XBox games and even though I never owned a PS2 I purchased 4 games for that as well to play on friends' systems. Out of all the consoles I've owned, the Gamecube is the one I've purchased the least number of games for, and that's including the NES, which I had when I was 8-11 years old and only making about $5-$10 a week in allowance.

Re:lets hope

[MemoryDragon]

You will not be happy with the Wii Either mostly. On Nintendo Systems most exclusive games are mostly Nintendo only games, but those are really exclusive, Nintendo while mostly having amazing gameplay and innovative ideas usually weaves its games around the marion, metroid and zelda franchises, except metroid most themes are cutified stuff. If you cannot stand that you maybe are better off with another system. Well there are some interesting nintendo only lineups on the DS like trauma center, phoenix wright, but those really are the minority over the multi platform games. I assume the Wii will be the same situation, many games probably will use the motion sensing in the wii mote, but many of those games will be multi platform and only nintendo games, a handful of ubisoft and capcom games will be exclusives.

The 'choice'

[steveo777]

I think /. as a whole tends to agree with Trépanier. Don't FORCE proprietary media formats at us through a console. In the end it comes down to what the consumer spends their money on. A good percent of people know they're getting a Blu-Ray player and that it's non-gaming functionality directly competes with HD-DVD if they purchase a PS3. I'm sure a lot of them see the Blu-Ray as a bonus. But I'd say even more people are outraged that Sony is offering them a product that is overpriced because of functionality they don't want or need. The consumer has a right to be angry, too. I know I wanted to play the next Gran Turismo, but now I doubt I ever will.

Re:The 'choice'

[NineNine]

You had it half right. Nobody knows what Blu-Ray is or that it's included in the PS3. But I'd also say that people aren't "angry" about the price. If people think it's too much, they just won't buy it. But, all of the armchair punditry in the world is all pointless. We'll see if they'll sell. Personally, I'm excited as hell about the PS3, and I'm buying one ASAP.

Re:The 'choice'

[Anonymous Coward]

. Don't FORCE proprietary media formats at us through a console

That's idiotic - Blu-Ray is the game format. Your complaining is as pointless as bitching about Sega "forcing" GDROM on people, or Nintendo with their endless array of proprietary cartridge formats. In other words, B-R is a fundamental part of the PS3 - and certainly 50GB is much better than the 9GB you get with DVD.

Not too mention that you're complaining about something as trivial as overpriced electronic games for children. You won't get to play some racing game? Christ, get over it.

Slashdot needs a serious sense of perspective.

Re:The 'choice'

[ThosLives]

Don't FORCE proprietary media formats

An honest question: at what point do formats cease being 'proprietary' and become 'open'? At some point in history, even DVD was 'proprietary' - the average consumer did not have tools to generate content and store it on that medium. And what about the old cartridge-based consoles - those were 'proprietary' media as well, and not many people complained about that.

There is really nothing new about companies choosing different formats for their devices; I don't understand why there is so much deliberation at this particular instance. If it is a question of price, then the market bears that out.

I personally feel that all other discussion is really just people hearing themselves speak, because media choice doesn't have more than a secondary effect on quality of content (only where media limits data quantity and access rates is there an effect - the rest is up to the skill of the content creators).

Re:The 'choice'

[C0rinthian]

There is a big difference between cartridge formats and Blu-Ray. Carts were all proprietary, and were never expected to become 'industry standard' for anything. Sony wants Blu-Ray to replace the DVD as the standard media format used by everyone, and they are using the PS3 to try and swing consumer interest to that format.

Carts were games only. Blu-Ray is a lot more than just games.

Re:The 'choice'

[Sinistar2k]

Actually, when the N64 stuck with the cartridge format, there was plenty of complaining. Publishers were hyped by the fact that pressing CDs for the PS1 was going to be incredibly cheap while publishing for the N64 required exorbitant royalty payments to Nintendo along with the high cost of cartridge manufacture.

Gamers complained, too, because the use of the cartridge jacked up the price of the games. It was not uncommon to drop $70 for a title, a price that now brings wailing and gnashing of teeth from the masses (even though it is now the normal price for "collector's edition" releases).

There were pro-cartridge folks. Their main argument in favor was the reduction of load times and the inherent durability of cartridges in the hands of children and clumsy adults.

Re:The 'choice'

[Control Group]

Honestly, I don't think it's the "proprietary" nature of it that's irksome in itself, it's that it's proprietary in an effort to lock you in outside the realm of the console. A proprietary format that was only going to be used for PS3 games would probably draw some ridicule (see the GameCube's disc format), but not such contempt.

The problem is that Sony appears to be pushing a format that makes the console more expensive, that is suspected of not particularly enhancing the games, but that they're pushing for reasons of their own. It makes people feel cheated, like they're being asked to foot the bill for Sony's strategy in the movie industry when all they want is to buy a games consol.

This level of vitriol didn't exist for previous consoles because Nintendo (for example) didn't try and sell movies on cartridges. So at least, insofar as you were paying for the proprietary format, you were paying for it solely for how it affected the gaming experience.

At least, that's my take on it.

Re:The 'choice'

[thatguywhoiam]

I think /. as a whole tends to agree with Trépanier. Don't FORCE proprietary media formats at us through a console.

If you are making the argument that the cost of the Bluray laser is not worth the price, I understand that argument. But these formats are all proprietary. Every one of them. I can't do anything with a 'Nintendo DVD' or a 'Playstation DVD', even though they are in fact on DVD media.

Really, it doesn't matter if they sell games printed on sponges or in vials of liquid or anything, as long as the games have what they need, right? (again excepting the cost argument). I really don't care if Nintendo (or whomever) is saving money; that's their problem.

In the end it comes down to what the consumer spends their money on. A good percent of people know they're getting a Blu-Ray player and that it's non-gaming functionality directly competes with HD-DVD if they purchase a PS3. I'm sure a lot of them see the Blu-Ray as a bonus. But I'd say even more people are outraged that Sony is offering them a product that is overpriced because of functionality they don't want or need. The consumer has a right to be angry, too. I know I wanted to play the next Gran Turismo, but now I doubt I ever will.

Ah, but I dispute your 'functionality they don't want or need'. It will have a huge impact on games, something they very much want. Developers agree with me.

Re:The 'choice'

[hal2814]

"Your complaining is as pointless as bitching about Sega "forcing" GDROM on people"

From what I remember, Sega put a GD-ROM in the system and still sold it for $200 and sold games for $40 to $50 each. If the PS3 could do that with BluRay, then you'd hear no complaints.

"and certainly 50GB is much better than the 9GB you get with DVD."

Your definition of certainly differs from mine. If the games don't use that extra 41GB, then it's of no use and currently there aren't a whole lot of games that span more than 1 DVD. That may change but it may not. It's hardly "certain." I'd give you "likely" at best.

