Where would gaming be today if the Nintendo 64 used discs

it would be the same thing. PS1 won because of the games, not the hardware

File: 5gen.jpg (10KB, 450x253px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 450x253px

>>378218289
i still think the original playstation would still be successful because sony was willing to bend over backwards for third party companies when it was the exact opposite for nintendo. also sony was one of the biggest companies of the 90s so they can still plunge a shit ton of money into the playstation if it was failing. i dont think the playstation would have sold as much and wouldnt have gotten as much as a big library it had gotten tho. as for sega the saturn is still fucked, their biggest problem was soa and soj couldnt get along. they still would have pulled out and release the dreamcast early so nothing changes there.

so overall nothing really changes except for the fact that the original playstation would have been a little shittier

>>378218289
Square Enix would still be closer with Nintendo

Probably not too different
Discs weren't the only reason devs flocked to Playstation
Nintendo treated 3rd party devs like shit

>>378218381
>>378218736
This,it would have probably sold a bit better but not a lot because the Saturn and PS1 had already tons of CD games out around the time the N64 came out.

>>378218289
Nearly every 3D Zelda would have ended up different, actually. Ocarina of Time would have gotten the expansion pack, so a good portion of dungeons would happen one game sooner. I think WW specifically would have completely different sage awakening dungeons

>>378218289
It would've been shit. Remember the Phillips CD-i? That was the disc-based game console that Nintendo helped fund. Asking for a disc-based N64 would just mean making another CD-i.

As for how things would turn out, >>378218381 has it right. Sony still would've had the tech to make a system and still would've had the support needed to make it successful. Plus, everyone abandoning Nintendo was in part due to how dickish Nintendo was back in the SNES days, and a disc-based N64 would not have changed that.

File: segaisdead.jpg (341KB, 892x1200px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 892x1200px

ok new question, what if the saturn was built for 3d graphics in mind and SOA & SOJ got along with each other?

File: 1452369403698.gif (959KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

959KB, 1024x1024px

>>378218381
>People still believe this.

>>378219452
He is talking about games,you know the thing that the N64 has a serious lack.

>>378218381
You don't understand the significance of Nintendo's decision to go with cartridge based games, then. You say the reason PS1 won is because of games. That is half true. The reason it got those games was because it was a disc based system. Discs are easier to develop with and offered more space, so regardless of Nintendo's relationship with 3rd parties at the time, had they also opted for a disc based system, they would have gotten every single game PS1 had gotten, simply because they would have been a safe choice. Nintendo already had a gigantic install base at the time, so it'd be shooting yourself in the foot to not put those games on a Nintendo system. Sure, Playstation still could have made a big name for itself, but it wouldn't have been nearly successful as it was in the 90's, and PS2 would consequently not have been NEARLY as successful as it was, by a wide margin. Sony had a pretty trustworthy name in the 90's so I imagine that Playstation would still be a thing. But it's possible, maybe even likely that Nintendo would be top dog to this day. The success of the Playstation series pushed Nintendo towards more unconventional methods of gaming, such as the Wii and Wii U. If Nintendo had at least kept even footing with Playstation, and in the scenario we are talking about, it's likely N64 would have sold better than PS1, then Nintendo probably would have made the decision to stick to traditional means of gaming, normal controllers and all. Nintendo was in a tough spot in the late 90's and early 2000's because Playstation was clobbering them, so projects like the Wii were explored, because Nintendo needed something over Playstation. But in this case, if we assume Nintendo wasn't getting it's ass whipped by Playstation, they would have no reason to go the Wii route that eventually led to Wii U and Switch. In all likelihood they would continue to build more powerful consoles.

>>378219936
A lot of N64's top games couldn't have even been done a PS1

>>378220170
Are you kidding?

No, CD media storage does not make a game easier or harder to develop for. The hardware and software in the console itself determines that. What CDs do is reduce the cost of publishing a game, since a developer is no longer required to purchase expensive cartridges from the console manufacturer for every copy of the game they put out. This allows companies to put more money into the game development, or take more risks because less money is required for a profit, or just get more money and so produce more games. That might've helped the N64's chances, but it would not have affected how easy a game was to develop on the N64.

There would be no meaningful multiplatform ports between PS1/N64, certainly no more than what the PS1/Saturn had. As mentioned before, development costs are related to the console, not the storage medium. Both N64 and PS1 (and Saturn, for that matter) running CDs doesn't relate to how well games can be ported. The system architecture determines that. PS1/N64 would be hard to port between, as much as they actually were, because of the difference between their systems. The reason that PS3/360 saw so many cross-ports is because they were both basically the same system, not because they both used the same storage medium for games. (PS2 saw so many cross-ports because Sony basically strongarmed third party publishers into releasing PS2 ports on launch.)

Playstation owes half its popularity due to its marketing going after a completely new market, and it's availability as a CD player. PS2 received a lot of sales thanks to being a cheap DVD player. And, as noted above, Sony forced developers to port or just release their games on PS2, so it still likely would've been as popular as ever.

