Squaresoft has made a terrible MISTAKE!!!
BWA
What??? FFVII was released in Japan, NOT the US, last time I checked...
there's about 5.5 million PSX's in Japan, so that's more than 50% of all
PSX owners... besides, theres probably not even 3 million N64's sold IN
JAPAN...
Josh Boyd wrote:
>
> For your information... 3 million sales is horrible... There's about
> 300 million people in the USA alone... That's 1 out of every 100 people
> in the USA, if all of the sales were in the USA... I'm sure that
> there's more than just 1 person out of every 100 that owns a Console
> system...
Michael Stern
This is the worst thing that could happen. I know it is old.. but I
still belive that this is wrong! All of you should know what I mean!
PLAYSTATION FF7?! THIS IS HORRIBLE! I SAY WE REVOLT!! ALL OF US!!
EVEN THE PSX OWNERS!! MAKE FF GAMES FOR ALL SYSTEMS!!! STRIKE! STRIKE!
STRIKE!!
Josh!
...what? Dumb post? Didn't you figure all this out about two years ago?
Get over it. Seriously.
J
Marcus S.
R.Talon wrote:
>
> Wow, a pretty moronic post if I do say so myself. Why did they make a
> mistake? Because they're a company that needs to stay in business, so they
> publish a game for a system they believe will make them money? Come on,
> now. If you really want to play FF7, GO BUY A PSX!!! Plus, FF7 has
> already sold 2 million+ units, so from an economics standpoint, Square made
> a good decision. Those programmers from Rare on the other hand............
I agree with you on the first part (the post was pretty dumb),
but the N64 is definitely not an unwise business decision to
program games for. In my part of the world, almost every N64
game (that is, all except MK) were constantly sold out, as well
as the N64s themselves. I believe that the reason that Square
didn't write FF7 for the N64 was because:
1. It's supposed to be much easier to program on a PSX
2. They liked the idea of having lots of space
3. There was a large time interval between SNES and N64, during
which Square wanted to keep up with technology. The system that
mostly filled this gap was the PSX.
Deadfrog
Michael Stern wrote:
>
> This is the worst thing that could happen. I know it is old.. but I
> still belive that this is wrong! All of you should know what I mean!
> PLAYSTATION FF7?! THIS IS HORRIBLE! I SAY WE REVOLT!! ALL OF US!!
> EVEN THE PSX OWNERS!! MAKE FF GAMES FOR ALL SYSTEMS!!! STRIKE! STRIKE!
> STRIKE!!
What a fuckin dumbass!
Im sorry if you bought a N64 and just found out about FF7 for
playstation. Shoulda kept up with the news. Square cant make games for
other systems until their 1 year contract with Sony is up, even then it
is unlikely they will make games for the N64 due to space limitations.
Why did Square chose sony?
1. The PSX is more sutied for a game like FF7 which could not fit on a
cartridge of 64dd
2.Making games on a cd is easier and cheaper(notice how all N64 games
cost $70 plus and all PSX games are around $50)
3.Square did not want to wait an extra year and a half for the N64 to be
finished when the PSX was already out. If FF7 had been released now for
the N64 it would have sold much less because there are alot less people
with N64s than PSXs
Deadfrog
Josh Boyd
> Wow, a pretty moronic post if I do say so myself. Why did they make a
> mistake? Because they're a company that needs to stay in business, so they
> publish a game for a system they believe will make them money? Come on,
> now. If you really want to play FF7, GO BUY A PSX!!! Plus, FF7 has
> already sold 2 million+ units, so from an economics standpoint, Square made
> a good decision. Those programmers from Rare on the other hand............
2 million+ units is a pretty small amount of sales...
--
Are you bored? Do you wish you had fun and exciting people to spend
your
time with? Do you want some lively company that you can count on? Do
you want a magnetic personality? If so, then this is for you --- Just
call 1-800-borgs-4u --- Yes that's 1-800-borgs-4u.
And remember --- the borg is for you.
Josh
Luke Drelick
Michael Stern wrote:
>
> This is the worst thing that could happen. I know it is old.. but I
> still belive that this is wrong! All of you should know what I mean!
> PLAYSTATION FF7?! THIS IS HORRIBLE! I SAY WE REVOLT!! ALL OF US!!
> EVEN THE PSX OWNERS!! MAKE FF GAMES FOR ALL SYSTEMS!!! STRIKE! STRIKE!
> STRIKE!!
Grow up plz and face reality. I have no problem with it, because Square
making the game on the PSX has it's benefits. Besides, the game's
supposed to suck compared to the others anyways...
--
-=[Butz Klauzer/Lassic/Luke Drelick ]=-
-=[President of Duky Incorporated, MZX design team]=-
-=[http://www.chocobo.org/~butz ]=-
-=[You no-good jerk noggins! I won't forget this! ]=-
R.Talon
Wow, a pretty moronic post if I do say so myself. Why did they make a
mistake? Because they're a company that needs to stay in business, so they
publish a game for a system they believe will make them money? Come on,
now. If you really want to play FF7, GO BUY A PSX!!! Plus, FF7 has
already sold 2 million+ units, so from an economics standpoint, Square made
a good decision. Those programmers from Rare on the other hand............
RT
Michael Stern <mst...@interaccess.com> wrote in article
<335FFA...@interaccess.com>...
Zemeron
Come on man, I am probely the most devote N64 person here and even I
relize that the playstation was a better choice for Final Fantasy 7.
But just wait eventualy, IMHO, Square will finish Final Fantasy SGI
for the 64dd. I can post a short movie of the beta version if anyone
wants it.
Scott
In article <335FFA...@interaccess.com>, mst...@interaccess.com wrote:
>This is the worst thing that could happen. I know it is old.. but I
>still belive that this is wrong! All of you should know what I mean!
>PLAYSTATION FF7?! THIS IS HORRIBLE! I SAY WE REVOLT!! ALL OF US!!
>EVEN THE PSX OWNERS!! MAKE FF GAMES FOR ALL SYSTEMS!!! STRIKE! STRIKE!
>STRIKE!!
>
I don't know about a strike but I am starting to wonder whether
Square/Aques may be spreading itself too thin. I mean the CG movies, sports
games ,etc.. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Maxwell - scottm (at) nic (dot) com
"Good morning doctors. I have taken the liberty of removing Windows 95
from my hard drive" - What Arthur C. Clarke wishes HAL had said.
Scott
In article <33603432...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
zem...@geocities.com (Zemeron) wrote:
>Come on man, I am probely the most devote N64 person here and even I
>relize that the playstation was a better choice for Final Fantasy 7.
>But just wait eventualy, IMHO, Square will finish Final Fantasy SGI
>for the 64dd. I can post a short movie of the beta version if anyone
>wants it.
>
I think eventually something will surface for the N64 from Square. I think
they'll deal with the size "problem" of the 64dd. They couldn't even fit
the game on 1 cd. SPeaking of which, does anyone know whether multi-dd
games will be doable? I don't see any reason why not.
Joe Blow
> If FF7 had been released now for
> the N64 it would have sold much less because there are alot less people
> with N64s than PSXs
FYI, that PSX market share > N64 market share gap in the US is narrowing
fast. And FF would have made a lot of money in the N64, but you're right,
a game of that length isn't technically feasible on a cart.
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
N64DD games will be $40 or less for NEW games...get a clue.
Lewis
I don't know what the big fuss over Final Fantasy is about, I'd much rather
have Zelda 64 anyday of the week. Still, if you're wanting it that bad,
get it for your PC.
Michael Stern <mst...@interaccess.com> wrote in article
<335FFA...@interaccess.com>...
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
> Grow up plz and face reality. I have no problem with it, because Square
> making the game on the PSX has it's benefits. Besides, the game's
> supposed to suck compared to the others anyways...
Yeah, when they get some sense and make a N64DD game or PC game, then maybe
it'll be a good game, unlike ffVII
Herman McClain
R.Talon wrote:
>
> Wow, a pretty moronic post if I do say so myself. Why did they make a
> mistake? Because they're a company that needs to stay in business, so they
> publish a game for a system they believe will make them money? Come on,
> now. If you really want to play FF7, GO BUY A PSX!!! Plus, FF7 has
> already sold 2 million+ units, so from an economics standpoint, Square made
> a good decision. Those programmers from Rare on the other hand............
>
> RT
>
> r.t...@ix.netcom.com
You're a moron, yourself! Square could've made FF7 on the N64
and still would've made more than enough $$$ to stay in business!
Square isn't as poor as you may think! It's pretty ironic that
Square never complained about carts, back in the days of
Super Famicom / Super NES. Its ALL about greed, nothing more --
those hypocrites!
Jesse Dorland
"Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
>N64DD games will be $40 or less for NEW games...get a clue.
And you know this because??? I think you'd better bite your tongue if you
don't know what you're talking about. No 64DD disk price has been confirmed.
You're the one who needs to get a clue, and stop spreading flamebait (and bad
flamebait at that; if you're just naturally mean and abrasive, then pardon my
misinterpretation of your post and disregard my "flamebait" comment).
I'm going on the current price of N64 cartridges, which seems to me to be a
more sound method than simply pulling guesses out of the air. N64 cartridges
now cost between $60 and $80. It only makes sense that 64DD disks, which have
a larger capacity and are partly rewritable, would cost more.
$40 is ridiculous. Nintendo already charges a $35 royalty to 3rd party
companies for every N64 cartridge. And the cost of making the carts is into
the double-digits. 64DD disks, even if the royalty is less, will cost the
same amount or more to make, and a $40 price would mean the companies are
losing money on every copy of a game they sell.