Re:The 'choice'

[Anonymous Coward]

Sega or nintendo never released mainstream movies on thier systems. So the argument is completely different.

Apples to oranges, IMHO.

Re:The 'choice'

[7Prime]

Nintendo had a very legitimate reason for staying with cartridges. It probably wasn't the best decision, as they lost the entire RPG market, but they did have a few very good reasons for the direction they took, which you outlined above. Some PS1 and PS2 games are incredibly painful to play because of their load times (Suikoden V, for example). But Nintendo's constant concentration on decreasing load times has lead them to be fairly good even when they switched to optical media, much better than Sony or Microsoft, anyway. I worry that Sony is going to uphold status-quo with the PS3s load times, the increase of loading speed being directly proportional to the capacity of the disc, which would be quite obnoxious. I think Nintendo probably should have gone optical back with the N64, as they would have put a lot more pressure, than Sony did, on developers building good code into their games so as to limit load times (like they did with the GameCube). Sony's problem is that they don't police their developers enough. Nintendo makes sure the developers don't make their systems look bad, and the consumer wins because of it

Re:The 'choice'

[steveo777]

Oh, I don't disagree that the BR drive is an amazing piece of equipment. I'd really be interested in read-times and seek-times for the drives. One thing I don't like is that it can't be considered reliable right now (especialy after all the PS2 drive failures).

But what I really don't like is that Sony is using PS3 to drive/push their format through. I understand and totally agree that they have every right to use whatever media they want for their games. But it's very frusterating considering the history of thier products, and the price is too much. I admit BR could give them the edge, but I won't be part of that edge until the price falls to or below 300 bucks.

Re:The 'choice'

[tbannist]

So Sony is "evil" because the format of their game storage mechanism *can* be used to play movies and *might* become a new standard.
They would be less "evil" if their format could not be used to play movies and therefore could not become a new standard?

Is this some new world where a console that costs just as much, but does less is better than the one that does more?

Sony screwed up on the Blu-Ray for sure, I'm sure they expected prices to have already fallen on the components when they started designing and building the PS3. But criticising them because it does play movies, just seems to be sour grapes.

Re:The 'choice'

[tbannist]

I'm prefectly fine with Sony using the PS3 to push their format, it's a product they built, and using the same technology for their next generation DVD players is pretty much common sense for them. Microsoft was going to do it too, but figured out that HD DVD drives would delay the launch and they desperately wanted to be first to market.

What I don't like is Sony passing on the cost of the Blu-Ray drive to the customer. Everything else is just people griping because they want something to gripe about. Removing the ability of the PS3 to play movies won't make it a better gaming system for anyone.

Re:The 'choice'

[C0rinthian]

I never passed judgement, just pointing out that you can't draw a comparison between the two.

Sony using their console to push their chosen standard makes perfect business sense. The PlayStation brand has a lot of leverage, and Sony would be stupid to not utilize that.

The real question will be if it works or not...

Re:The 'choice'

[ClamIAm]

But what I really don't like is that Sony is using PS3 to drive/push their format through.

Hey, guess what I heard? Nintendo is using the Wii to push their Wii format through. Focusing on Bluray ignores the reality that all these formats are proprietary, which is exactly what the parent said. And by "all" formats, I don't mean just video discs: I'm including the games themselves. Hell, the formats for PS3/X360/Wii games are even more locked down than say DVD, as the game formats are controlled by one company which can act much more arbitrarily than even the collusive multinational agreements that exist for DVD.

Re:The 'choice'

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not the format for games that's the problem - its the format for everything else. Do you hear people bitching about the DS's tiny cartridges, or the GameCube's nonstandard discs? No, of course not. Those are console games - all they're supposed to do is run in the console. But the problem is proprietary general purpose media. If the Blu-Ray discs are to be used for everything from movies to data, and the machine can only read Blu-Ray discs, and the system is being touted as a media center, we should be able to put our own content on those discs. This is something the iPod Generation has come to expect.

Proprietary Models

[TPIRman]

Nintendo is a great gaming company, and I'm excited about their resurgence with the DS and the Wii, but it will be a long time before I'm willing to hear someone from Nintendo lecture the industry about a "proprietary model." The Wii's support for DVD is one of very few times that the big N has strayed from its defining "not made here" syndrome. Have we already forgotten Nintendo's numerous examples of proprietary lock-in—one example that comes to mind being the GBA-SP's notorious "headphone jack"?

Re:Proprietary Models

[kannibal_klown]

The main thing is "not established." Where-as Big N has used MANY proprietary doo-dads in their products, none of them was something along the lines of the whole BluRay/HDDVD fiasco. There's a difference between them using small discs or funky headphone jacks, relatively cheap/minor nuisances, and picking an expensive disc player (for movies) that may become the next BetaMax.

Honestly though, I have to say I'm surprised at Microsoft during this whole thing. I was expecting them to be as assinine as Sony, but they're relatively tame in comparison.

Re:Proprietary Models

[chrismcdirty]

Don't forget, Nintendo as run by Iwata is much different than Nintendo as run by Yamauchi. Iwata seems to be more in touch with the people who play games, whereas Yamauchi was a crazy old man, rumored to have five heads.

Re:Proprietary Models

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"Have we already forgotten Nintendo's numerous examples of proprietary lock-inone example that comes to mind being the GBA-SP's notorious "headphone jack"?"

How is that lock-in? It says right there in the article that it was a form factor limitation.

Re:Proprietary Models

[Chris Burke]

Yeah, the GC mini-DVDs are also a nice example. Dragged kicking and screaming into the world of optical media, they still couldn't go with something mainstream. Most of their weird proprietary decisions seem to involve preventing piracy and enforcing their licensee agreements -- the GBA-SP thing was at least allegedly a form factor issue, though I don't buy that it would have been impossible to use a normal jack. Anyway, the point is that Nintendo has always been weird and supported strange proprietary tech, but only for purposes of locking down their own console. Sony and MS use proprietary tech as a lever to force consumer's to do things in other markets. This has always been the difference to me: Nintendo's megalomaniacal urges seem to only run as far as ruling video games with an iron fist.

Re:Proprietary Models

[thatguywhoiam]

The Wii's support for DVD is one of very few times that the big N has strayed from its defining "not made here" syndrome.

No kidding. That's an argument that I've never understood - often employed in the whole Bluray discussion. "If it doesn't catch on, its useless to consumers". Well its not like I can take a Nintendo 'DVD' or a Playstation 'DVD' and do anything else with it, is there?

Nintendo used to sell games in boxes of RAM. Doesn't get much more proprietary than that.

Re:Proprietary Models

[LordKronos]

the GC mini-DVDs are also a nice example. Dragged kicking and screaming into the world of optical media, they still couldn't go with something mainstream.

