Haha. Semantics? that's a good one.
It gets better...
You have some serious flaws in your thinking.
The example Clock is ticking.
Either you weren't old enough(which is my guess) to understand the situation BITD,
I celebrated the five-year anniversary of my doctorate last week. Care to try again?
or you just don't get it.
Example Clock is *still* ticking...
Besides, Nintendo's actions speak for themselves. If it was a worth while pursuit, Nintendo would have done it.
Buying gold eight years ago also would've been a good idea, but most of us didn't do it. That an unworthy pursuit doth not make.
Maybe you didn't know this, but before the 16bit generation, the majority of gamers were young kids and barely teens.
...which explains why I discussed marketing around that very demographic in my prior post: timing the official
Nintendo Power announcement to coincide with the autumnal return to school, word-of-mouth on the playground at recess, the holiday buying season (i.e., when most of us *got* our annual Nintendo fix), etc. Did those pixels not show up on your monitor, or were you too busy ignoring the Example Clock to notice?
Parents did most/majority of the spending/funding (and renting was very popular). Upgrade/Addons need to have significantly comparable difference, to justify the price/purchase. Something as small as a single inclusive mapper isn't going to cut it (not to mention that the technology already existed on cart, in working fashion).
Please cite the portion of my initial post where I state that this concept involved/was limited to a single mapper. (Then tell me again about the serious flaws in
my thinking, ROFL!)
And like I said, developers are going to be reluctant to support it without a large enough consumer base.
They do or they don't. Perhaps you should review the section where I discussed how the Game Genie, 4-Player Adapter and N64 Expansion Pak were all optional peripherals, and how developers weren't forced to support any of them.
And to say they could have made dual carts, is just retarded.
Who said that?
I'm sure the last thing Nintendo wanted, was to confuse the parents and kids about which game to purchase.
Farmer Bob called; he wants his strawman back.
Anyway, I got nothing more to say without repeating myself. I'll not bother continuing this debate. Good luck in trying to figure it out
Already did! I'll be faxing my professional recommendation to your psychiatrist tomorrow morning. :crazy:
Oh, and you should get rid of that fanboy-ism (or more specifically the Sega hate'n). It's such an ugly/unbecoming trait.
Facts is facts; Sega bit the big one and anyone paying attention during the '90's knows exactly how & why.
May 20, 2010, 01:41:33 am - (Auto Merged - Double Posts are not allowed before 7 days.)
If it really would have brought game prices down, I would have been in favor of it. When I was a kid, I was severely limited by how many games we could actually purchase because of the high cost. If an expansion unit cost $70 but made all subsequent games cost about $25 to $40, I would have appreciated it and probably would have bought it. But the gaming industry rarely prices things in favor of the consumer. Cutting edge gaming tends to drive up prices. I doubt it would have, in reality, made much difference in the price of the games if they chose to implement something like that.
On the topic of price: I never did understand why
Maniac Mansion only cost $20 new & sealed, when everything else was at least $40...
I recall reading somewhere that the cost of MMC5 hardware was the main reason most third-party developers shied away from it. Maybe that was the [shoutout] genesis [/shoutout] of this idea?
Now that I think about it, Nintendo should've just sent us all one of these things as a concession for that price-fixing scandal (instead of those dopey coupons).
RHDN Forum Archive
Author