-Jesse
====================================
Very funny Scotty!
Now beam down my clothes!
====================================
Jesse Dorland
"Joe Blow" <fre...@rastafari.com> wrote:
If anything an N64 version would have made MORE money. The selection of N64
titles is small right now, and anything for the system sells like mad. At
least 6 of the top 10 best selling video games for any given month are N64
games.
Since it would be the only RPG available, it would sell millions of copies.
It would have virtually no competition.
Wolf
jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse Dorland) writes:
>If anything an N64 version would have made MORE money. The selection of N64
>titles is small right now, and anything for the system sells like mad. At
>least 6 of the top 10 best selling video games for any given month are N64
>games.
>Since it would be the only RPG available, it would sell millions of copies.
>It would have virtually no competition.
But the only way it would have made money was if they sold it
for over $100. Square would have had to use the largest cart size
Nintendo allows, hell maybe an even bigger one with special permission.
Those things cost a lot of money to produce, plus the royalty to
Nintendo. Now if you were square, which sounds better: 3 million copies
at a production cost of 15 bucks a piece, or 3 million at $35to $50 a
piece? They had to consider that, and for the vision they had for FF7,
there was NO WAY to fit it on a N64 cart. Even DD64! FF7 would have
required massive changes to fit inside of Nintendo's cartridge port. I
can't see every parent with a child that owns a 64 plunking down $100+
for a game with a teen or mature rating, either. FF7 is on the
Playstation. Please people, get over it. System loyalty is so passe it's
not funny anymore.
Wolf
--
________________________________________________________________________
Wolves and humans have a lot in common. The true difference is that you
don't see wolves f*@king each other over every day. --Me
lho...@hubcap.clemson.edu | And no, I'm not a misanthrope. =) Really.
T McDonald
In article <scottm-ya02408000...@news.erols.com>,
Scott <sco...@nic.com> wrote:
>
>I don't know about a strike but I am starting to wonder whether
>Square/Aques may be spreading itself too thin. I mean the CG movies, sports
>games ,etc.. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
Depends what you mean by spreading themselves too thin. They'll do as
many projects as they can in order of profitability. They probably won't
have an excess of labor, so their product quality might diminish slightly.
But they have a good rep and that's gold in the bank, and you can bet
everyone in the company takes that to heart if they want to stay working.
Otherwise, they'll go the way of the dinosaur, and I'll wager that because
they are in the competative industry they are in they are WELL aware of
this. I guess it comes down to, do you expect them to act in favor of
their long term interest or short term intrests? I'm betting the former.
Doug
I AGREE!
Zemeron
Your logic is so fucked up I cant believe it. 64dd disks will cost
something like $12. I agree that games won't be $40 but I can easly
see $50 games. The disks don't even need a battery to retain their
info.
On 25 Apr 1997 07:55:01 -0700, jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse
Dorland) wrote:
Zemeron
On Fri, 25 Apr 1997 13:16:31 -0700, "Marcus S."
<mar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>and it COULD end up meaning that the disks will be
>cheaper than the cartridge. Yeah, right. Oh, well.
>Maybe.
Hello, is anyone home? Nintedno has already confirmed that the price
of disks will be more than CDs but FAR less than the price of carts.
Marcus S.
Jesse Dorland wrote:
>
> "Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
>
> >N64DD games will be $40 or less for NEW games...get a clue.
>
> And you know this because??? I think you'd better bite your tongue if you
> don't know what you're talking about. No 64DD disk price has been confirmed.
> You're the one who needs to get a clue, and stop spreading flamebait (and bad
> flamebait at that; if you're just naturally mean and abrasive, then pardon my
> misinterpretation of your post and disregard my "flamebait" comment).
>
> I'm going on the current price of N64 cartridges, which seems to me to be a
> more sound method than simply pulling guesses out of the air. N64 cartridges
> now cost between $60 and $80. It only makes sense that 64DD disks, which have
> a larger capacity and are partly rewritable, would cost more.
>
> $40 is ridiculous. Nintendo already charges a $35 royalty to 3rd party
> companies for every N64 cartridge. And the cost of making the carts is into
> the double-digits. 64DD disks, even if the royalty is less, will cost the
> same amount or more to make, and a $40 price would mean the companies are
> losing money on every copy of a game they sell.
>
> -Jesse
The fact that Nintendo is releasing a DD is a sign
that they are finally doing something to be kinder
to the companies that program for them -- or probably
rather that they have responded to the large number
of companies turning their backs on the N64 -- so
that may mean that they have started a campaign to
get the companies back. Hopefully. This may mean
that they'll reduce the exorbitant royalty price,
Joe Moone
Michael Stern <mst...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>This is the worst thing that could happen. I know it is old.. but I
>still belive that this is wrong! All of you should know what I mean!
>PLAYSTATION FF7?! THIS IS HORRIBLE! I SAY WE REVOLT!! ALL OF US!!
>EVEN THE PSX OWNERS!! MAKE FF GAMES FOR ALL SYSTEMS!!! STRIKE! STRIKE!
>STRIKE!!
Oh boo hoo. They're going to be making an FF game for the computer, so
that's all we need. Besides, what if this "revolt" and "strike" drove
Square out of business < hah! >. They're one of the few good RPG
makers left.
Cryptic Bug
In article <12df7c54...@news.primenet.com>,
jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse Dorland) wrote:
> $40 is ridiculous. Nintendo already charges a $35 royalty to 3rd party
> companies for every N64 cartridge. And the cost of making the carts is into
> the double-digits.
they would be about $49. $35 Royalty? Prove it. last we heard, the
Cartridges cost about $30 (to 3ps), and the royalty is a lot less, but
we can't say for sure, because the developers don't talk.
> 64DD disks, even if the royalty is less, will cost the same amount
> or more to make, and a $40 price would mean the companies are losing
> money on every copy of a game they sell.
Like I said, Carts at last report were $30 or so, regardless of size
(to the 3ps, again), and last reported cost of a 64DD disk was $7-9, a
lot less than a Cart, which is why they'll be cheaper.
--
Cryptic Bug
Cr...@vcn.bc.ca
Marcus S.
Scott wrote:
>
> In article <33603432...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
> zem...@geocities.com (Zemeron) wrote:
>
> >Come on man, I am probely the most devote N64 person here and even I
> >relize that the playstation was a better choice for Final Fantasy 7.
> >But just wait eventualy, IMHO, Square will finish Final Fantasy SGI
> >for the 64dd. I can post a short movie of the beta version if anyone
> >wants it.
> >
> I think eventually something will surface for the N64 from Square. I think
> they'll deal with the size "problem" of the 64dd. They couldn't even fit
> the game on 1 cd. SPeaking of which, does anyone know whether multi-dd
> games will be doable? I don't see any reason why not.
The reason it took so many CDs is the massive MPEGs. That would
not be on a N64 (some would say that the polygons would be so good
that MPEG would not be better than what you can do with them). I
don't understand how people can justify the statement that no new
FF will fit on a cartridge...
Hanson
jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse Dorland) wrote:
>I'm going on the current price of N64 cartridges, which seems to me to be a
>more sound method than simply pulling guesses out of the air. N64 cartridges
>now cost between $60 and $80. It only makes sense that 64DD disks, which have
>a larger capacity and are partly rewritable, would cost more.
No it doesn't. Manufacturing magnetic disks is far less expensive than ROM
carts. By your reasoning, CD's should cost hundreds of dollars.
>$40 is ridiculous. Nintendo already charges a $35 royalty to 3rd party
>companies for every N64 cartridge. And the cost of making the carts is into
>the double-digits. 64DD disks, even if the royalty is less, will cost the
>same amount or more to make, and a $40 price would mean the companies are
>losing money on every copy of a game they sell.
An 8 meg cart costs somewhere between $20-$25 to produce. The royalty is under
$10. The disks will cost somewhere between $9-$15. 64DD games should cost
around $10 less than carts, or $50 first party and $60 third party. One of the
reasons for 64DD production is that disks cost much less per meg than carts.
Hanson
"Aw, just get one of those inflatable women. But make sure it's a woman, though, because one time I...heh."
- Chief Wiggum
Bryan Wall
>If anything an N64 version would have made MORE money. The selection of N64
>titles is small right now, and anything for the system sells like mad. At
>least 6 of the top 10 best selling video games for any given month are N64
>games.
>
>Since it would be the only RPG available, it would sell millions of copies.
>It would have virtually no competition.
Actually, N64 titles have to outsell PSX titles about 10:1 to make the
same amount of money. This is because PSX CD's cost about $0.50 each
to produce, while N64 carts cost about $35.00 each to produce. That
is why there will never be many games made for the N64. Game
companies exist to make a profit, and when they make more profit
selling 100,000 PSX games, than 500,000 N64 games - which do you think
they will choose to develop for?
Bryan
Sammael
>You're a moron, yourself! Square could've made FF7 on the N64
>and still would've made more than enough $$$ to stay in business!
>Square isn't as poor as you may think! It's pretty ironic that
>Square never complained about carts, back in the days of
>Super Famicom / Super NES. Its ALL about greed, nothing more --
>those hypocrites!
Maybe the reason Square didn't complain about carts in the old days
of Super famicom/Super nes is because there wasn't any cd based
console system! Or are you just some braindead zombie who didn't know
that?
You're so stupid! Do you really don't think that ALL companies are
trying to make as much money as they can(including Nintendo)?