Yeah, and you also couldn't play your PS2 games on your XBOX. What does it matter that your games use a format that won't work on another console or player? The point with the GC was that they were keeping it's cost down at the expense of being able to play movies. They weren't trying to sell anything more than a game system.

With the Wii, they've added DVD support (presumably because by now the cost impact is minimal) but are abstaining from adding support for an unstandardized movie format (and the added expense that comes with that).

Re:Proprietary Models

[Chris Burke]

Yeah, and you also couldn't play your PS2 games on your XBOX. What does it matter that your games use a format that won't work on another console or player? The point with the GC was that they were keeping it's cost down at the expense of being able to play movies. They weren't trying to sell anything more than a game system.

It doesn't matter. It was an example of Nintendo's fetish for strange proprietary formats and hardware. And I doubt it kept costs down to use non-standard DVD players, particularly for those manufacturing media, but the GC was affordable enough regardless, and the form-factor issue (the GC would have had to be larger to fit a full size DVD) was probably more important. Oh, and it's harder to pirate mini-DVDs, which is the main reason Nintendo makes all their weird hardware decisions.

"They weren't trying to sell anything more than a game system" was the whole point of my post, so maybe you should read it again. Or not.

With the Wii, they've added DVD support (presumably because by now the cost impact is minimal) but are abstaining from adding support for an unstandardized movie format (and the added expense that comes with that).

Really I have a hard time believing that DVD support was a signficant cost at any point in time over using mini-DVD. The only difference would be how far the laser has to track, big deal. I bet Wii supports DVD not because of cost, but because mini-DVDs were pretty cramped in the GC generation and full DVD is a big capacity upgrade.

Obviously a next-gen format that requires an expensive new laser is a different story.

Re:Proprietary Models

[Lehk228]

actually they were ROM chips, not RAM. there was small amounts of battery backed up RAM to store save files and sometimes extra chips for the system to use such as the SuperFX chip.

Re:Proprietary Models

[MemoryDragon]

Yes Nintendo is one of the worst companies when it comes to vendor lock in, fortunately they usually are too small to roll really their own hardware, which usually opens their consoles after a while. The ds for instance just uses SD cards with a different proprietary form factor. The Wii finally uses a normal DVD drive and SD slots. But the history of Nintdos attempty to bypass existing standards is endlessly and also their list of having fallen flat on their face with it.

Re:Proprietary Models

[Anonymous Coward]

It was funny to hear Yamauchi-san speaking at the N64 launch in Tokyo through a translator. He was gesticulating and speaking very forcefully about how he would strangle his competitors with their own entrails (or some such thing) and the japanese girl translating it for the gai-jin press was speaking in such a calm and hesitant voice that the contrast made me chuckle.

Re:Proprietary Models

[Anonymous Coward]

Many of Yamauchi's most controversial decisions - the same ones none of today's growing legion of armchair analysts ever seem to understand - were ultimately what kept Nintendo in the the black when the competition weren't. Some of his lesser declarations may have led nowhere, or may have been made as poilitical gestures instead of as actual predictions, but his understanding of the industry was near perfect. We can look back at those predictions of his that weren't clearly politically-driven and see that he spoke accurately and with clarity. He simply never polished his words or pulled his punches for the sake of others. He may not have been much of a fan of playing video games (unlike Iwata), but he was very obviously good at driving Nintendo forward independent of industry and market fashion.

Iwata is a good leader and businessman with extensive production and programming experience. However, his major strengths when compared to Yamauchi have been his diplomacy, his ability to delegate, and his ability to take risks (within reason). All of Nintendo's current successes (_including_ the original DS) were Yamauchi-led initiatives. Iwata has not had the chance to prove himself with a new product launch beyond the scope of the GameBoy Micro. I don't say this to rile up any Johnny-come-lately fanboys that would defend whatever Nintendo is doing right now at the expense of understanding of what they did in the past; it's just not responsible to history for people to misunderstand the profound relevance of what Yamauchi did for Nintendo. His legacy is that Nintendo never folded under the ridiculous PlayStation debacle, and therefore Nintendo still exists today. We can all talk about the craziness that the industry AS A WHOLE experienced while just coming out of its second infancy (during which Nintendo just happened to be the industry leaders), but to pin all that on Yamauchi? Ridiculous. It's like pinning all of Atari's and the industry-of-the-day's woes on Bushnell, which some people here were trying to do just a few days ago.

BetaMax vs VHS All over again

[LordHotDog]

and remember Sony originally backed BetaMax....

Re:BetaMax vs VHS All over again

[hansamurai]

So HD-DVD will win even though Blu-Ray is the superior product?

*That's history talking, not me.

Re:BetaMax vs VHS All over again

[jdgeorge]

and remember Sony originally backed BetaMax....

Great Scott, you're right! That amazing coincidence nearly slipped past us, in the same way that a steamroller nearly slips past the tar in a freshly poured road surface!

Re:BetaMax vs VHS All over again

[Control Group]

+1 Good use of "Great Scott"

Re:BetaMax vs VHS All over again

[Osty]

and remember Sony originally backed BetaMax....

Sony didn't just back BetaMax, they created it. It was just the first in a long line of media duds for Sony: BetaMax, MiniDisc, Memory Stick, UMD, and soon to be Blu-Ray. Sony just doesn't learn. It's like the entire company is operating under a Kutaragi reality distortion field where they honestly believe they've won all of the past media wars.

Re:BetaMax vs VHS All over again

[VJ42]

It's like the entire company is operating under a Kutaragi reality distortion field where they honestly believe they've won all of the past media wars.

Either that or "if a first you don't succeed, try, try and try again" was drummed into him really hard as a child.

Re:BetaMax vs VHS All over again

[7Prime]

So HD-DVD will win even though Blu-Ray is the superior product?

Yeah, probably.

Re:BetaMax vs VHS All over again

[grapeape]

BetaMax was superior in both video quality and audio fidelity...but that didnt help it much

Re:BetaMax vs VHS All over again

[iainl]

Sony's format had technical advantages over the other one, but cost a lot more, and took a long time to produce media that fully exploited the theoretical format (at first, the tapes were just too short).

Meanwhile, BluRay can in theory do 50Gb vs. HD-DVD's 30Gb, while in practice only holding 25Gb or less at the moment. Also, BluRay players are twice the price of HD-DVD players (Samsung's is $1000 or £950, vs. Toshiba's HD-DVD player at $500/£425).

Do you think history might repeat itself?

Re:Zune not so soon

[revlayle]

Because we know the Zune has so much to do with the PS3.

????????

Format Wars and Useless Plastic

[norminator]

But look at it this way, if Blu-Ray fails, your PS3 is still an incredible game machine. If HDDVD fails, your XBOX360 add-on is a useless piece of plastic.

