Kounan Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 Discs are also a lot cheaper in the same way. Of course, the discs are almost free, while cards would probably cost a euro, or 2 more, so not really a big difference and probably not a huge loss for nintendo to pay for that OK, I am guessing here using the experience my friend had in china. Also you can buy download cards in GAME etc. d/l only doesn't mean you are restricted to the e-Shop, they just have rrp on e-shop and allow retailers a bit more flexibility with pricing. In fact download codes don't need to take up shelf space at all which allows shops to offer a wider range of products without having to pay huge rent prices for a mega sized store. OK, that's true actually didn't think of that .
nekunando Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 One of the things that irritates me most with consoles that use discs is that they sound so loud if you're trying to play something late at night while your partner is trying to sleep To be honest, my Wii is loud at the best of times With no noise, better load times and, I guess, the potential to work across home and handheld platforms means that I'm very much in the cartridge camp
Kounan Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 (edited) Cartridges or flash memory are still a lot more expensive than a single Blu Ray. I'm not sure where people are getting this information. Go google a 64GB flash card (akin to a 3DS game cartridge, but a size that might be able to accommodate 'next gen' games); you're looking at around 15 quid. Obviously this is the price for us to buy it and it would be cheaper for them, but it's still expensive. Blu Ray discs on the other hand are very cheap, costing pence. Some of the Blu Ray loading time is also offset by hard drive installations and people get a Blu Ray player out of it, so it's not so bad. Mind you, Blu Ray drives aren't as costly as they used to be so it's not too expensive as a one off cost for manufacturers to include. Sure, it's going the way of cheap and high volume flash storage, but we're not quite there yet. The price is a lot cheaper for them, plus we are talking about more than 100m units if it's for both consoles. Also, not every game will be 60gb game, there will be a lot of games which are smaller. Plus if it's for a homeconsole and a handheld it has a lot more value for the game producer as there are almost no production cost for the second console and a bigger audience would probably be worth taking a smaller profit from the game. Again, maybe I am totally wrong, but again, the articles and the experience my friend had in China suggest I might me correct. Edited October 19, 2015 by Kounan
Sheikah Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 You said blu ray has gaming applications, those are fully realised in the Wii U with their blu ray (less branding) panasonic discs.I can also watch films on my Wii U, right? So what you are proposing is that I should have paid extra for my Wii U so I would be able to buy a more expensive version of a DVD to put into my Wii U to do something I can already do on the current Wii U (ie watch a film)? Why do that? Interesting, didn't know they were effectively playing Blu Rays. Personally, I think Nintendo are depriving their fanbase something cool for the sake of £6.13 (the cost of a Blu Ray license). For that extra money all Wii U owners could be playing Blu Ray films. It might not be everybody's bag but it's one feature on a checklist of several in terms of stepping up to make their console the same value for money as the competition. Seems silly to near enough have the drive but not play them. That's actually such a small cost that they could just swallow it so you wouldn't need to pay any extra. The price is a lot cheaper for them, plus we are talking about more than 100m units if it's for both consoles. Also, not every game will be 60gb game, there will be a lot of games which are smaller. Plus if it's for a homeconsole and a handheld it has a lot more value for the game producer as there are almost no production cost for the second console and a bigger audience would probably be worth taking a smaller profit from the game. Again, maybe I am totally wrong, but again, the articles and the experience my friend had in China suggest I might me correct. Ok £15 to us, but hardly going to be less than 7-8 for them. They're not direct manufacturers of these things after all. That's still a heck of an added cost per game; it's a considerable added cost for literally no reason. The market is fine with optical media at the moment. Also as a console of the next generation (NX is technically a generation ahead of PS4/X1), we should expect that their games will considerably step up, so using 64GB cards in this example isn't unreasonable at all.
Pestneb Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 Interesting, didn't know they were effectively playing Blu Rays. Personally, I think Nintendo are depriving their fanbase something cool for the sake of £6.13 (the cost of a Blu Ray license). For that extra money all Wii U owners could be playing Blu Ray films. It might not be everybody's bag but it's one feature on a checklist of several in terms of stepping up to make their console the same value for money as the competition. Seems silly to near enough have the drive but not play them. That's actually such a small cost that they could just swallow it so you wouldn't need to pay any extra. even with current Wii U sales a blu ray license would be in the region of £60 million. That money, for what essentially adds nothing to the system (It can play back films). Add on to that the fact that Sony, a direct competitor to Nintendo would be getting a portion of that income and it does make sense for them to shun Blu Ray. I imagine next gen Blu Ray will begin to become less prominent as streaming takes precedence - really Blu Ray is only the better option to those who have weak internet connections, which is an increasingly smaller demographic.