You're the biggest moron of them all.
Sammael
Brian Lee
In article <01bc514a$ea5e2740$2cfc45cf@default> "Joe Blow" <fre...@rastafari.com> writes:
>From: "Joe Blow" <fre...@rastafari.com>
>Subject: Re: Squaresoft has made a terrible MISTAKE!!!
>Date: 25 Apr 1997 07:40:43 GMT
>> If FF7 had been released now for
>> the N64 it would have sold much less because there are alot less people
>> with N64s than PSXs
>FYI, that PSX market share > N64 market share gap in the US is narrowing
>fast. And FF would have made a lot of money in the N64, but you're right,
>a game of that length isn't technically feasible on a cart.
Also Square's major concern shouldn't be American market. It is their
Japanese market where FFs are hottest item, and N-64's number is nowhere near
PSXs in Japan.
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
> The reason it took so many CDs is the massive MPEGs. That would
> not be on a N64 (some would say that the polygons would be so good
> that MPEG would not be better than what you can do with them). I
> don't understand how people can justify the statement that no new
> FF will fit on a cartridge...
Maybe if they combined the N64DD and a cart, they could make a super-game
type thing...and with the storage the DD has to offer, i doubt a second
cart would be needed...
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
> Actually, N64 titles have to outsell PSX titles about 10:1 to make the
> same amount of money. This is because PSX CD's cost about $0.50 each
> to produce, while N64 carts cost about $35.00 each to produce. That
> is why there will never be many games made for the N64. Game
> companies exist to make a profit, and when they make more profit
> selling 100,000 PSX games, than 500,000 N64 games - which do you think
> they will choose to develop for?
But the DDs cost about the same as a floppy disk to make, so...anyway, they
already sell 10 times as many od the 64 games as the PSX games do...Hexen
64 will outsell PSX hexen by a ton because of the 4 player option. That 4
player thing was a genius idea, and the 64 is the only one with it built
in!!
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
>
> Maybe the reason Square didn't complain about carts in the old days
> of Super famicom/Super nes is because there wasn't any cd based
> console system! Or are you just some braindead zombie who didn't know
> that?
Yeah, but the PSX was out before the N64, and they trashed the 64
developer's kit and went to Sony...or didn't you hear about that?
> You're so stupid! Do you really don't think that ALL companies are
> trying to make as much money as they can(including Nintendo)?
The point of all industry is $$$$$$, moron.
> You're the biggest moron of them all.
No, you appear to be even dumber...
> Sammael
-LM
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
Well, I know cause I'm on the inside. They are bettetr than CDs cause they
hold more, are Read/writable and are cheaper. They are kinda like optical
discs...or a zip drive. Maybe you otta think before you fame, shit head.
Charles Miller Jr.
> But the DDs cost about the same as a floppy disk to make, so...anyway,
they
> already sell 10 times as many od the 64 games as the PSX games do...Hexen
> 64 will outsell PSX hexen by a ton because of the 4 player option. That
4
> player thing was a genius idea, and the 64 is the only one with it built
> in!!
Still, the DD is more expensive than a CD and the fact remains that
Nintendo still charges more for licensing and ALSO Sony will buy back the
copies of games that don't sell. That is something that is keeping the
third party away from the N64. Fact is that the whole deal with the makers
of the games only releasing games that are deffinite sellers backfires....
because the PSX is the "test market."
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
> Come on man, I am probely the most devote N64 person here and even I
> relize that the playstation was a better choice for Final Fantasy 7.
> But just wait eventualy, IMHO, Square will finish Final Fantasy SGI
> for the 64dd. I can post a short movie of the beta version if anyone
> wants it.
PSX is the best for FFVII, but the N64DD is the best for FFIX (Since VIII
may be lost in the mix...) And I'm also a big N64 fan...
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
> I don't know about a strike but I am starting to wonder whether
> Square/Aques may be spreading itself too thin. I mean the CG movies,
sports
> games ,etc.. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
Yeah...Square should stick to RPGs...plus, Tobol sucks...
Scott
In article <33611E...@worldnet.att.net>, mar...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>Scott wrote:
>> I think eventually something will surface for the N64 from Square. I think
>> they'll deal with the size "problem" of the 64dd. They couldn't even fit
>> the game on 1 cd. SPeaking of which, does anyone know whether multi-dd
>> games will be doable? I don't see any reason why not.
>
>The reason it took so many CDs is the massive MPEGs.
>
That's what I thought. I'm not a big fan of cut scenes (polygon or MPEG) so
I don't see the need for something that huge. If they use eye candy to fill
in parts of the story then I think they should have spent more time making
the game fill in those parts. Wow-ness doesn't do it for me anymore.
>I don't understand how people can justify the statement that no new
>FF will fit on a cartridge...
>
It's the wow factor again. Burying games in eye candy. I'm not saying
they're using it to cover up less than exciting game play (I haven't played
the game yet) but that's a common use for FMV.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Maxwell - scottm (at) nic (dot) com
"Good morning doctors. I have taken the liberty of removing Windows 95
from my hard drive" - What Arthur C. Clarke wishes HAL had said.
Hanson
bw...@iglou.com (Bryan Wall) wrote:
>Actually, N64 titles have to outsell PSX titles about 10:1 to make the
>same amount of money. This is because PSX CD's cost about $0.50 each
>to produce, while N64 carts cost about $35.00 each to produce.
Do you really think 3rd parties only pay $.50 for making games for Sony? There
a royalty fee involved which amounts to $7 or $9. Yes, carts cost more. But
then again, they charge more for them. Third parties don't make that much less
for carts than CD's, and it's nowhere near 10:1. The big problem is that cart
runs are necissarily much higher than CD runs, meaning that there's a much
higher up front cost. Some publishers don't like the gamble.
>That is why there will never be many games made for the N64.
Define "many". The only real ceiling is the user base.
>Game companies exist to make a profit, and when they make more profit
>selling 100,000 PSX games, than 500,000 N64 games - which do you think
>they will choose to develop for?
Like I said, the ratio isn't 10:1 nor 5:1. It's more like 3:2, but looking at
the tremendous numbers of N64 carts sold, many publishers are now jumping at the
chance to distribute N64 games, carts or whatnot. Williams made out like a
bandit between MKT, WGH, and NBA Hangtime. Doom 64 is going to add more money
into their coffers. And Turok bailed out Acclaim. It's a fallacy that 3rd
parties can't make money off of carts. It's riskier, perhaps, but it's nowhere
near impossible.
Dork Boy
It's a fighting game, it's *supposed* to suck. Ooo! That's a good one!
I think I'll add it to my sig!
--
If you want to see my great and wonderfull sig go to
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/home_cool. Go there! Now!
Especially if you haven't seen it since 4/25/97 (and yes, KeFKa, I *do*
think you mark it off on your callender when you see the updated sig)
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into yours and join the fun!
Marty Chinn
Jesse Dorland (jessed...@hotmail.com) wrote:
: If anything an N64 version would have made MORE money. The selection of N64
: titles is small right now, and anything for the system sells like mad. At
: least 6 of the top 10 best selling video games for any given month are N64
: games.
Eh? With a smaller base, and a larger cost of the cartridge format, I
find it highly doubtful that the N64 version of FF would have made more
money. Especially when FF7 is one of the largest selling FF titles,
beatin the SFC sales figures. I don't see how a N64 version could have
done better.
: Since it would be the only RPG available, it would sell millions of copies.
: It would have virtually no competition.
It doesn't matter if FF has competition or not, FF fans are FF fans. They
will buy it.
: -Jesse
: >
: ====================================
: Very funny Scotty!
: Now beam down my clothes!
: ====================================
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marty Chinn *** 1997 E3 Plans & Info Coming Soon ***
Video Source PlayStation, Nintendo 64, Saturn, Imports
973 Foxglove Dr. M-F: 9:30-6:00, Sa: 10:00-3:00 PST, Sun: Closed
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Ordering, and Preordering info at:
<408> 720-8575 Voice E-Mail: vids...@netcom.com
<408> 720-8576 FAX WWW : http://www.video-source.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Herman McClain
Sammael wrote:
>
> >You're a moron, yourself! Square could've made FF7 on the N64
> >and still would've made more than enough $$$ to stay in business!
> >Square isn't as poor as you may think! It's pretty ironic that
> >Square never complained about carts, back in the days of
> >Super Famicom / Super NES. Its ALL about greed, nothing more --
> >those hypocrites!
>
> of Super famicom/Super nes is because there wasn't any cd based
> console system! Or are you just some braindead zombie who didn't know
> that?
> trying to make as much money as they can(including Nintendo)?
>
>
YOU SHIT FOR BRAINS! There was the PC Engine CD-ROM ( btw,
PC-Engine had a big audience right next to the Super Famicom ) and
Mega CD. They may've been peripherals but the bottom-line
was that there WERE CD-ROM units back then. Again, I don't recall
Square making a fuss over cart-space, then. They could've EASILY
shun Nintendo's cart systems to make their previous FF games
on the PC Engine or Mega CD. BUT NO THEY DID NOT! What made them
change their minds now?! The ability to blend polygons into Pre-
Rendered *wallpaper*?! And what's with this "AQUES" shit?!
SQUARE HAS LOSS CONTROL!
Weapon X
On 26 Apr 1997, Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus wrote:
> The point of all industry is $$$$$$, moron.
>
> > You're the biggest moron of them all.
>
> No, you appear to be even dumber...