But the question is, does the Blu-Ray make the PS3 an incredible game machine, or is it the other technologies (cell, etc.)? If the Blu-Ray isn't adding that much to the gaming experience, then it's just adding extra cost to the customer. Some people are saying that developers are already filling Blu-Ray discs for individual games, but I wonder if that's because they're just not compressing anything, or what the deal is... I haven't heard any complaints that the XB360 discs are filling too easily, though, so is the expense of Blu-Ray really worth it?

Also, I understand what you mean about the HD-DVD add-on for the XBox, but at least that $200 cost is optional. It's just for watching movies, so if you are worried about HD-DVD failing, you can not buy it at all. From a larger perspective of HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray, though, I feel comforted by the fact that HD-DVDs can be manufactured with a DVD side, so I could buy the HD-DVD discs now, even though I haven't moved up to a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player, and whatever happens in the format war, I'd still have the DVD disc at least, so it's not a total loss. Of course, when I was browsing the HD-DVD titles at Target the other day, I didn't see any that made use of the hybrid DVD feature, so that may be a moot point anyway.

Obviously Microsoft is doing the same with HDDVD since they're one of the founders (and because Sony supports the other).

I believe Microsoft was not a founder or original member of the HD-DVD group at all, but that they aligned themselves with HD-DVD later on. I could be wrong, though.

Re:Format Wars and Useless Plastic

[7Prime]

Correct, Microsoft has nothing to do with the HD-DVD standard. HD-DVD is largely a Toshiba endevour. Microsoft did, however, throw themselves entirely behind Toshiba in this, so they have quite a bit to lose if it doesn't pan out.

Re:Format Wars and Useless Plastic

[amuro98]

What it really comes down to is:

IF Blu-Ray is successful, then the PS3 has a big leg up, as it already includes the means to play Blu-ray movies.

IF, on the other hand, Blu-Ray is not successful, Sony must still support it for the PS3, just as Sony must still support UMD for the PSP because both mediums didn't just play movies, but are used for software (the games) as well.

Sony is gambling that the higher prices NOW will pay off in the future by launching Blu-ray into millions of homes, striking a large blow against HD-DVD.

As for games, it's yet to be shown how Blu-Ray adds anything to them, other than providing tons of extra space for those long, beautifully rendered, non-interactive CGI movies Square so loves using in their Final Fantasy games and other RPGs. I've not heard of any game filling a Blu-Ray disc. Supposedly the developers of 'Resistance...' were claiming each level was going to use up 4GB of space on the Blu-Ray disc, but later it was shown the entire game fit into 12GB (down from their initial claims of 24GB) While still larger than a dual-layered DVD, there's not much real information on how that space is being utilized (is it multiple versions of the cutscenes? is it uncompressed texture and graphical data? etc.)

Personally, I could care less what format the games used. And I'm not going to get interested in next-gen DVDs until the format war has gone away, or multi-format players are readily available and under $500. I figure that's a good 2 years away.

--
Win cash and giftcards just for clicking your mouse!
http://www.netwinner.com/?signupCode=amuro98

Re:Format Wars and Useless Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the reasons why I don't want a HD-DVD unit is that it's base on some proprietary and incompatible Microsoft codec.

Re:Format Wars and Useless Plastic

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, I could care less what format the games used.

Then please, please care less than what you do now, and when you've stopped caring about the formats, start learning the meaning of the expression "couldn't care less".

Huh?

[twosmokes]

Having mostly ignored the format wars I don't understand Nintendo's statement. For consoles the disc media is meaningless, no? I mean it's not like I can take a Wii game and stick it in my computer and play it.

The only format forcing is the one that's always been there. If you want to play Nintendo games, you buy the Nintendo hardware. Same for Sony and MS.

The HD-DVD add on is optional and the ability to play Blue-Ray on the PS3 is just a bonus.

I don't see the problem.

Re:Huh?

[Nerdfest]

The problem is that fans of Sony (there are stilla few, despite their recent displays of Evil) would love to buy the latest version of their game console, but don't want to shell out the rediculous price dictated by the forced inclusion of a Blu-Ray player. Sony still insists it's for game content, but we all know it's to get their latest format picked up by the masses.

Re:Huh?

[Tainek]

The problem is a blue-Ray Player, and the blue ray Media are both extreemly expensive, and the consumer has to pick up the Tab, even if he doesnt want a Blue-Ray Player

Re:Huh?

[twosmokes]

I still don't see it. $399 for the higher end Xbox vs. $599 for the higher end PS3. It's not like the only difference there is the Blue-Ray.

You're getting a larger HD, Wifi support (which MS charges $100 for), and flash card readers. Obviously the price is higher, but the features (even ignoring the Blue-Ray) are there to support the price.

I won't be buying either system until there's some/more games for them, but the prices are comparable.

Re:Huh?

[MeanderingMind]

The issue is that not everyone wants Blue-ray, and the inclusion has had two undesirable affects on the PS3.

1. An increase in price.
2. A decrease in supply.

The lasers for Blue-ray are both difficult and expensive to manufacture. Because of this, we have fewer PS3s at a greater price.

The argument for Blue-ray is largely for the 50GB of space it provides. This is compared to DVDs with a max of 9GB.

What people seem to forget is that the Gamecube's small discs had a maximum storage capacity of 1.5GB. That's exactly 1/6th of what the PS2 and Xbox had availible, yet we were delivered a number of incredible games (Resident Evil 4, Crystal Chronicles, Metroid Prime, Windwaker, Super Smash Bros and even Twilight Princess). 9GB is slightly more than 1/6th of the 50GB that Blue-ray offers.

The point is that because of facts such as these, the cut scene CG craziness many games employ, and general skepticism of the potential success for Blue-ray, many gamers are not exactly thrilled with it. Those who wanted to play Blue-ray movies may be, and some who don't as well, but a fairly large number don't feel happy about being used as a stepping stone for Sony's plans of market domination.

Re:Huh?

[NineNine]

For consoles the disc media is meaningless, no? I mean it's not like I can take a Wii game and stick it in my computer and play it.

Not quite. It makes a tiny difference. Those people who get thier game boxes modded/chipped/whatever you want to call it, can make backups of their games, and use those. For the PS2, it's standard DVD. You want to make a backup of God of War? Put it in your PC. Copy it to a regular ol' DVD (+/- R doesn't matter), and play that in your PS2. If PS3 games come on a blue-ray disk, or the XBox 360 games come on an HD disk, then that effects those people who like to do backups. It's tiny. It probably doesn't matter. I just hope (for my sake) that the PS3 games don't all come in Blue-Ray format.

Re:Huh?