Sheikah Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 You're inflating the figures to 'all Wii Us', to make it sound bigger, but it's still just 6 quid per unit. That's a real shame that they held something like this back over that. Bear in mind, they went with the technology, just not the license! You're also not acknowledging that extra features make consoles more appealing, so there is going to be a return for that investment. Some people that are on the fence will jump if it has something else they also need. Honestly, if they charged an extra 6 quid for their console would that have made any bleeding difference? Nintendo being Nintendo once again.
Debug Mode Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 even with current Wii U sales a blu ray license would be in the region of £60 million. That money, for what essentially adds nothing to the system (It can play back films). Add on to that the fact that Sony, a direct competitor to Nintendo would be getting a portion of that income and it does make sense for them to shun Blu Ray. I imagine next gen Blu Ray will begin to become less prominent as streaming takes precedence - really Blu Ray is only the better option to those who have weak internet connections, which is an increasingly smaller demographic. Microsoft are also using Blu Ray by the way, a direct competitor to Sony. But why would they do that? You're giving money to the enemy and it supposedly adds "nothing to the system". No, it's not the whole playing Blu Ray movies, Blu Ray as a medium has an immense amount of storage capacity for a relatively cheap price and games these days need a hell of a lot of memory. This is why Blu Ray is important. I wouldn't care if it couldn't play Blu Ray movies, the Wii didn't bother me with using DVD games but not being able to play the movies but it still struck me as a little odd to not pay that very little license price just to say "Yeah, it can do that". I'm not sure why people can't understand this concept.
Pestneb Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 Microsoft are also using Blu Ray by the way, a direct competitor to Sony. But why would they do that? You're giving money to the enemy and it supposedly adds "nothing to the system". No, it's not the whole playing Blu Ray movies, Blu Ray as a medium has an immense amount of storage capacity for a relatively cheap price and games these days need a hell of a lot of memory. This is why Blu Ray is important. I wouldn't care if it couldn't play Blu Ray movies, the Wii didn't bother me with using DVD games but not being able to play the movies but it still struck me as a little odd to not pay that very little license price just to say "Yeah, it can do that". I'm not sure why people can't understand this concept. Every XBOX has been capable of running the current film media formats, no? So XBOX excluding blu ray would be an active move from them away from something that is associated with the XBOX brand. witht he one they had 3 options. 1) include blu ray 2) dvd only 3) no physical film media. Nintendo went with 3, and upgraded by allowing streaming. If Microsoft had gone with streaming only it would have been a downgrade compared to the previous system, and sticking with dvd would have looked antiquated compared to PS. On top of that they needed the capacity of blu-ray, and I suspect other divisions that don't compete directly with Sony were already licensing blu ray. Also I get the concept, I just don't think it's as great as a lot of people on here seem to. If I wanted a blu ray player then sure, £6 would be a steal... but I'm not that much of a film fan.. I have two dvd players available to me as it is and the only one that has been used was my PC dvd player for installing software... You're inflating the figures to 'all Wii Us', to make it sound bigger, but it's still just 6 quid per unit. That's a real shame that they held something like this back over that. Bear in mind, they went with the technology, just not the license! You're also not acknowledging that extra features make consoles more appealing, so there is going to be a return for that investment. Some people that are on the fence will jump if it has something else they also need. Honestly, if they charged an extra 6 quid for their console would that have made any bleeding difference? Nintendo being Nintendo once again. I'm not inflating at all. You suggested Nintendo could easily swallow a £6 fee, I was just pointing out to you that Nintendo would be paying that 10 million times so it would be £60 million for them. In fact I was actually understating the figure, because Nintendo have exceeded 10 million now and the cost is greater than the £6 I used. Extra features can sway someone on the fence. But you aren't acknowledging that extra cost can sway people the other way. £5 might not be a large amount of money, but if you have only £200 available to spend and something costs £200.01 you can't afford it.
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 If having Blu Ray is more about size than about movie playback - has there been any complaints about the size of the regular WiiU discs? Im sure everyone gets the attraction of added features, why not tack on a toaster too since its nice and convenient? The point is cost and I think I trust Nintendo knows whats best when it comes to balancing the books.