>
Well my dad can beat up your dad!
No, my dad can beat up YOUR dad!
^_^;; Sorry, I couldn't resist..
Weapon X
Kool Girls of Anime: Belldandy, Chun Li, Hino Rei, and Mihoshi.
CAPOW Home Page: http://www.ucalgary.ca/~krramdat/capow/
Weapon X's Anime Asylum: http://www.ucalgary.ca/~krramdat/
Falimortalis
"Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
Er, that's...
fLame
Or
Lame.
Hmm....Worth a thought. Definitely worth a thought...
--
The Sig befits the Meaning,
The Meaning befits the Sig.
Anders Simonsson
"Marcus S." <mar...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>I agree with you on the first part (the post was pretty dumb),
>but the N64 is definitely not an unwise business decision to
>program games for. In my part of the world, almost every N64
>game (that is, all except MK) were constantly sold out, as well
>as the N64s themselves. I believe that the reason that Square
>didn't write FF7 for the N64 was because:
>1. It's supposed to be much easier to program on a PSX
>2. They liked the idea of having lots of space
>3. There was a large time interval between SNES and N64, during
>which Square wanted to keep up with technology. The system that
>mostly filled this gap was the PSX.
Well, the main reason was simply data storage. FF7 comes on several
CD`s, most of which contain animations and stuff. The actual game
could probably fit in a cart, but there`s just no way that all the
animations could fit in there as well. Not even the fabled 64DD could
contain even a fraction of the stuff. Sad, but true. Sigh... I love my
N64, I really do, but I wish that Yamauchi would get his head out of
his ass sometimes...
When replying via email, use this adress:
anders.s...@mailbox.swipnet.se.
Charles Miller Jr.
> Do you really think 3rd parties only pay $.50 for making games for Sony?
There
> a royalty fee involved which amounts to $7 or $9. Yes, carts cost more.
But
> then again, they charge more for them. Third parties don't make that
much less
> for carts than CD's, and it's nowhere near 10:1. The big problem is that
cart
> runs are necissarily much higher than CD runs, meaning that there's a
much
> higher up front cost. Some publishers don't like the gamble.
Ah, but Sony buys back the unsold CDs. Makes the Gamble MUCH BIGGER.
> >Game companies exist to make a profit, and when they make more profit
> >selling 100,000 PSX games, than 500,000 N64 games - which do you think
> >they will choose to develop for?
> Like I said, the ratio isn't 10:1 nor 5:1. It's more like 3:2, but
looking at
> the tremendous numbers of N64 carts sold, many publishers are now jumping
at the
> chance to distribute N64 games, carts or whatnot.
They are not stupid. They understand that the only reason they are lessing
is because they are all that is out. The PSX sell more of many games.
This means that if you bring out a game that you can at least get close to
breaking even even if it is something that few people like.
> Williams made out like a
> bandit between MKT, WGH, and NBA Hangtime. Doom 64 is going to add more
money
> into their coffers. And Turok bailed out Acclaim. It's a fallacy that
3rd
> parties can't make money off of carts. It's riskier, perhaps, but it's
nowhere
> near impossible.
This is something you say because you fail to relise that anything will
sell when you fill a demand that has no supply. Once there is ANY
competition in the markte for N64 games companies WON'T make money of the
games like they do now. People buy it because there is nothing else to
buy.
Matt Hayden
>It only makes sense that 64DD disks, which have a larger capacity and
>are partly rewritable, would cost more.
Larger capacity always means it costs more? Look at carts and CD's...
CD's have a much larger capacity then carts, but still cost less. Its
been said officialy by Nintendo that the 64DD disks cost less to
manufacture, so going by that, we should see them sell for less than
carts. Hope that's not too "out of the air" for you.
-=Sponge=-
----------
Matt Hayden
mha...@poboxes.com
Matt Hayden
>Maybe the reason Square didn't complain about carts in the old days
>of Super famicom/Super nes is because there wasn't any cd based
>console system! Or are you just some braindead zombie who didn't know
>that?
NO CD-ROM based consoles back then? Funny, I distinctly remember both
the PC-Engine and the Sega CD being CD-Based consoles. Guess that's just
me though.
Sammael
"Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
>> Actually, N64 titles have to outsell PSX titles about 10:1 to make the
>> same amount of money. This is because PSX CD's cost about $0.50 each
>> to produce, while N64 carts cost about $35.00 each to produce. That
>> is why there will never be many games made for the N64. Game
>> companies exist to make a profit, and when they make more profit
>> selling 100,000 PSX games, than 500,000 N64 games - which do you think
>> they will choose to develop for?
>But the DDs cost about the same as a floppy disk to make, so...anyway, they
>already sell 10 times as many od the 64 games as the PSX games do...Hexen
>64 will outsell PSX hexen by a ton because of the 4 player option. That 4
>player thing was a genius idea, and the 64 is the only one with it built
>in!!
Yeah right 4-player on the same screen, that should be funny, BTW do
yo know that Hexen 64 has a loading time of 10 seconds before a new
level?
Sammael
Sammael
jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse Dorland) wrote:
>"Joe Blow" <fre...@rastafari.com> wrote:
>>> If FF7 had been released now for
>>> the N64 it would have sold much less because there are alot less people
>>> with N64s than PSXs
>>
>>FYI, that PSX market share > N64 market share gap in the US is narrowing
>>fast. And FF would have made a lot of money in the N64, but you're right,
>>a game of that length isn't technically feasible on a cart.
>If anything an N64 version would have made MORE money. The selection of N64
>titles is small right now, and anything for the system sells like mad. At
>least 6 of the top 10 best selling video games for any given month are N64
>games.
>Since it would be the only RPG available, it would sell millions of copies.
>It would have virtually no competition.
You do know that FF VII have sold 3 million copies on the PSX don't
you? Also I can inform you that FF VII is the best selling Final
Fantasy RPG. So I really don't think that that FF VII would make more
money on the N64,
Square would make less money because they would have to pay alot more
money for cartridges than cd's.
Sammael
Sammael
mha...@poboxes.com (Matt Hayden) wrote:
>>Maybe the reason Square didn't complain about carts in the old days
>>of Super famicom/Super nes is because there wasn't any cd based
>>console system! Or are you just some braindead zombie who didn't know
>>that?
>NO CD-ROM based consoles back then? Funny, I distinctly remember both
>the PC-Engine and the Sega CD being CD-Based consoles. Guess that's just
>me though.
I'm not talking about ad-ons(that's what you're talking about, in case
you don't know)
Sammael
Sammael
"Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
>>
>> Maybe the reason Square didn't complain about carts in the old days
>> of Super famicom/Super nes is because there wasn't any cd based
>> console system! Or are you just some braindead zombie who didn't know
>> that?
>Yeah, but the PSX was out before the N64, and they trashed the 64
>developer's kit and went to Sony...or didn't you hear about that?
>> You're so stupid! Do you really don't think that ALL companies are
>> trying to make as much money as they can(including Nintendo)?
>The point of all industry is $$$$$$, moron.
That's just what I said to the moron that I was answering, are you
sure that you can read
>> You're the biggest moron of them all.
>No, you appear to be even dumber...
Can you tell me what the point with your post was, I was telling some
asshole that the point of any industry is to earn as much money as
possible, but I can't seem to find any meaning in your post
whatsoever!
You are so stupidity is beyond words!
>> Sammael
>-LM
Luke Drelick
Dork Boy wrote:
>
> Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus wrote:
> > Yeah...Square should stick to RPGs...plus, Tobol sucks...
>
> It's a fighting game, it's *supposed* to suck. Ooo! That's a good one!
> I think I'll add it to my sig!
Really? Tekken 2 kinda kicks ass.
--
-=[Butz Klauzer/Lassic/Luke Drelick ]=-
-=[President of Duky Incorporated, MZX design team]=-
-=[http://www.chocobo.org/~butz ]=-
-=[You no-good jerk noggins! I won't forget this! ]=-
-=[Meowers suck! They all need lives! ]=-
Sammael
>YOU SHIT FOR BRAINS! There was the PC Engine CD-ROM ( btw,
>PC-Engine had a big audience right next to the Super Famicom ) and
>Mega CD. They may've been peripherals but the bottom-line
>was that there WERE CD-ROM units back then. Again, I don't recall
>Square making a fuss over cart-space, then. They could've EASILY
>shun Nintendo's cart systems to make their previous FF games
>on the PC Engine or Mega CD. BUT NO THEY DID NOT! What made them
>change their minds now?! The ability to blend polygons into Pre-
>Rendered *wallpaper*?! And what's with this "AQUES" shit?!
>SQUARE HAS LOSS CONTROL!
Maybe it has something to do about the space(cd=650MB, N64=32MB) and
price(Nintendo charge $35 per cartridge, while Sony charge $10-15 per
cd).
Square has full controll over everything that they do YOU FUCKING
ASSHOLE. BTW the PC-Engine was nothing compared to the super famicom,
the super famicom had 90% of the japanese market FYI.
Sammael
Jeremy Peralta
Herman McClain wrote:
>
> Sammael wrote:
> >
> > >You're a moron, yourself! Square could've made FF7 on the N64
> > >and still would've made more than enough $$$ to stay in business!
> > >Square isn't as poor as you may think! It's pretty ironic that
> > >Square never complained about carts, back in the days of
> > >Super Famicom / Super NES. Its ALL about greed, nothing more --
> > >those hypocrites!
> >
> > of Super famicom/Super nes is because there wasn't any cd based
> > console system! Or are you just some braindead zombie who didn't know
> > that?