[drinkypoo]

the ability to play Blue-Ray on the PS3 is just a bonus.

A $200 bonus.

I don't see the problem.

The problem is that Sony wants half my rent for the month for a feature I don't want and which won't make the games any more fun.

Re:Huh?

[twosmokes]

Maybe the price is an issue, maybe not (see my other reply). Supply issues will eventually be resolved. There's always supply problems at a console launch. But price and supply have nothing to do with the article.

Trépanier said "Forcing people to adopt a technology and a model that's proprietary and still not established is unfair to gamers."

I don't see how. How does only allowing only one type of MOVIE to be played on a system have anything to do with gaming?

And don't they both offer DVD playback out of the box?

Re:Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Blu-Ray didn't increase the price of PS3, they own and manufacture everything in-house. The hard drive, royalty for RSX chip and XDR RAM would be more likely the cause of price increase (and probably their wicked cooling system).

Sony wanted a bigger storage media for PS3, and it just so happened that Blu-Ray could also be used for playing movies, not the other way around. Compared with PS2's 640*480 screen, Full HD requires 6.75 times the storage space. It's just a logical step to move to the next-gen format to accommodate this huge requirement.

I wouldn't mind watching a Full HD CG, if it's done properly (like from Square-Enix). It may not add anything to the game play, but it certainly makes you feel satisfied watching a beautifully crafted CG after spending 100+ hours to finish the game.

I still can't believe that there are people complaining about the extra storage space. IMHO Blu-Ray is not enough, at least 100GB should be a norm by now. At least Sony is heading towards the right direction.

Re:Huh?

[MrCopilot]

How does only allowing only one type of MOVIE to be played on a system have anything to do with gaming?

By forcing the consumer to pay for a feature that they neither want or need.

Gamers want games. Games do not need BluRay (yet). At least with Xbox360 it is still a choice (by making it so they can still support BluRay if Sony does the impossible and wins this format war.)

Choice?

[testudorex]

I love how nintendo fans can so eloquently tell everyone that sony forces new technology people don't want, and that with nintendo, there's choice.
How many people plan on buying a wii with 1 controller, anyone? Didn't think so, that'll be $60 for each other player.
How many people plan on playing VC or GC games on the wii, anyone? Yeah, that's $20 for each player.
How much space of memory you think the wii comes with, enough? Well you can all ways "choose" to buy an extra sd card.
Don't you love the illusion of choice?

Re:Choice?

[joshetc]

Hmm? Half of those questions can be asked about 360 and PS3 as well though.. how many controllers do those come with? Also AFAIK you dont HAVE to use the wii-mote which means you dont have to pay $60 per players. I plan on using the gamecube controllers I already have...

Re:Choice?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

"I love how nintendo fans can so eloquently tell everyone that sony forces new technology people don't want, and that with nintendo, there's choice."

All of your examples are not only examples of choice, but amazingly, they apply to the competitors as well.

Re:Choice?

[Ash-Fox]

How many people plan on buying a wii with 1 controller, anyone?

I probably will.

How many people plan on playing VC or GC games on the wii, anyone?

There are two games I want to play from the GC, a few SNES games and so on. I never got those consoles, because I couldn't justify it.

How much space of memory you think the wii comes with, enough?

I don't know.

Well you can all ways "choose" to buy an extra sd card.

Seems fair enough, after all. I don't have to buy from Nintendo -- do I? Then again, theres the xbox, which required that I obtain a harddrive from Microsoft somehow, or use some horrible hack to use a generic one, which would void the warranties, xbox live agreements yadayadayada.

Don't you love the illusion of choice?

I choose Wii, after most of my life, not owning a console. I cannot justify getting a xbox, if I have to pay for xbox live so I can host my own servers for online play, to play on games online I already paid for on my own resources. Plus only having one game I'm interested in playing on the platform isn't much justification either.

I cannot justify getting a Sony product, simply because most of the hardware they sell have had so many issues, I don't want to, on that alone. Nevermind the fact that I don't find the need in high resolution TVs or a RSX processor that can apparently shuffle pictures on the screen that I've been doing for years on my amiga1200. Nevermind the fact there is no game I can think of that I want on the platform, and for that obscenely high price to get the console, there better be.

I want network play, I like the idea of forming a wireless neighborhood gaming network... Not really much of a choice, but there you go.

And I'm not really a gamer, all this crap over the years I keep experiencing, from things like Steam to CD protections wrecking my DVD drives has put me off playing many games.

Re:Choice?

[Anonymous Coward]

How many people plan on buying a wii with 1 controller, anyone?

Most likely everyone since the SKU only comes with one controller.

Re:Choice?

[MrCopilot]

How many people plan on buying a wii with 1 controller, anyone? Didn't think so, that'll be $60 for each other player.
Well, me for one, Family already has 4 GC controllers.

How many people plan on playing VC or GC games on the wii, anyone? Yeah, that's $20 for each player.
No it is Zero per player. My entire GC library will be playable Free. Sony,Ms, maybe some games? VC games are per console. Better Still you can carry them with you on the STANDARD SD memory card to your friends house.

How much space of memory you think the wii comes with, enough? Well you can all ways "choose" to buy an extra sd card.
Or I could use one of the cards that I already own for my mp3player, cameras, USBDrives

Hope you enjoy being $500 to $700 poorer. I'm spending my 3 bills on 1 console, 1 game.

Re:Zune not so soon

[Kazzahdrane]

There is no European Launch Date for the PS3, only a vague launch window of March 2007. Also, if you've read the latest interview with Phil Harrison you'll know he carefully avoided answering the question of whether they'd make that date. Certainly the retailers here in the UK aren't holding their breath, they're telling customers that it might be March, maybe not.

Oh, so it's not *the* Smacktalk..

[Channard]

.. and here was me thinking this was news that there was a PS3 of the Smacktalk being released. Which is, for anyone who's not heard of it, a device that sits between the 360's headset and console and lets you assign swearing and sound samples to various buttons. I'd buy one to assign a bunch of Dr Weird voice samples to if they weren't so expensive, and if they were actually available in the UK.

I personally say we look to Maddox

[drcagn]

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=so ny_bullshit

You think that's bad...

[casualsax3]

... check out these head to head screenshot comparissons of RidgeRacer on the Xbox360 vs the PS3 :)

http://microsoftisawesome.blogspot.com/2006/11/ps3 -vs-xbox-360-screen-shots-update-2.html

Yeah, but the cheapest solution is...

[Hitto]

Wii and a 25$ divx player.

I mean, c'mon guys. I know the next-gen storage format war is important to movie enthusiasts and people who have huge storage needs, but the rest of us are still happy with our "old" technology, and don't see (or care about) the artifacts or "bad quality" of the image. I mean, there's being interested in bleeding-edge, and then there's being anal about a percent performance increase.