Sheikah Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 (edited) But you aren't acknowledging that extra cost can sway people the other way. £5 might not be a large amount of money, but if you have only £200 available to spend and something costs £200.01 you can't afford it. Come off it, who would be able to afford 200 quid but say no deal at 200 quid and 1p? Same goes to 200 and 206. I'm pointing out that ultimately that amount of money extra would make very little difference in swaying a customer either way. Just seems silly to me that they have the tech but say no to the license over such a small cost! It seems to me that people here are seriously underestimating Blu Ray playback; if you don't like it, great, but it is very popular. People like to own things. Edited October 19, 2015 by Sheikah
Ashley Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 (edited) What kind of comment is that? So it's okay for you and others to say it is important, but if anyone says it isn't then it's some kind of offensive retort? You don't have to get defensive because I don't agree with you. A response to another "I'm right" tone kind of response. "It really isn't". Not "I don't think it's important". Perhaps you don't mean it, but quite often you come across as not accepting other opinions. I do not care one bit if you don't agree with me (in fact, it's always good to see other opinions) but the delivery always seems less like you're disagreeing and more like you're dismissing. Add on to that the fact that Sony, a direct competitor to Nintendo would be getting a portion of that income and it does make sense for them to shun Blu Ray. They're completely different businesses. Sony Computer Entertainment would not get any money from it. It's like how Samsung and Apple are rivals when it comes to making phones, but Samsung actually make parts that go into iPhones. Edited October 19, 2015 by Ashley
liger05 Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 The worry when you start coming up with reasons why certain features are not needed is you can do that for a number of things. Blu ray, storage space, instant pause and play, Bluetooth support etc etc. One could come up with reasons on why these sort of things are not necessary.
markderoos Posted October 20, 2015 Posted October 20, 2015 The worry when you start coming up with reasons why certain features are not needed is you can do that for a number of things. Blu ray, storage space, instant pause and play, Bluetooth support etc etc. One could come up with reasons on why these sort of things are not necessary. Absolutely true, and also the other way around. Only 6,- extra for Bluray support, so why not? I think there are more than enough features you could add that cost only a little extra. But adding them all would make the console too expensive. It's one feature out of a hundred that could have been added. They obviously thought it over and made a choice. For example, neither does Apple TV have a build-in Bluray player. Some consumers would've wanted it, some like it as it is. It's about finding that sweet spot and of course there will always be people who would want it different than it came out. If they did a good job is a whole other discussion and obviously a matter of taste and your definition of a good job.
Sheikah Posted October 20, 2015 Posted October 20, 2015 The comparisons being made here to other things are not good. They already have the Blu Ray drive, which is the key difference, and is without doubt the big cost hurdle that they have already overcome. If you're going to make the argument that Nintendo must know what was best to include/exclude from their console then I'm going to remind you they got everything wrong on the Wii U, it bombed, and launched at 300 quid.
markderoos Posted October 20, 2015 Posted October 20, 2015 The comparisons being made here to other things are not good. They already have the Blu Ray drive, which is the key difference, and is without doubt the big cost hurdle that they have already overcome. If you're going to make the argument that Nintendo must know what was best to include/exclude from their console then I'm going to remind you they got everything wrong on the Wii U, it bombed, and launched at 300 quid. I understand what you mean, and I'm not saying I disagree. but you're laying some words in my mouth. I never stated Nintendo know what was best and neither did I state it didn't bomb, so no need to remind me If you put some extra effort in how you say things (less hostile), I think there will be less unnecessary tension in this discussion. But ok, let's say you didn't mean it that hostile. Back on topic: I personaly like what the Wii U has on offer, but then again I also loved the Dreamcast That the Wii U is a commercial failure is a fact, but to me as a gamer I spent more than enough hours on it to be happy with owning it. @Sheikah: what would NX have to become for you to find it your perfect console the next (or this) generation?