> > trying to make as much money as they can(including Nintendo)?
> >
> >
>
> YOU SHIT FOR BRAINS! There was the PC Engine CD-ROM ( btw,
> PC-Engine had a big audience right next to the Super Famicom ) and
> Mega CD. They may've been peripherals but the bottom-line
> was that there WERE CD-ROM units back then. Again, I don't recall
> Square making a fuss over cart-space, then. They could've EASILY
> shun Nintendo's cart systems to make their previous FF games
> on the PC Engine or Mega CD. BUT NO THEY DID NOT! What made them
> change their minds now?! The ability to blend polygons into Pre-
> Rendered *wallpaper*?! And what's with this "AQUES" shit?!
> SQUARE HAS LOSS CONTROL!
Obviously they wouldn't make CD games for some crap system back then,
it's on PSX because in Japan, where RPGs are more popular, PSX has a ton
of userbase and the N64 is dying. That means they can sell more games
because of a bigger base AND do it 30 times cheaper to boot!
Duckman
Had Square not bailed out on Nintendo maybe the userbase would've been
larger. Alot of people would've bought the N64 had they known FF7 would
arrive soon. Square dissed the people who made them the big bucks,
Nintendo fans. I understand they need to money, but it seems to me that
by releasing FF7 on the N64 and PSX they would've made alot more money.
Hopefully square will change its mind.
-Dan
Josh Boyd
> Yeah right 4-player on the same screen, that should be funny, BTW do
> yo know that Hexen 64 has a loading time of 10 seconds before a new
> level?
BTW do you know that Hexen on the computer has a loading time of about
10 seconds? (sheesh...)
--
Are you bored? Do you wish you had fun and exciting people to spend
your
time with? Do you want some lively company that you can count on? Do
you want a magnetic personality? If so, then this is for you --- Just
call 1-800-borgs-4u --- Yes that's 1-800-borgs-4u.
And remember --- the borg is for you.
Josh
Jeremy Peralta
Josh Boyd wrote:
>
> > You do know that FF VII have sold 3 million copies on the PSX don't
> > you? Also I can inform you that FF VII is the best selling Final
> > Fantasy RPG. So I really don't think that that FF VII would make more
> > money on the N64,
> > Square would make less money because they would have to pay alot more
> > money for cartridges than cd's.
>
> 300 million people in the USA alone... That's 1 out of every 100 people
> in the USA, if all of the sales were in the USA... I'm sure that
> there's more than just 1 person out of every 100 that owns a Console
> system...
Uhh, are you just trying to be a dumbshit, or are you really so dumb?
I'm not really sure how many PSXs there are in North America, but let's
say 6 million in North America and 6 million in Japan. Do you think
everyone in the US has a PSX or something? There's older people, really
old people, babies, poor people, people who just don't like video games,
people who don't care about video games etc. etc. etc. who don't have a
PSX, so if FFVII sold 3 million, it would be the biggest success in the
whole damn history of video games sales!! It would mean that 1 out of
every 2 people who owned a Playstation would BUY FFVII. That means if
you knew 6 people with PSXs, 3 of them would have the game!!! It's
phenomenal you idiot!! ESPECIALLY for an rpg. Of course, most people in
the US just go out and buy the next madden game that comes out, so i'm
sure the sales will not be as good in the US.
Josh Boyd
> You do know that FF VII have sold 3 million copies on the PSX don't
> you? Also I can inform you that FF VII is the best selling Final
> Fantasy RPG. So I really don't think that that FF VII would make more
> money on the N64,
> Square would make less money because they would have to pay alot more
> money for cartridges than cd's.
For your information... 3 million sales is horrible... There's about
300 million people in the USA alone... That's 1 out of every 100 people
in the USA, if all of the sales were in the USA... I'm sure that
there's more than just 1 person out of every 100 that owns a Console
system...
RuInEr
Where have you been. SQUARESOFT IS GOING TO RELEASE FINAL FANTASY 5, 6 ,
AND 7 TO THE PC.
Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote in article
<01bc5126$67d5c040$34fdadcd@default>...
>
> > Grow up plz and face reality. I have no problem with it, because Square
> > making the game on the PSX has it's benefits. Besides, the game's
> > supposed to suck compared to the others anyways...
>
> Yeah, when they get some sense and make a N64DD game or PC game, then
maybe
> it'll be a good game, unlike ffVII
>
>
Tom
If they made FF7 for N64, it would have to be exclusive for one year.
Thats why MDK is coming out 4 PSX, also.
Bryan Wall <bw...@iglou.com> wrote in article
<33613756...@news.iglou.com>...
> >If anything an N64 version would have made MORE money. The selection of
N64
> >titles is small right now, and anything for the system sells like mad.
At
> >least 6 of the top 10 best selling video games for any given month are
N64
> >games.
> >
> >Since it would be the only RPG available, it would sell millions of
copies.
> >It would have virtually no competition.
>
> Actually, N64 titles have to outsell PSX titles about 10:1 to make the
> same amount of money. This is because PSX CD's cost about $0.50 each
> to produce, while N64 carts cost about $35.00 each to produce. That
> is why there will never be many games made for the N64. Game
> companies exist to make a profit, and when they make more profit
> selling 100,000 PSX games, than 500,000 N64 games - which do you think
> they will choose to develop for?
>
> Bryan
>
>
Tom
Dumbfuck, the DD's cant hold more than a CD.
Falimortalis <mrh...@ihot.com> wrote in article
<3361cf2e....@ihotnews.ihot.com>...
Scott
In article
<Pine.A41.3.96.970426...@acs5.acs.ucalgary.ca>, Weapon X
<krra...@acs.ucalgary.ca> wrote:
>> > You're the biggest moron of them all.
>>
>> No, you appear to be even dumber...
>
> Well my dad can beat up your dad!
>
> No, my dad can beat up YOUR dad!
>
No, my mom can kick YOUR dad's butt anytime!
>^_^;; Sorry, I couldn't resist..
>
Me neither...
Scott
In article <336433ae...@nntpserver.swip.net>,
metal...@mailbox.swipnet.se (Anders Simonsson) wrote:
>Well, the main reason was simply data storage. FF7 comes on several
>CD`s, most of which contain animations and stuff. The actual game
>could probably fit in a cart, but there`s just no way that all the
>animations could fit in there as well. Not even the fabled 64DD could
>contain even a fraction of the stuff.
>
If it were all pre-rendered then no it couldn't all fit. But if it used the
N64 metaformat (for lack of a better term) quite a bit of it could have
fit. They could have also changed things if need be in the animations since
the N64 would be doing the rendering on the fly.
Josh Boyd
> If it were all pre-rendered then no it couldn't all fit. But if it used the
> N64 metaformat (for lack of a better term) quite a bit of it could have
> fit. They could have also changed things if need be in the animations since
> the N64 would be doing the rendering on the fly.
Yes... :) People don't seem to realize that the only information
contained on the N64 carts (with graphics) is the positioning of
polygons... The process renders the view as you're playing... :) That
is FAR beyond any standard home computer right now, seeing as how it can
take up to a minute just to render a single frame... :) (And it's
doing 15+ (30 for "life" speed) frames per second?) That's why I was
laughing when someone on here said that the SGI processer in the N64
wasn't anything special... ;) It can whoop any Pentium out there...
hehe.
Josh Boyd
> Dumbfuck, the DD's cant hold more than a CD.
He meant that they hold more than cartriges... Not CD's...
T McDonald
In article <5ju1fs$sn6$5...@news.inet.tele.dk>,
Sammael <Sam...@post2.tele.dk> wrote:
>
>>> You're so stupid! Do you really don't think that ALL companies are
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> trying to make as much money as they can(including Nintendo)?
>
And a smart guy wrote:
>>The point of all industry is $$$$$$, moron.
Sammael again:
>That's just what I said to the moron that I was answering, are you
>sure that you can read
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't know. Why not try to learn how to write, and then find out?
Be careful when throwing around lables like, idiot, moron, etc. Sometimes
they are more applicable to the man in the mirror, than the man on the
street.
With love,
me.
Falimortalis
"Tom" <fre...@mindless.com> wrote:
>Dumbfuck, the DD's cant hold more than a CD.
What's that got to do with anything?
I really couldn't give a Shi--
A shoot. Damn, yeah. A shoot.
BTW, in case anyone wants to know why I'm using "shoot" instead of...
well, you know... is that some friggin' NetCop jerk-off is ignoring
all the 'dumbf*ck" letters and is trying to get me kicked off the Net,
the moron he/she is.
Yeah, I am annoyed. How would you act if, on a thread everyone said
"F*k" in, you said Damn and were almost cut off the Net? Make up your
mind!
Falimortalis
Josh Boyd <jb...@mail.coos.or.us> wrote:
>> Dumbfuck, the DD's cant hold more than a CD.
>
> He meant that they hold more than cartriges... Not CD's...
Yeah. You took the words right from my mouth.
Glad I'm now part of this dispute =).
Ryan Ryttie
One of the infinite number of monkeys typing in a locked room,
the monkey with this ID <3362279f...@news.ntr.net>
posing as han...@ntr.net (Hanson)
pressed these keys in sequence:
! jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse Dorland) wrote:
!
! >I'm going on the current price of N64 cartridges, which seems to me to be a
! >more sound method than simply pulling guesses out of the air. N64 cartridges
! >now cost between $60 and $80. It only makes sense that 64DD disks, which have
! >a larger capacity and are partly rewritable, would cost more.