I thought we geeks cared about content, low prices, and squeezing the most life out of any piece of kit, however old it may be. What's the rest of /.'s opinion on this, I'd love to know.

And on the upcoming games front? Personally, I am not interested by either the Xbox 360's or the PS3's offerings, even though I enjoyed the main franchise games on both consoles' predecessors. We have already witnessed how the cheaper, innovative console is more fun in many ways to the expensive, state-of-the-art piece of hardware that "isn't a console". (yes, I am in eternal love with the DS)

You may now post your best "Wii is barely powerful enough to run MARIO PONG : kidz version" flames... :)

It's all about having space for game content.

[MikeFM]

So the PS3 has enough room to provide massive content in it's games.. and XBox and Wii don't. To me that's all I need to know. What's the point of a next gen console that can't even provide more detailed and massive enviroments to game in? A graphics boost is nice as is improved controllers but I want better gameplay and that means more data available to the games, better physics, better AI, etc.

I'll get a PS3 but I have no plan at all to upgrade my movie buying to HD-DVD or Blue-Ray or to use my next gen console for playing movies. The biggest deciding factor for me as to when I will switch to a HD movie format is when the format is cracked so that the security measures no longer work. I won't buy movies I can't copy and modify (removing menus, etc).

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[7Prime]

Physics, AI, etc. have almost NOTHING to do with disc capacity. These things are dry code, which takes up an insignificant amount of drive space. A good 95% or more of a disc goes into graphics and sound. Code for most contemporary games could still fit in an N64 cartridge. Maybe this is an exaduration, but not by much. All the disc capacity is for is for "pretty". Disc capacity has NO overarching effect on gameplay, WHAT SO EVER. Now, I'm not saying that disc capacity is pointless. Graphics and sound enhance the atmosphere of the game, making it more immersive if used well (which most HD games, I would argue, do not). So if it's gameplay you are concerned about, do not worry, the Wii will probably have the best gameplay (AI, Physics, etc.) since companies are being persuaded to concentrate more on that than "oooh... pretty".

This is coming from a person who thinks that the game with the best graphics, that I've ever seen, is Okami, a PS2 game. I don't believe that most developers have come to terms with the graphical capabilities that they had with the last generation, let alone the current one. Graphics are only as good as the artistic vision of the creators. Although, I will admit that Shadow of the Collosus is one example of a game made painful because the creators surpassed the capabilities of the machine, and the game was increadibly choppy because of it.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[Control Group]

That's all well and good, to be sure...but what does it have to do with my comment, that Nintendo's criticism only applies to the PS3, not to both the PS3 and the 360, as the blurb indicates?

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[HappySqurriel]

So the PS3 has enough room to provide massive content in it's games.. and XBox and Wii don't. To me that's all I need to know. What's the point of a next gen console that can't even provide more detailed and massive enviroments to game in? A graphics boost is nice as is improved controllers but I want better gameplay and that means more data available to the games, better physics, better AI, etc.

I'll get a PS3 but I have no plan at all to upgrade my movie buying to HD-DVD or Blue-Ray or to use my next gen console for playing movies. The biggest deciding factor for me as to when I will switch to a HD movie format is when the format is cracked so that the security measures no longer work. I won't buy movies I can't copy and modify (removing menus, etc).

In the previous generation (PS2/XBox/Gamecube) most of the games produced easily fit on a single layered DVD, with only a few requiring a double layered DVD and (almost) none requiring multiple dual layered DVDs; in fact, most games were easily ported to the Gamecube on its single layered (1.5GB) optical disc. The Wii (we assume) now has about 6 times as much storage as the Gamecube did without requiring much more data in game (because of it's modest graphics).

The XBox 360 may not have the storage capacity of the PS3 but that shouldn't be too big of a problem because FMV should be far less necessary on a next generation console (the few double layered DVD games for the PS2 were mostly filled with MPEG-2 encoded FMV) and the XBox 360 can handle much greater compression on FMV than the XBox could, the XBox 360 can handle greater texture compression than the XBox could, and most polygonal data can be stored as a spline on the disc and polygonalized in memory; I know someone will say that polygonalizing a spline would take longer but the reality is that (with how slow optical drives are) it is much faster to store a model as a spline and then polygonalize it then to load a polygonal model from disc.

Anyways, I'm not so sure you will see more detailed massive environments then are already being provided on the XBox 360. the more detailed the enviroment becomes, or the more massive it becomes, the more people are required to produce the content; if game budgets are already in the $20-$40 Million range (requiring 1 to 2 Million sales to break even) I doubt you will see many game budgets explode to $40-$80 Million (requiring 2 to 4 Million sales to break even) to produce your massive detailed worlds.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[MikeFM]

Maps and a wide range of objects DOES take up disc capacity. If you want massive worlds you can spend hundreds or thousands of hours exploring you need the disc space to store all the information. Maybe you're happy with repetitive textures and a limited number of different objects but I love to see huge and diverse worlds. You can have diverse and flexible AI by using that disc space to put many different personalities (or whatever you want to call different AI) in the game. The bare executables may not take that much space but you need all kinds of information to make those executables do something interesting. Making executables do something interesting is what makes gameplay interesting.

I want to see games so large and interactive that I can spend years just wandering around discovering new things. I'm thinking of games like GTA except where every building is accessible and you can explore every room and play with objects and meet people and everything is unique. When you reach city limits you should be able to get in a car and drive to the enxt town over and explore it too. They need to be able to cram a full world on a disc.

The Wii doesn't have the processing power for impressive physics or AI let alone enough disc space to really make full-sized worlds. If anything the PS3 is still underpowered and doesn't have enough disc capacity and it leads the pack.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[MikeFM]

Most games are crap anyway so I'd never think that most games will take full advantage of the system they are on. The really impressive ones though are the ones that push the system to the limits. A bunch of FMV isn't a very useful way to use disc capacity given the quality of graphics on next gen consoles but you have a lot of other possible uses for disc space.

I won't quite agree that more people are required to produce larger and more detailed enviroments. You only have to carefully craft the parts that are important to gameplay. Even that isn't that important given the open nature of many of today's games. Most of the expanded maps and certain ranges of objects can be produced algorithmicly. A lot of things such as textures, sounds, and object primitives can be copied from title to title. A little work on world-generation and source materials such as textures and developers can let game worlds largely create themselves if they have the processing power and disc capacity needed. The fun thing about such worlds is that you can end up with unexpected twists that developers may not expect and which gives players that explore the worlds chances for a lot of alternative ways to play the game.