I'm not sure the GameCube or Dreamcast would've fared any differently if the N64 was more successful.

>>378218841
Nope
3rd parties were pissed off at Nintendo anyway, the cart's were just the final nail

>>378220907
95% of the PS1 library couldn't have been on the N64,or at least without being chopped up and lowering the music/fmv quality a lot.

we would have had a f zero track editor

>>378218289

Well for starters Nintendo wouldn't be forever 1-2 generations behind in terms of console tech for whatever their current console is at the time.

Nintendo is so far behind at this point when discussing console generations I always have to make a caveat for them "here are the systems for this gen and this is what Nintendo had at the time despite being as powerful as systems from two gens back."

>>378221086
That's what I am saying. If N64 used CD's we would have missed out on a lot of games.

>>378221217
But the gamecube was more powerful than the PS2.

>>378221217
>Nintendo wouldn't be forever 1-2 generations behind in terms of console tech
Nintendo simply could not keep up with companies who are selling their own consoles at a loss. Sony has multiple other divisions and Microsoft is basically using the Xbox as a Windows testing ground, so they can take deep losses when selling their systems. Nintendo just has video games, and can't really eat a financial loss four years out of every five and still survive as a company. They would've needed to back off anyways, and at that point, they might as well just go with simple and wacky tech for their consoles since nobody else is competing in their "low specs console" market.

>>378221419
oh boy here we go this again. now someones gonna post that burnout image and this thread gonna get derailed

>>378218289
Theyd be on top, the switch woulda came out 7 years ago baybay, and sd cartridge gaymes would be the norm by now

>>378220940
Well, as far as porting games to PS1 to N64 goes, I didn't imply that at all. I just said that since Nintendo has the install base, games would naturally come to the system. Everything else you said however, are all fair points.

>>378221678
You said that porting from PS1 to N64 would be a "safe choice", but that is not at all true. Porting is quite expensive, basically re-making the entire game, and no guarantee that it would generate enough sales to make it worth it. That's where the Saturn/PS1 comparison comes from: the PS1 actually did have a massively larger install base than the Saturn. If porting were easy, then every Saturn game would've seen a PS1 port after a few years. But very few did, primarily because the difficulty in porting meant that even (some) increased sales on PS1 would not necessarily cover the costs to port the game.

So no, not quite. Even with a massive install base, there was no certainty that games would receive ports. Perhaps the big names with guaranteed sales (Final Fantasy 7) but not most of them.

File: f62b8114ba11a3118cb2c99e3b9d9852.jpg (343KB, 1282x715px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 1282x715px

>>378221521

>>378222049
buuut wasnt the xbox teh stronkest:)

>>378222049
wheres the dreamcast version?

>>378221646
>Switch would have come out 7 years ago
nigga 7 years ago high end mobile devices had 512mb of ram and 1ghz cpus

>>378218289
More people would have been willing to develop for the system and in turn Nintendo would have seen the value in keeping up with the times.
The game cube would have sold better being able to plaay DVDs with that insight from the previous gen and then they wouldn't have had to turn to casuals with the Wii and would have just made a normal console.

They might actually be competing instead of looking for the next gimmick for the next audience that would evaporate before too long.

File: thinking-face.png (53KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 256x256px

>release a console more powerful than the genesis and pc engine
>gimp the console by skimping out on the cpu
>release a console more powerful than saturn and ps1
>gimp the console by having it use cartridges
>release a console more powerful than the ps2 and dreamcast
>gimp the console by having it use mini discs
>all consoles afterwards are just underpowered as fuck

if it wasnt for their handhelds nintendo would have joined sega a long ass time ago

>>378218289

Cinematic cancer would have damaged the industry far more than it already did.

>>378221975
Sorry but I literally didn't say porting from PS1 to N64. I said put the game on the system, I was already aware that porting wasn't easy between these two systems. I did in fact mean building from the ground up, which sure, would be a hard task.

>>378218381
PS1 won because of third party games. FMV in games was a huge selling point, so were cheap to produce disks as opposed to expensive cartridges.
Sony had polyphony digital and not much else in terms of first party.

>>378223875
Alright, fair enough. I thought you were talking about porting.

I don't think that N64 would've had that many games. Most companies jumped ship to PS1 because of how successful the PS1 was (a completely unrelated topic) and how dickish Nintendo had been up to that point. I doubt that Square would've bothered with the N64 after releasing Final Fantasy on the PS1, and Konami/Capcom probably would've kept their focus on the PS1 with the occasional game on the N64, as it turned out. Sure, Castlevania 64 probably would've ended up better, but not enough to compete with what SotN turned out to be.

Optical discs are shit. Go figure no one buys them anymore.

>>>/vr/

>>378224646

Optical discs are only worth your time if you enjoy watching loading screens or movies rather than playing video games.

>>378218289
Still loading I guess.

>>378221491
>nobody else is competing in their "low specs console" market.
The problem is they charge just as much or more for their consoles. The Switch is $300 when the PS4 slim can be gotten for $250-$280 with a game.