!
! No it doesn't. Manufacturing magnetic disks is far less expensive than ROM
! carts. By your reasoning, CD's should cost hundreds of dollars.
!
! >$40 is ridiculous. Nintendo already charges a $35 royalty to 3rd party
! >companies for every N64 cartridge. And the cost of making the carts is into
! >the double-digits. 64DD disks, even if the royalty is less, will cost the
! >same amount or more to make, and a $40 price would mean the companies are
! >losing money on every copy of a game they sell.
!
! An 8 meg cart costs somewhere between $20-$25 to produce. The royalty is under
Wrong, an 8 MB cart costs around $10 the problem is that 16 MB carts cost $20
! $10. The disks will cost somewhere between $9-$15. 64DD games should cost
! around $10 less than carts, or $50 first party and $60 third party. One of the
! reasons for 64DD production is that disks cost much less per meg than carts.
Well, since a 512 Mbit cart would cost $80 to make I'd have to say the savings
is immense. Although in 3 years 256 Mbit carts will prob. cost around $15 to
make. (while 64dd media might go down $1 or two)
In three years we will all be using 500MHz computers that make N-64 look like
the toy that it is.
--
Ryan Ryttie -- E-Mail-It's hidden in this sig. D e l e t e ^d o t^ K e y
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into yours and join the fun! ^a t^
'Just because you're paranoid dosen't mean they're not after you' W o r l d n e t
'Sayonara wa mata au toki no yakusoku' ^d o t^ a t t ^d o t^ n e t
Ryan Ryttie
One of the infinite number of monkeys typing in a locked room,
posing as "Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net>
!
!
! Well, I know cause I'm on the inside. They are bettetr than CDs cause they
! hold more, are Read/writable and are cheaper. They are kinda like optical
! discs...or a zip drive.
"Maybe you otta think before you fame, shit head."--
<01bc51fb$b9e0f460$36fdadcd@default> Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus
<bmet...@iamerica.net>
That just Quotes so nice. BTW how exactly does one 'Fame' anyway?
Does it involve actors/actresses? <g>
Ryan Ryttie
One of the infinite number of monkeys typing in a locked room,
posing as Deadfrog <"dead...@worldnet.att.net"@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
! Michael Stern wrote:
! >
! > This is the worst thing that could happen. I know it is old.. but I
! > still belive that this is wrong! All of you should know what I mean!
! > PLAYSTATION FF7?! THIS IS HORRIBLE! I SAY WE REVOLT!! ALL OF US!!
! > EVEN THE PSX OWNERS!! MAKE FF GAMES FOR ALL SYSTEMS!!! STRIKE! STRIKE!
! > STRIKE!!
!
! What a fuckin dumbass!
Ditto, only with _Both_ of you targeted.
! Im sorry if you bought a N64 and just found out about FF7 for
! playstation. Shoulda kept up with the news. Square cant make games for
! other systems until their 1 year contract with Sony is up, even then it
! is unlikely they will make games for the N64 due to space limitations.
False, Square can't make FF7 for any other console. They can make any
other game they want to for any console.
! Why did Square chose sony?
! 1. The PSX is more sutied for a game like FF7 which could not fit on a
! cartridge of 64dd
Hmm...I'd say that FF7 was made the way it was, because it was made for
PSX. It was the only way to make a 'playable' PSX RPG. I highly doubt
that Square moved to PSX just to be able to do that kind of a game.
! 2.Making games on a cd is easier and cheaper(notice how all N64 games
! cost $70 plus and all PSX games are around $50)
Uhh...No. $70 are like the highest cost games on N-64. Most are $55-$65
! 3.Square did not want to wait an extra year and a half for the N64 to be
! finished when the PSX was already out. If FF7 had been released now for
! the N64 it would have sold much less because there are alot less people
! with N64s than PSXs
Uhh...Not Exactly. If FF7 had been a 'N-64' Exclusive N-64 would be the
#1 new console system in Japan. OTOH you had the right idea about the
'N constantly pushing back release dates, while PSX was already out'
concept.
Chris
In article <3362DB...@mail.coos.or.us> Josh Boyd <jb...@mail.coos.or.us> writes:
>From: Josh Boyd <jb...@mail.coos.or.us>
>Subject: Re: Squaresoft has made a terrible MISTAKE!!!
>Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 21:51:01 -0700
>> Yeah right 4-player on the same screen, that should be funny, BTW do
>> yo know that Hexen 64 has a loading time of 10 seconds before a new
>> level?
> BTW do you know that Hexen on the computer has a loading time of about
>10 seconds? (sheesh...)
>--
But a computer doesn't use "Fast instant load time" cartridges.
Chris
Chris
In article <3362DD...@mail.coos.or.us> Josh Boyd <jb...@mail.coos.or.us> writes:
>From: Josh Boyd <jb...@mail.coos.or.us>
>Subject: Re: Squaresoft has made a terrible MISTAKE!!!
>> You do know that FF VII have sold 3 million copies on the PSX don't
>> you? Also I can inform you that FF VII is the best selling Final
>> Fantasy RPG. So I really don't think that that FF VII would make more
>> money on the N64,
>> Square would make less money because they would have to pay alot more
>> money for cartridges than cd's.
> For your information... 3 million sales is horrible... There's about
>300 million people in the USA alone... That's 1 out of every 100 people
>in the USA, if all of the sales were in the USA... I'm sure that
>there's more than just 1 person out of every 100 that owns a Console
>system...
Yeah, but not all of those people own a PSX as a console system. FF7 is a PSX
game. In essence 3 million copies sold on a system roughly 2 years old and
ONLY available for that particular system isn't half bad.
Chris
The Laughing Bandit
jessed...@hotmail.com (Jesse Dorland) wrote:
>"Joe Blow" <fre...@rastafari.com> wrote:
>>> If FF7 had been released now for
>>> the N64 it would have sold much less because there are alot less people
>>> with N64s than PSXs
>>
>>FYI, that PSX market share > N64 market share gap in the US is narrowing
>>fast. And FF would have made a lot of money in the N64, but you're right,
>>a game of that length isn't technically feasible on a cart.
>If anything an N64 version would have made MORE money. The selection of N64
>titles is small right now, and anything for the system sells like mad. At
>least 6 of the top 10 best selling video games for any given month are N64
>games.
Funny Note about #'s of available games: According to a study (I read
a lot of economics mags and keep up on trade and what not...little
stock speculation here and there too) Nintendo is gonna have to kick
up its production to catch up with PSX on title availability. As of a
month or two ago (if I recall) N64 had 1 or 2 games scheduled for
release each month, whereas PSX was scheduled for 3-5 releases per
month. If Nintendo doesn't speed up its production and hire some
companies to make more games, there won't be alot available. They
have to make a move NOW before PSX snags all the juicy deals
too...otheerwise the market will be awash in good PSX games while N64
is slower and with worse stuff. I myself have no opinion as to which
system is better (I'm waiting to form a concrete opinion on N64 until
they release some of this additional stuff for it-and to see how they
do with titles/games).
Gaius Tarquinius Superbus Maximus I Magnus Somniculosus Ex Patricus Priscus
=================================================================
<<{{The Laughing Bandit!!!}}>>
<Strikes Again!/ha! Ha! HA!>
"Insanity is the ultimate low stress lifestyle." -Me
"The things we regret most are often those we do not do." -Me
"In Animis Vester, sum deus." -Me
-The Most Powerful man in Anime Fanficdom
-Graduate of Akane Tendo's Cookery Masterclass.
================================================================
Michael Stern
Joe Moone wrote:
>
> Michael Stern <mst...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>
> >This is the worst thing that could happen. I know it is old.. but I
>
> Oh boo hoo. They're going to be making an FF game for the computer, so
> that's all we need. Besides, what if this "revolt" and "strike" drove
> Square out of business < hah! >. They're one of the few good RPG
> makers left.
If it made them go out of buisness I'd say its there fault!
The Laughing Bandit
Herman McClain <sa...@juno.com> wrote:
>R.Talon wrote:
>>
>> Wow, a pretty moronic post if I do say so myself. Why did they make a
>> mistake? Because they're a company that needs to stay in business, so they
>> publish a game for a system they believe will make them money? Come on,
>> now. If you really want to play FF7, GO BUY A PSX!!! Plus, FF7 has
>> already sold 2 million+ units, so from an economics standpoint, Square made
>> a good decision. Those programmers from Rare on the other hand............
>>
>> RT
>>
>> r.t...@ix.netcom.com
>You're a moron, yourself! Square could've made FF7 on the N64
>and still would've made more than enough $$$ to stay in business!
>Square isn't as poor as you may think! It's pretty ironic that
>Square never complained about carts, back in the days of
>Super Famicom / Super NES. Its ALL about greed, nothing more --
>those hypocrites!
[BTW-there were ONLY carts available back in the SNESonly days, and at
that time they served amiably. Now, this has come into question...]
Hypocrites? You've got to be kidding me. They're BUSINESSMEN. Why
do people go into business-it sure as hell isn't to make the world
safe for idiotic roleplaying game players like you....ppl go into
business for one rea$on: to make $$$$$$. PSX offered Square the best
deal on units and profit, so they went with them. N64 is the worst
seller outside the US, PSX is the second best seller (if I recall)
worldwide and the number one position fluctuates from area to area-so
Square went with a guaranteed good payoff. Get logical. Better yet,
study economics before you comment on it.