It's harder and more expensive to develop in a limited system than it is when you can just throw more work at the processing power of the system and not worry about storage capacity.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[HappySqurriel]

I won't quite agree that more people are required to produce larger and more detailed enviroments. You only have to carefully craft the parts that are important to gameplay. Even that isn't that important given the open nature of many of today's games. Most of the expanded maps and certain ranges of objects can be produced algorithmicly. A lot of things such as textures, sounds, and object primitives can be copied from title to title. A little work on world-generation and source materials such as textures and developers can let game worlds largely create themselves if they have the processing power and disc capacity needed. The fun thing about such worlds is that you can end up with unexpected twists that developers may not expect and which gives players that explore the worlds chances for a lot of alternative ways to play the game.

It's harder and more expensive to develop in a limited system than it is when you can just throw more work at the processing power of the system and not worry about storage capacity

You're correct that you can produce content using an algorithm, but developing the algorithms is very expensive. At several universities the graphics programs are focused on procedural content generation of plants and trees; at one well known University they have been working on this problem for 10 years with several PHD researchers (and their students) and have yet to perfect the method. In the near future procedural content generation is (mostly) going to be very limited in scope.

Now, you could use greater power and greater resources to reduce the cost of game development (say if you continued to produce 2D games on the PS3 using SVG rather than pixelmaps) but that never happens. There is a reason why it is so much less expensive to produce a DS game compared to a PSP game, and why people are reporting that Wii games are so much cheaper than PS3 games, and that is mostly that you can say "it can't be done" when a marketing manager "asks" you to include into your game. When you have a limited scope, and limited requirements, in anything you produce you will usually have a much less expensive (much higher quality) product; greater resources tends to increase the scop and increase the requirements of any product and thus makes it much more difficut to produce.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[Yvan256]

Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2 are good examples of huge worlds to explore, but each game fits onto a small DVD for the Gamecube.

If those worlds aren't big enough, then try Final Fantasy XI. This game is huge, the maps are numerous and quite huge too, not to mention dungeons, etc. And it still fits on a regular DVD-ROM, even with 3 expansion packs.

I'm still predicting the same old "let's fill the rest of the disc with FMV" crap, even though this new generation should be able to render cut-scenes in real-time (even the previous was able to do that, and the one before that too, to a certain point).

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[7Prime]

Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2 are good examples of huge worlds to explore, but each game fits onto a small DVD for the Gamecube.

Although I would agree, we're talking with someone who's on a whole different level of "need to walk everywhere" syndrome. Did you notice his "like GTA but where I can walk into every building" comment? I mean, sure it would be nice... but... why? If the creators did that, then they won't have the time to put any time into making those buildings interesting, or at all inspired. You're basically asking a group of game designers to recreate New York City for you. Fuck disc capacity, the design capacity just isn't there. Why not have designers concentrate on smaller things that they can put a lot of subtlety and creativity into? The last thing I want to have happen is designers creating an endless amount of content while sacrificing any kind of artistry or creative thought. There's always a price to pay.

I suggest, to this guy, that he try playing Metroid Prime, which, although probably not up to your graphical standards, has an incredible amount of thought put into every room in the game, to the point where it's extremely interesting to explore, even just a small area. On the flip side, most urban architecture is quite boring. Sky scrapers basically repeat the same floor over and over again for 80 stories, with subtle changes in interior layout. Do we really want this to become the new standard in video game design?

The "let me go everywhere" attitude is a bit selfish, IMHO. Games are an entertainment/art form like anything else... sure they're interactive, but within the confines of the vision the creators wanted to portray. It's like if I wrote a symphony, just to have one of the audience members yell at me because they want to hear their favorite musical theme in retrograde inversion performed on the english horn and harmonized by the horns and low strings. There's an infinte amount of variation, but, I mean... gaahhhh... doth one not appreciate the art of editing? I mean, exploration is one of my favorite aspects in games, but only if there's something WORTH exploring. Wind Waker gave me a huge world with nothing but endless, repeatitive, open water... geee, that was FUN.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[Anonymous Coward]

"In the previous generation (PS2/XBox/Gamecube) most of the games produced easily fit on a single layered DVD, with only a few requiring a double layered DVD and (almost) none requiring multiple dual layered DVDs; in fact, most games were easily ported to the Gamecube on its single layered (1.5GB) optical disc."

Actually, I read that Burnout 3 wasn't available on Cube purely because the media size was too small, and the game design required being able to play any level at any time (so disc swapping would have been very annoying). Other cross-platform games required more than one Cube disc, e.g. Resi 4 and Killer 7. This shows pretty clearly that the limit was reached in the lifetime of the Cube.

However, IMO it was worth it - the smaller discs allowed for higher speed and shorter load times. I hate load times.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[donscarletti]

the Wii will probably have the best gameplay (AI, Physics, etc.) since companies are being persuaded to concentrate more on that than "oooh... pretty".

That's just like saying that if a girl is ugly she must have a great personality.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[MemoryDragon]

Actually I am not a PS3 fan, it simply is too expensive, but you mentioned better pyhsics, that is one area where the ps3 definitely will shine, the vector units in the cell processor have two areas where they probably can shine, physics calculations and 2d/3d caluculations, all of them can be made highly parallel. The hardware of the PS3 is really interesting, but for a console it is way too expensive. I just wonder how the general purpose computing thing, Sony has planned for the box works out. It could be that the box will replace my PC in the long run (but the most early date is likely in about two years), it really depends on how far Linux can push the hardware on this thing.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[iainl]

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion looks bloody gorgeous, causes powerful PCs to faint, seems to take the average person north of 100 hours to get through all of, and is generally pretty packed with content whichever way you choose to measure that.

Yet there's a couple of gig spare space on the single DVD9.

So I'm not convinced it's a terminal crippling of the 360 yet.

Re:It's all about having space for game content.

[MikeFM]

It's not that hard to give primitive objects options that can vary the objects quite a bit without killing yourself with flexibility. You can define certain types of trees for instance but their exact number of limbs, health, etc can be varied. Then using a system which lays out these objects and configures them so they'll seem natural isn't that difficult either. Likewise with things like street layout or building layout. You have a given number of building types and each have certain types of rooms and props which make sense and the computer can configure everything without a human designer needing to go in and design every building and every room. To make things interesting such systems should allow for occassional weirdness such as rooms that don't make sense in the building or props that are out of place. Again you can do the same things with extra characters by varying their personalities, look, etc.

I wouldn't say that this is zero effort. It does take programmers and artists working together but it's not as hard as you seem to imply. You can't just tell a program to create your entire game for you but you can use a program to create and populate maps in a way that is realistic enough to be interesting for players to explore. And as I said before you can reuse most of this code from title to title so you could start out with some basics and then add to it as you released new titles. To me it seems like it'd be the kind of code that'd be perfect for an opensource project as the investment could be spread out between multiple game makers and it's more in adding depth to games than to creating games so there'd be little need not to share.

Some good and some bad.