Sheikah Posted October 20, 2015 Posted October 20, 2015 (edited) I understand what you mean, and I'm not saying I disagree. but you're laying some words in my mouth. I never stated Nintendo know what was best and neither did I state it didn't bomb, so no need to remind me If you put some extra effort in how you say things (less hostile), I think there will be less unnecessary tension in this discussion. But ok, let's say you didn't mean it that hostile. Back on topic: I personaly like what the Wii U has on offer, but then again I also loved the Dreamcast That the Wii U is a commercial failure is a fact, but to me as a gamer I spent more than enough hours on it to be happy with owning it. @Sheikah: what would NX have to become for you to find it your perfect console the next (or this) generation? Well if you look at my post I never addressed a specific person when I said that, it was more of a collective addressing of the opposition's arguments. That particular part where I said Nintendo didn't pick the best things to include/chop was actually in response to King V who said Nintendo would know best when it came to balancing the books and picking features...given they released a 300 quid last gen console lacking some very basic features, I'd very much argue they didn't. As for your question - as someone who has been spoiled by other consoles I know what features should really be a standard now, and other things I'd like to see too. Here's my wish list: - Graphical power above the PS4 and X1 (in line with the next generation) - A standardised controller - Online functionality on par with the other systems; easy to add and play with friends (and message them), proper account system - At least half of all content to not be a sequel or rehash of an existing type of gameplay to bring back people who are bored of the same, decades-old franchises - Epic launch lineup - Option to have subscription-based access to back catalogue (as well as traditional model), and fairly cheap - Communication with third parties when developing the console, deals struck for new game development and investment/startup in western studios - For them to listen to their fans (personal hope: turn amiibo into toys and withdrawn them from the gaming sphere; I can dream) Edited October 20, 2015 by Sheikah
markderoos Posted October 20, 2015 Posted October 20, 2015 Well if you look at my post I never addressed a specific person when I said that, it was more of a collective addressing of the opposition's arguments. That particular part where I said Nintendo didn't pick the best things to include/chop was actually in response to King V who said Nintendo would know best when it came to balancing the books and picking features... Apologies accepted. Just messing with you Back to your wish list: I agree that those are industry standards by now. Do you have any wishes when it comes to innovation, anything refreshing and new when it comes to the hardware? Or do you prefer the innovation coming from the software? Or both perhaps? I'm very keen to find out it the scrolling shoulder buttons are indeed added to their next controller. But even more intrigued if and what it can add to gameplay and if it will be something third party developers will jump on.
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted October 20, 2015 Posted October 20, 2015 Absolutely true, and also the other way around.Only 6,- extra for Bluray support, so why not? I think there are more than enough features you could add that cost only a little extra. But adding them all would make the console too expensive. It's one feature out of a hundred that could have been added. They obviously thought it over and made a choice. For example, neither does Apple TV have a build-in Bluray player. Some consumers would've wanted it, some like it as it is. It's about finding that sweet spot and of course there will always be people who would want it different than it came out. If they did a good job is a whole other discussion and obviously a matter of taste and your definition of a good job. That's my point. To want every feature under the sun just for the sake of convenience is naive. Nintendo aren't Multimedia giants like Sony and Microsoft who have in-house divisions for a range of technologies - which they can rightly implement into their entertainment systems. Nintendo doesn't have that luxury, so they would need to outsource, which costs money as it did when their worked/are working with Panasonic. I believe Nintendo understand this which is why they have been pretty good at making profits even with commercial failures here and there - so yes, Nintendo know best according to their business model.
Fierce_LiNk Posted October 20, 2015 Posted October 20, 2015 Thats fine - but we should remember that Sony and Microsoft are Multimedia giants, with Im sure, lots of R&D within DVD/Blu Ray tech - its natural for these devices to have the feature to watch movies. It was definitely relevant back in the GC/PS2 era as the streaming services were not on the radar and where gaming magazines were providing DVDs with reviews etc. I bought a Panasonic Q for that feature essentially, but I guess my point is if its going to bring down the cost £50-£100 by not having a standard DVD - Im for that instead. Like @Sheikah pointed out, the WiiU already has a Blu Ray drive. I didn't actually know this. That's incredibly lame to have pretty much everything there except for the ability to play movie discs. It's a mixed message considering that you can stream stuff through Netflix on the system. If somebody were to ask you the question, "Can you watch movies on your WiiU?" you can't give a straightforward yes or no answer. If they're going to allow streaming, why not go all the way and allow us to use our physical movie discs, whether they're DVD and/or Blu Ray? The WiiU is giving/has given tons of mixed messages up until now and this is just another to add to that list. I still think it's a somewhat important point because if you were to only have the money to buy one console, you'd be placing each system side by side and be analysing what each one can and can't do. To some, (me, for instance) it's a valid reason to favour another system over the WiiU or at least give it some sort of edge. Maybe not by itself, but it's another reason to favour another system over this one. I don't really care that Sony and Microsoft are multimedia giants. I'm a gamer and a consumer. From my point of view, I'm looking for a games console that can fit my needs and will give me the most value for money. Nintendo are competing for the same space that Sony and Microsoft are, so they have to have a system that also competes or at least challenges its rivals in multiple areas.