>[snip]
As for the comment about making FF for all systems, square knew they
could make it just on PSX, get their money and that true diehard fans
would buy the PSX just for FFVII. Besides, PSX CD's are easier to
prorgam for N64 carts (so less $$ spent in production=MORE PROFIT-the
primary motivation of businesspeople the world over). Thank you all
for listening to my little "lecture."
Sammael
>>>The point of all industry is $$$$$$, moron.
>Sammael again:
>>That's just what I said to the moron that I was answering, are you
>>sure that you can read
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>I don't know. Why not try to learn how to write, and then find out?
>Be careful when throwing around lables like, idiot, moron, etc. Sometimes
>they are more applicable to the man in the mirror, than the man on the
>street.
>With love,
>me.
YES another moron!
Sammael
Jesse Dorland
> Yes... :) People don't seem to realize that the only information
>contained on the N64 carts (with graphics) is the positioning of
>polygons... The process renders the view as you're playing... :) That
>is FAR beyond any standard home computer right now, seeing as how it can
>take up to a minute just to render a single frame... :) (And it's
>doing 15+ (30 for "life" speed) frames per second?) That's why I was
>laughing when someone on here said that the SGI processer in the N64
>wasn't anything special... ;) It can whoop any Pentium out there...
>hehe.
It's going slow, but I think soon we may have some people convinced of this
fact. The N64 *is* a better game platform than any PC, but people seem to
think that a higher Megahertz number means a faster computer.
I just read a post where someone said that Quake on the PC looked better than
anything on the N64! 8-bit palette, unbearably dark screen (due to most of
the palette being used for light source shading), low enemy polygon count,
they all make for some terrific graphics compared to the N64, don't they? :-)
He then continued on about how his P100 could outperform the N64! Ridiculous!
-Jesse
>--
>Are you bored? Do you wish you had fun and exciting people to spend
>your
>time with? Do you want some lively company that you can count on? Do
>you want a magnetic personality? If so, then this is for you --- Just
>call 1-800-borgs-4u --- Yes that's 1-800-borgs-4u.
>
>And remember --- the borg is for you.
>
>Josh
====================================
Very funny Scotty!
Now beam down my clothes!
====================================
Matt Hayden
>Obviously they wouldn't make CD games for some crap system back then,
Crap system? If my memory serves me correctly, the PC-Engine was quite
popular in Japan.
-=Sponge=-
----------
Matt Hayden
mha...@poboxes.com
Jesse Dorland
>Speaking of all this, a friend mentioned that Acclaim said Turok would
>have a PSX release in the future. Anyone know anything about that?
Yes, there will be a PSX version of Turok, though it will probably be nothing
like the N64 version. Using Quack mode in Turok (which completely turns off
anti-aliasing) gives you some idea of what it might look like on the
Playstation. The graphics are incredibly blocky, and almost make the game
unplayable. If you thought Turok for the N64 had a lot of fog, wait for the
PSX version....
>And what about Enix's move over to Sony.... BTW, I've been looking at
>available N64 carts, and has anyone else noticed a disturbing trend to
>"3D" and "64bit" older games/concepts (All the "Insert old title
>here"64 games-take doom64 as an example.). Just a thought. I know I
There have been lots of next-gen remakes of old games. Super Mario 64
immediately jumps to mind, although a 64-bit incarnation of Mario is a
no-brainer; he "introduces" every new Nintendo platform. Pilotwings 64 is an
update on an early SNES game, NBA Hangtime is a followup to NBA Jam, Mario
Kart 64 supercedes Super Mario Kart, etc., etc.
Not all of them have a "64" attached to the end, and most of them offer up
some new gameplay, instead of just fancier graphics. SM64 is completely
different from any of the previous Mario games, for instance.
-Jesse
>said I had no opinion above, but what little loyalty I had left to
>Nintendo has since evaporated.
>
>Gaius Tarquinius Superbus Maximus I Magnus Somniculosus Ex Patricus Priscus
>=================================================================
><<{{The Laughing Bandit!!!}}>>
> <Strikes Again!/ha! Ha! HA!>
>"Insanity is the ultimate low stress lifestyle." -Me
>"The things we regret most are often those we do not do." -Me
>"In Animis Vester, sum deus." -Me
>-The Most Powerful man in Anime Fanficdom
>-Graduate of Akane Tendo's Cookery Masterclass.
>================================================================
>
====================================
Jesse Dorland
>[BTW-there were ONLY carts available back in the SNESonly days, and at
>that time they served amiably. Now, this has come into question...]
>Hypocrites? You've got to be kidding me. They're BUSINESSMEN. Why
>do people go into business-it sure as hell isn't to make the world
>safe for idiotic roleplaying game players like you....ppl go into
>business for one rea$on: to make $$$$$$. PSX offered Square the best
>deal on units and profit, so they went with them. N64 is the worst
>seller outside the US, PSX is the second best seller (if I recall)
>worldwide and the number one position fluctuates from area to area-so
>Square went with a guaranteed good payoff. Get logical. Better yet,
>study economics before you comment on it.
Saturn is the worst seller in- and outside the U.S. Sales of the Nintendo 64
have leveled off in Japan, and the N64 didn't start off that great in Europe,
but it's still selling at a faster pace than the Playstation, and before long,
it will surpass the PSX as the most popular video game console. It's still
well almost everywhere, even if it isn't selling 10x more units than any other
system. People act as though if it's not getting double the profit of other
systems, it's not selling well.
-Jesse
>>[snip]
>As for the comment about making FF for all systems, square knew they
>could make it just on PSX, get their money and that true diehard fans
>would buy the PSX just for FFVII. Besides, PSX CD's are easier to
>prorgam for N64 carts (so less $$ spent in production=MORE PROFIT-the
>primary motivation of businesspeople the world over). Thank you all
>for listening to my little "lecture."
>
The Laughing Bandit
"Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
>but it is feesable on the N64DD
Feasable and profitable are two entirely different realms, good sir.
Michael Stern
Zemeron wrote:
>
> Come on man, I am probely the most devote N64 person here and even I
> relize that the playstation was a better choice for Final Fantasy 7.
> But just wait eventualy, IMHO, Square will finish Final Fantasy SGI
> for the 64dd. I can post a short movie of the beta version if anyone
> wants it.
>
> On Thu, 24 Apr 1997 19:26:28 -0500, Michael Stern
> <mst...@interaccess.com> wrote:
>
> >This is the worst thing that could happen. I know it is old.. but I
> >still belive that this is wrong! All of you should know what I mean!
> >PLAYSTATION FF7?! THIS IS HORRIBLE! I SAY WE REVOLT!! ALL OF US!!
> >EVEN THE PSX OWNERS!! MAKE FF GAMES FOR ALL SYSTEMS!!! STRIKE! STRIKE!
> >STRIKE!!
FF7.
The Laughing Bandit
"Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
>N64DD games will be $40 or less for NEW games...get a clue.
There's gonna be games? <G>
The Laughing Bandit
han...@ntr.net (Hanson) wrote:
>bw...@iglou.com (Bryan Wall) wrote:
>>Actually, N64 titles have to outsell PSX titles about 10:1 to make the
>>same amount of money. This is because PSX CD's cost about $0.50 each
>>to produce, while N64 carts cost about $35.00 each to produce.
>Do you really think 3rd parties only pay $.50 for making games for Sony? There
>a royalty fee involved which amounts to $7 or $9. Yes, carts cost more. But
>then again, they charge more for them. Third parties don't make that much less
>for carts than CD's, and it's nowhere near 10:1. The big problem is that cart
>runs are necissarily much higher than CD runs, meaning that there's a much
>higher up front cost. Some publishers don't like the gamble.
>
>>That is why there will never be many games made for the N64.
>Define "many". The only real ceiling is the user base.
>>Game companies exist to make a profit, and when they make more profit
>>selling 100,000 PSX games, than 500,000 N64 games - which do you think
>>they will choose to develop for?
>Like I said, the ratio isn't 10:1 nor 5:1. It's more like 3:2, but looking at
>the tremendous numbers of N64 carts sold, many publishers are now jumping at the
>chance to distribute N64 games, carts or whatnot. Williams made out like a
>bandit between MKT, WGH, and NBA Hangtime. Doom 64 is going to add more money
>into their coffers. And Turok bailed out Acclaim. It's a fallacy that 3rd
>parties can't make money off of carts. It's riskier, perhaps, but it's nowhere
>near impossible.
Speaking of all this, a friend mentioned that Acclaim said Turok would
have a PSX release in the future. Anyone know anything about that?
And what about Enix's move over to Sony.... BTW, I've been looking at
available N64 carts, and has anyone else noticed a disturbing trend to
"3D" and "64bit" older games/concepts (All the "Insert old title
here"64 games-take doom64 as an example.). Just a thought. I know I
said I had no opinion above, but what little loyalty I had left to
Nintendo has since evaporated.
Gaius Tarquinius Superbus Maximus I Magnus Somniculosus Ex Patricus Priscus
The Laughing Bandit
Jeremy Peralta <chris_u...@bc.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>Josh Boyd wrote:
>>
>> > You do know that FF VII have sold 3 million copies on the PSX don't
>> > you? Also I can inform you that FF VII is the best selling Final
>> > Fantasy RPG. So I really don't think that that FF VII would make more
>> > money on the N64,
>> > Square would make less money because they would have to pay alot more
>> > money for cartridges than cd's.