[MikeFM]

I bought Paper Mario a while back and I just have to say that I loath that game despite all the rav reviews I saw for it. It's boring with lame puzzles that require mostly trial and error or repetitive tasks than actual thought or skill and the dialog is so lame as to be a crime. I love the Mario family of games and RPG style games but Paper Mario is just a mockery of both.

I do like the Skies of Arcadia remake for Gamecube (a bit better than the Dreamcast version) and the Gamecube I think is the choice platform for party games. I think Nintendo is making a mistake by choosing a design for the Wii that looks more like the PlayStation instead of keeping the easily portable little cube design of the Gamecube.

I'd like to see Nintendo shrink the form factor of the Gamecube further and bring it's price down to around $50 as I think they could really hit the market for younger kids and party players if they did. Maybe add some Wii-like controllers while their at it. I think a smaller, cheaper, and improved Gamecube could sell better than the Wii. The Gameboy isn't all bells and whistles like the PSP but it consistantly sells better than the PSP and similar expensive rivals. I think the Wii price is to high for the market it's going after.

Re:Some good and some bad.

[Minced]

Congratulations, you've described what the Wii basically is, a smaller GCN with remote support and slightly enhanced RAM and graphics. Thats it. Honestly it is, just go back and read other /. stories about developer responses.

Re:Some good and some bad.

[MikeFM]

The form factor is less portable and the price is higher. For their target market I don't think Nintendo needed more RAM and graphics so much as a lower price tag and some better (or cheaper - pick one) titles. I'd easily shell out $50 for a Gamecube to give as a gift to my children, neices, nephews, etc but there is no way I'm going to spend $200 for a Wii as a gift and I'm going to buy myself the best next gen console so I'll be spending $600+ on a PS3. I'll probably buy a Wii, like I have for past also-ran consoles like Gamecube and Dreamcast, when their price drops to around $100. I'd be a lot more likely to buy a couple DS's to hand out as gifts then I would be to buy a Wii.

Is there any technical reason Nintendo couldn't have added the Wii controllers to the GameCube? IMO those are the only interesting feature of the Wii and they don't justify the price increase.

Not quite exactly...

[DrYak]

Except that back then, it was EITHER betamax OR vhs. 1 was bound to superceed the other.

Whereas today, while Microsoft and Sony kill each other in a blood bath, the consumer will only start buying once no-name asian constructors bring to market dual standart recorder that records both HD-DVD and BlueRay.

It's more "DVD-R vs. DVD+R vs. brand-less multi-standarts".

i love nintendo, but....

[Anonymous Coward]

"Forcing people to adopt a technology and a model that's proprietary and still not established is unfair to gamers."

that statement sounds awfully funny coming from a company that has always pushed their own proprietary formats. has everyone forgot about those cartridges that made the price of n64 games balloon to $60+ in the 90s? correct me if i'm wrong, but i believe the gamecube's discs are proprietary as well. even if the gamecube discs were standard, nintendo is still out of line with that comment. nintendo is the anti-standard, which is good in some ways and bad in others. mark my words, if they get burnt this go round for the Wii's lack of HD compatability, the next console they make will have a proprietary "HiiiD" holographic display.

Re:Yes, Blu-ray is a the next DVD

[GrayCalx]

Sony made DVD a standard and Blu-ray will, aside from an unprecedented problem occurring, be the new delivery media for high definition movies.

I definitely agree with you. In fact, so much so I'd like to subscribe to your podcast, could you ship me one on MiniDisc?

'presh.

Re:Yes, Blu-ray is a the next DVD

[lkeagle]

>> Sony made DVD a standard and Blu-ray will, aside from an unprecedented problem occurring, be the new delivery media for high definition movies. Why would last generation be any different than this one, barring a huge screw up?

Precedent is not set by a single iteration. I would ask what reasoning would lead you to believe that the next generation would be the *same* as the last. Also, your correlation is flawed. Why would you believe that the PS2 created the DVD standard? DVDs had been out for quite some time before the PS2. I would argue that the boom of digital video created a huge surge in PS2 purchases, not the other way around. Now that everything is digital, the only benefit consumers can see from any next-generation standard is capacity. HD-DVD and BluRay have about the same capacity, so where is the drive to choose one over the other?

Besides, the Xbox360 with HD-DVD beat the PS3 to market by a decent time margin, whereas the PS2 beat the Xbox to market by a huge margin (in my memory at least). What about the present situation makes you think that the playing field is at all aligned with the same forces that were at work 5-6 years ago?

Re:Yes, Blu-ray is a the next DVD

[DDLKermit007]

Actually, The Matrix, The Mummy, and other fairly decent blockbuster special effects movies that made the format change make sense came out just as DVD was attempting to go mainstream, and did more for the format than any console did. I wouldn't touch DVD until The Matrix came out. Which surprise, surprise came out just before the PS2. Anyone who purchases a PS2 for DVD playback was a fool and still is. The laser on those are so damn fragile to begin with, not to mention how shitty the DVD playback is on a PS2 has always been. Damn system can't even display black correctly.

Blue Ray has no such movies to pull it's ass out of the fire. Just the same movies available on DVD that really don't need BR (a decent upsampler to 720p/1080i does the job), players that cost too much and a console thats being rushed to market and they can't get good numbers of. God knows they have to have something out this year or they have absolutely no chance to even capture a quarter of the market.

Re:Yes, Blu-ray is a the next DVD

[iainl]

"Both cost the same" REALLY?

The cheapest standalone Blu-Ray player is $1000, or £950 if you're in the UK like me.
The cheapest standalone HD-DVD player is $500 or £430

The XBox 360 add-on is $200, or £130. The cheapest PS3 is $500, or will be £425 when it eventually turns up here next year.

That's quite extraordinarily wrong.

Re:Yes, Blu-ray is a the next DVD

[Slashcrap]

Dear Frobozz0,

I do hope you're right about all this. I really do.

Do you know why? Because it looks like you've been on Slashdot quite a while. And the thing is, you've rather gone out on a limb here. So I feel obliged to copy your comment and file it away.

And if in future it turns out that you're wrong, I'm afraid I'm going to have to post it as a reply to every comment you make. I imagine it will get quite annoying.

In the interests of full disclosure, I'd just like to say that I don't own a console, will never own a console and could not give the slightest shit which corporation sells the most units to the most consumers.

I do however enjoy humiliating people who show an inexplicable attraction to commercial entities.

See you soon,
Slashcrap

Codecs

[norminator]

Blur-Ray and HD-DVD can use the same codecs. From Wikipedia:

Both of the new formats [Blu-Ray and HD-DVD] are backward compatible with DVDs and both employ the same video compression techniques: MPEG-2, Video Codec 1 (VC1) and H.264/MPEG-4 AVC.