Falcon_BlizZACK Posted October 20, 2015 Posted October 20, 2015 (edited) I don't really care that Sony and Microsoft are multimedia giants. I'm a gamer and a consumer. From my point of view, I'm looking for a games console that can fit my needs and will give me the most value for money. Nintendo are competing for the same space that Sony and Microsoft are, so they have to have a system that also competes or at least challenges its rivals in multiple areas. I guess thats the counundrum, technically speaking Nintendo can't compete with those two - If Sony brought out a new range of Playstation TV (a hybrid) - Nintendo can not compete in that same arena as they have no expertise in that field. Likewise, as a consumer, you go where your needs are met. But not expect a company to be something it doesn't seem to want to be. I guess its drawing to the time to 'agree to disagree' - All I hope Nintendo focuses on with the NX is to provide a console which is relative in power to Sony and Microsoft so third party games may be easily ported, fix and polish 1st party games, rejuvenate franchises and build a solid online community. Everything else for me is secondary. Edited October 20, 2015 by King_V
Pestneb Posted October 20, 2015 Posted October 20, 2015 Like @Sheikah pointed out, the WiiU already has a Blu Ray drive. I didn't actually know this. That's incredibly lame to have pretty much everything there except for the ability to play movie discs. AFAIK the bluray bits Nintendo have in the Wii U go only as far as reading data off a disc and sending it elsewhere. A full Blu Ray system (to my understanding) has additional chipsets to decrypt data contained on commercial blu ray film discs, the drive itself is only a part of the puzzle. anyway, to quote the late Iwata "The reason for [the lack of dvd/blu ray playback] is that we feel that enough people already have devices that are capable of playing DVDs and Blu-ray, such that it didn't warrant the cost involved to build that functionality into the Wii U console because of the patents related to those technologies."
Ashley Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Just like they think watching streams isn't fun. Or playing online leads to grooming and/or verbal abuse. Or that there's no reason we might want purchases tied to accounts. Nintendo, quite frankly, either take us for mugs or don't care enough. They're constantly coming up with excuses as to why they don't do things, often standardised things, and try and hide behind the "Nintendo difference".
Mr_Master_X2 Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) The main plus of solid state media for me is load times. GC kept load times down with tiny discs (there were advantages) but obviously that left less room for actual storage. Plus yes, prices are dropping, but a 32Gb sd card for example is about £8, a 64Gb card is about twice that. not a huge amount, but compared to a 50Gb disc that is available for 40p... (I realise companies producing on mass scale have discounts, but just as an example) So a £20 game would easily become £25 for the consumer, if not £35. A £40 game up to £45-£55, £50 £55-£65. It may seem a small price, but it's between 1 cheap game and 1/3 an expansive one. Having a reasonable capacity for the internal storage and d/l only titles would be more do-able in my mind, average attach ratio for games consoles is about 10, I would say a 1Tb internal hard drive would be reasonable, maybe with a 500Gb entry level diskless version. NOTE: Sorry if this quote is a page so back, I had something typed out before then N-Europe blew up. The problem with these prices is; they're mass consumer prices. They'd actually be cheaper to Nintendo since no store has to take a cut. Then by the time Nintendo actuality needs them they'd be cheaper. Then they'd be cheaper because they're buying in mass bulk. Then cheaper because Nintendo probably strikes some sort of deal. Then AFTER this they'd go down because they'd be being more mass-produced and so on (think of the magic the consoles going bluray did for blurays in general). Then consider Nintendo doesn't have to fork out for bluray drives/sets, expensive fans, bluray licenses, and future replacement consoles due to the inner working being so fragile a good portion always break down (how much of MS's profit has been lost to THIS very problem?) There was something else about this I wanted to say but I brain farted. An issue I can see is those who wish Nintendo ill will spread info that Nintendo is going backwards or kiddy for using cards, and I can see Sony unwilling to let go of their medium advantage (will they come out with their own unique medium again next gen? Or just go digital with MS? Will next gen see a completely fractured medium base? Be weird.) Edited October 21, 2015 by Mr_Master_X2
dazzybee Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 A response to another "I'm right" tone kind of response. "It really isn't". Not "I don't think it's important". Perhaps you don't mean it, but quite often you come across as not accepting other opinions. What's the difference between "Blueray is very important" and "No it isn't"? Nothing, there both statements of opinion declared in the same manner. Or even "Nintendo, quite frankly, either take us for mugs or don't care enough" Another opinion presented as a factual statement. It's how we all talk. We don't need to precursor with "I think that..." all the time.
Ashley Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 What's the difference between "Blueray is very important" and "No it isn't"? Nothing, there both statements of opinion declared in the same manner. Or even "Nintendo, quite frankly, either take us for mugs or don't care enough" Another opinion presented as a factual statement. It's how we all talk. We don't need to precursor with "I think that..." all the time. Maybe it's the sum of the whole statement. Words like "ridiculous", "gobsmacking". Or maybe it's just prior to that you were talking about "people" (ie a whole) and then said it isn't important. It ties together the two concept (all people think one thing, when the opposite is true). And part of it could be the result of history. I really didn't mean a big thing by it. As I said, ultimately I'm not affected by how you think.
Recommended Posts