>>
>> For your information... 3 million sales is horrible... There's about
>> 300 million people in the USA alone... That's 1 out of every 100 people
>> in the USA, if all of the sales were in the USA... I'm sure that
>> there's more than just 1 person out of every 100 that owns a Console
>> system...
>Uhh, are you just trying to be a dumbshit, or are you really so dumb?
>I'm not really sure how many PSXs there are in North America, but let's
>say 6 million in North America and 6 million in Japan. Do you think
>everyone in the US has a PSX or something? There's older people, really
>old people, babies, poor people, people who just don't like video games,
>people who don't care about video games etc. etc. etc. who don't have a
>PSX, so if FFVII sold 3 million, it would be the biggest success in the
>whole damn history of video games sales!! It would mean that 1 out of
>every 2 people who owned a Playstation would BUY FFVII. That means if
>you knew 6 people with PSXs, 3 of them would have the game!!! It's
>phenomenal you idiot!! ESPECIALLY for an rpg. Of course, most people in
>the US just go out and buy the next madden game that comes out, so i'm
>sure the sales will not be as good in the US.
Another thing to remember: It sold 3 million copies so far....it's not
even IN the US yet(not translated, anyway).
Cryptic Bug
You know, it would help a lot to QUOTE, so people know what you're
talking about. I assume you're talking 64DD...
In article <01bc51fb$b9e0f460$36fdadcd@default>,
"Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
> Well, I know cause I'm on the inside.
The inside of what, a cave?
> They are bettetr than CDs cause they hold more, are Read/writable
> and are cheaper. They are kinda like optical discs...or a zip
> drive. Maybe you otta think before you fame, shit head.
1+1/2 for 5. CD's hold 10x, DD disks are only HALF writable, and cost
about 10x more than CD's. They are 100% magnetic, no optical
whatsoever, but are like a ZIP drive (Magnetic, NOT Magneto-optical).
maybe you "otta" (ought to) get informed before you "fame" (flame).
One point to consider, though, is that since N64 uses a different
GFX/FMV format, 64DD can hold as big a game as PSX games, or bigger.
--
Cryptic Bug
Cr...@vcn.bc.ca
Sammael
>>
>> Obviously they wouldn't make CD games for some crap system back then,
>> it's on PSX because in Japan, where RPGs are more popular, PSX has a ton
>> of userbase and the N64 is dying. That means they can sell more games
>> because of a bigger base AND do it 30 times cheaper to boot!
> Had Square not bailed out on Nintendo maybe the userbase would've been
>larger. Alot of people would've bought the N64 had they known FF7 would
>arrive soon. Square dissed the people who made them the big bucks,
>Nintendo fans. I understand they need to money, but it seems to me that
>by releasing FF7 on the N64 and PSX they would've made alot more money.
>Hopefully square will change its mind.
> -Dan
You don't seem to understand that there's no way that Square would be
able to make FF VII on the N64, there's simply not space enough to FF
VII, even if it was on the 64DD(and no it's not because of FMV!)!
Sammael
Acco
> PSX is the best for FFVII, but the N64DD is the best for FFIX (Since VIII
> may be lost in the mix...) And I'm also a big N64 fan...
How do you know that the DD drive would be the best, I would assume that
the memory needs would increase for FFIX. Personally I would not want an
1800 mbyte game spanned across 29 disks, knowing me I would probably lose
several of them.
Sammael
Josh Boyd <jb...@mail.coos.or.us> wrote:
>> You do know that FF VII have sold 3 million copies on the PSX don't
>> you? Also I can inform you that FF VII is the best selling Final
>> Fantasy RPG. So I really don't think that that FF VII would make more
>> money on the N64,
>> Square would make less money because they would have to pay alot more
>> money for cartridges than cd's.
> For your information... 3 million sales is horrible... There's about
>300 million people in the USA alone... That's 1 out of every 100 people
>in the USA, if all of the sales were in the USA... I'm sure that
>there's more than just 1 person out of every 100 that owns a Console
>system...
Hey stupid asshole did you know that FF VII hasn't been released in
the US yet? I guess that the N64 sales are horrible in your opinion
since only 3 million people have bought it in the USA, and what about
Mario 64 it hasn't even sold 3 million in the USA so I guess that's
horrible also(sarcasm intended).
Sammael
Greene
Lewis wrote:
>
> I don't know what the big fuss over Final Fantasy is about, I'd much rather
> have Zelda 64 anyday of the week. Still, if you're wanting it that bad,
> get it for your PC.
Ummm...neither Zelda 64 or Final Fantasy 7 - PC are playable games as we
speak and will not be for some time. It seems foolish to me to prefer
vapor ware to a living breathing game (and yes...until these games are
released they are vapor ware because you CAN'T PLAY THEM YET!!!). You
know what the worst part is...99% of the people that say that FF7 isn't
great haven't EVEN PLAYED IT YET! What...is it the fact that it isn't
for the N64? Is that it?
- D'Ary
Jesse Dorland
laughin...@pipeline.com (The Laughing Bandit) wrote:
>"Lord of Darkness/Lord Magus" <bmet...@iamerica.net> wrote:
>
>>but it is feesable on the N64DD
> Feasable and profitable are two entirely different realms, good sir.
If the 64DD retailed for under $100, and had a decent library of games when ti
was released, it could catch on fairly quickly. A 64DD game probably wouldn't
be very profitable, though, until mid to late 1998.
-Jesse
>
>Gaius Tarquinius Superbus Maximus I Magnus Somniculosus Ex Patricus Priscus
>=================================================================
><<{{The Laughing Bandit!!!}}>>
> <Strikes Again!/ha! Ha! HA!>
>"Insanity is the ultimate low stress lifestyle." -Me
>"The things we regret most are often those we do not do." -Me
>"In Animis Vester, sum deus." -Me
>-The Most Powerful man in Anime Fanficdom
>-Graduate of Akane Tendo's Cookery Masterclass.
>================================================================
>
====================================
Josh Boyd
> Yeah, sure.. post the movie. Probably better than the whole game of
> FF7.
*chuckles, thinking back to FF2...* "Dang this opening sequence... It
was cool when I first saw it, but after 30 times or so it just get's
old... A waste of 11 game minutes..." *wonders how long it will take
people to say that about the FMV in FF7...*
Josh Boyd
> You don't seem to understand that there's no way that Square would be
> able to make FF VII on the N64, there's simply not space enough to FF
> VII, even if it was on the 64DD(and no it's not because of FMV!)!
You don't seem to realize that the main reason FFVII is so large is
because of all the stored information that has to be read... Unlike on
the N64 where it would PROCESS all of that imformation immediately,
instead of having to store it... I have no idea by how much, but the
pseudo 3D environment of FFVII would take up MUCH less space if it were
on the N64... (Storing point data and color data is a lot less info to
store than actual graphics...)
Marcus S.
Jesse Dorland wrote:
>
> > Yes... :) People don't seem to realize that the only information
> >contained on the N64 carts (with graphics) is the positioning of
> >polygons... The process renders the view as you're playing... :) That
> >is FAR beyond any standard home computer right now, seeing as how it can
> >take up to a minute just to render a single frame... :) (And it's
> >doing 15+ (30 for "life" speed) frames per second?) That's why I was
> >laughing when someone on here said that the SGI processer in the N64
> >wasn't anything special... ;) It can whoop any Pentium out there...
> >hehe.
>
> It's going slow, but I think soon we may have some people convinced of this
> fact. The N64 *is* a better game platform than any PC, but people seem to
> think that a higher Megahertz number means a faster computer.
>
> I just read a post where someone said that Quake on the PC looked better than
> anything on the N64! 8-bit palette, unbearably dark screen (due to most of
> the palette being used for light source shading), low enemy polygon count,
> they all make for some terrific graphics compared to the N64, don't they? :-)
> He then continued on about how his P100 could outperform the N64! Ridiculous!
>
> -Jesse
Actually, the N64 processor isn't anything special
(compared to a computer),
but the whole N64 is specialized for 3D games, so
it runs them WAY fater than any PC, though a PC
can process more data faster than an N64.
Josh Boyd
> Yeah, but not all of those people own a PSX as a console system. FF7 is a PSX
> game. In essence 3 million copies sold on a system roughly 2 years old and
> ONLY available for that particular system isn't half bad.
I would be willing to bet that 1 person out of every 100 in the USA
owns a Playstation... And you're forgetting the massive population in
Japan... I didn't include their population because I don't know how
much it is... (Or even the USA's, but my friend said that it was about
300M) I do not consider 3 million copies a large sales amount.
Josh Boyd
> Uhh, are you just trying to be a dumbshit, or are you really so dumb?
> I'm not really sure how many PSXs there are in North America, but let's
> say 6 million in North America and 6 million in Japan. Do you think
> everyone in the US has a PSX or something? There's older people, really
> old people, babies, poor people, people who just don't like video games,
> people who don't care about video games etc. etc. etc. who don't have a
> PSX, so if FFVII sold 3 million, it would be the biggest success in the
> whole damn history of video games sales!! It would mean that 1 out of
> every 2 people who owned a Playstation would BUY FFVII. That means if
> you knew 6 people with PSXs, 3 of them would have the game!!! It's
> phenomenal you idiot!! ESPECIALLY for an rpg. Of course, most people in
> the US just go out and buy the next madden game that comes out, so i'm
> sure the sales will not be as good in the US.
Is that all you have to say on the subject? ;) What about all the
people who buy games, play them, and then sell them to Funco or other
game retailers? *smiles at you calling him an idiot* :) Believe what
you want... *chuckling*