Post by: HappyMaskSalesman on March 06, 2003, 03:35:43 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 06, 2003, 08:16:37 PM
Post by: SCF on March 07, 2003, 04:46:33 AM
.In my opinion one of the reasons Nintendo has been having good sucess with their Gameboy systems its because its games are compatible with the older Gameboy versions. Besides Nintendo always makes gamers happy and a way to do this is to make their next generation system GC compatible.Post by: Marcus Arillius on March 07, 2003, 05:21:27 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on March 07, 2003, 06:17:15 AM
Plus one huge advantage with backwards compatibility is that Gamecube titles can still be released for the new console while third parties are getting used to the new hardware. Huge droughts wouldn't be as common. Plus Nintendo could release a big Gamecube title for Christmas the year the new console comes out and both GC and GC2 owners can buy it which would take some pressure off of the GC2 launch.
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 07, 2003, 07:26:17 AM
Post by: StRaNgE on March 08, 2003, 01:54:56 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 08, 2003, 02:24:17 PM
Post by: rodtod on March 09, 2003, 07:01:14 PM
I Nintendo is going to be more worried about trying to not act like Sony. The whole CD-based gaming system was originally Nintendo's idea wasn't it? Or did Sega come out with the Saturn before Nintendo started working on the SNES-CD? Anyhow, Nintendo likes to act independent and, well, unique in how they market their games and systems. I think what we'll see is a combination Gameboy/Console type of system, where the gamer can hook the thing up to the tv for uber graphics and sound, and then take it on the road for lighter gaming.
Now that would make the next system compatible with both GCN and GB/GBA games
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 09, 2003, 07:12:30 PM
Post by: MikeHrusecky on March 12, 2003, 07:48:55 AM
If it can it be done CHEAPLY. Being disc-based alone isn't enough. The new system has to be hardwired to emulate the code, read the disc format, and recognize the piracy measures. If the GPU/CPUs are extensions of the existing ones, as opposed to whole new cores, that could make it easier from an R&D and production standpoint for emulation.
For the drive itself, Panasonic likely has significant rights to the proprietary format. A different manufacturer would have to license the format, increasing cost. Nintendo would have to go with Panasonic again to avoid that hurdle.
Another being Cube's market penetration. Sony had a lot of motivation to be backward compatible since the size of the PSOne userbase is/was pretty huge.
And relatedly, if GameCube games continue to be a considerable sales driver, and developers continue to make games for it after the next system's launch (a la PSOne after PS2 was released.)
Post by: Ian Sane on March 12, 2003, 08:08:23 AM
Yeah but I'm pretty sure the main reason PSX games were still made at a semi-regular rate after the PS2 launch was because of the backwards compatibility. Otherwise the amount of PSX games released probably would have dropped significantly. It's kind of a "chicken or the egg" situation. Is backwards compatibility a result of previous generation games still selling or are previous generation games still selling because of backwards compatibility?
Post by: BlkPaladin on March 12, 2003, 09:46:48 AM
But as it has been said would the cost it would take to make it backwards compatible, out weigh the potential profits.
And I did say they would have to hard code the next console to accept the Gamecube's games, or put in a whole chipset. And I was assuming that Nintendo would go with Panasonic again. What I was saying in the pervious post is that one of the reason they didn't use backwards compatiblity in their cartrige consoles was they would of had to include a whole different port on the mother board in addition to the current one which was an added cost.
Post by: MikeHrusecky on March 12, 2003, 01:30:26 PM
"Yeah but I'm pretty sure the main reason PSX games were still made at a semi-regular rate after the PS2 launch was because of the backwards compatibility. Otherwise the amount of PSX games released probably would have dropped significantly. It's kind of a "chicken or the egg" situation. Is backwards compatibility a result of previous generation games still selling or are previous generation games still selling because of backwards compatibility?"
Correct. My point in fewer words was that with a transition phase from one console to the other, there is normally a sales slump as people wait for the new gear, which usually begins as early as 2-3 quarters ahead of launch and doesn't correct itself for at least as many quarters after launch, which can mean a year of revenues being shaken up (hence their hate for talking about future products). Before it just had to be tolerated due to the cartridges. But now with discs, one factor could be if the continued sales they'd get from GameCube games for that year are worth the R&D and manufacturing of backward compatibility. It's a market and money question that we can't really quantify ourselves, but it's at least one factor of many to consider. It would certainly just be a perk if GameCube games kept being released more than a year later.
I think Sony's main reasons for doing it was the volume of sales they could have to lessen the pain of the slump, and to a lesser extent the fact that the PS2 business was not going to make money for a good deal of time... so stretching out PSOne made a lot of sense. Since Nintendo's working on a smaller userbase scale, it's unknown if it would be worthwhile from the same standpoint. But as I said, it's at least one factor of many to consider.
Or they could go with a new set of suppliers and all bets could be off.
Post by: Kimchi on March 13, 2003, 12:22:46 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: rodtod
SCF, you only have 6 GCN games? o_O
Well.. each game is generally $40 or $50 US... 6 games alone is like $300. I bought my Gamecube a few months ago and only own 3 games so far, soon to be 4... Super Mario Sunshine, Zelda OoT/MQ, Animal Crossing, and in a few weeks Wind Waker. I've rented a few other games.
But then again.. I'm 16, living with my dad and I don't have a job.
Post by: theaveng on March 15, 2003, 03:54:28 AM
QuoteIn 1985, Atari released the 7800 ProSystem which was backwards-compatible with the 2600's ~1000 title library... and that was cart-based. Ditto the Gameboy Advance. So it IS possible for cart systems to be backwards-compatible as long as they share the same connector.
Originally posted by: BlkPaladin
The problem with backwards compatiblity in the cartrige based systems was price, because of the second I/O they would have to install.
Post by: Army_F_body on March 20, 2003, 12:06:03 PM
Post by: Termin8Anakin on March 20, 2003, 01:30:48 PM
Developers are STILL making PSOne games, and the console is still being sold everywhere. In catalogues here in Australia, the PSOne has more page space than the Gamecube! How's that for unfairness!
I reckon it would be a great idea to make GC2 backward compatible. It would take the heat away from Nintendo with the whole drought of activity between releasing console.
And people still might develop for it!
Post by: BoMfORd on May 02, 2003, 07:35:17 PM
Post by: Locke Cole on May 03, 2003, 11:16:26 AM
Post by: OldMan Nintendo on May 06, 2003, 07:48:23 AM
Post by: RickPowers on May 06, 2003, 07:55:25 AM
Post by: EggyToast on May 06, 2003, 08:27:54 AM
I do think Nintendo will incorporate backwards compatibility with their next console, simply because it's proven to work well for the Gameboy and they *know* that MS and Sony are going to try to incorporate backwards compatibility into their consoles. I personally think that was one of the big selling points for the PS2 -- people stopped buying the PS1 for games and bought the PS2 along with good PS1 games at launch, since the launch games were rather poor. It's a great way to launch a system, as you have a few hundred games to go with it right off the bat instead of 10.
Post by: Gamefreak on May 08, 2003, 11:16:57 PM
