the games would be bigger and better if they went with larger discs right?GspotDeluxer
Maybe?
It was for anti-theft. PS1 and PS2 were heavily modded. Nintendo did it because its harder to burn the gamecube discs. I think its just that cut and dry.
Anti-piracy, yes, and also faster loading times. Smaller discs make for less work for the laser - data can be accessed more quickly when the laser doesn't have as far to go.
[QUOTE="GspotDeluxer"]the games would be bigger and better if they went with larger discs right?sonic_spark
Maybe?
It was for anti-theft. PS1 and PS2 were heavily modded. Nintendo did it because its harder to burn the gamecube discs. I think its just that cut and dry.
[QUOTE="GspotDeluxer"]the games would be bigger and better if they went with larger discs right?peypan
Maybe?
It was for anti-theft. PS1 and PS2 were heavily modded. Nintendo did it because its harder to burn the gamecube discs. I think its just that cut and dry.
but xbox didnt have any problems........
Yes but xbox also had a hard drive to help wit the loading
Totally. Burning mini cd's isn't a huge feat. Piracy is something that can't be avoided, and your answer to the question is probably that the games Nintendo brings out are tiny. They're compacted little tiny games that don't even warrant cds up until that console.
Yes I agree with the original post, that if they were on 700mb cds the games would proabably have been even better looking and hold more gameplay though.
[QUOTE="GspotDeluxer"]the games would be bigger and better if they went with larger discs right?beefdog
Maybe?
It was for anti-theft. PS1 and PS2 were heavily modded. Nintendo did it because its harder to burn the gamecube discs. I think its just that cut and dry.
but xbox didnt have any problems........
Yes but xbox also had a hard drive to help wit the loading
noo xbox didnt have problems w piracy. maybe cuz it sold so much less.....
noo xbox didnt have problems w piracy. maybe cuz it sold so much less.....
DarkManiaN_1979
You must be joking. Xbox is by far the easiest console to modify and use for pirated games. The GC probably used mini disks because they were too cheap to produce games that warrant a full 700mb :lol:
it was still hacked, and it was easy but it was hacked much less..... you could get mario64 on ur box
Totally. Burning mini cd's isn't a huge feat. Piracy is something that can't be avoided, and your answer to the question is probably that the games Nintendo brings out are tiny. They're compacted little tiny games that don't even warrant cds up until that console.
Yes I agree with the original post, that if they were on 700mb cds the games would proabably have been even better looking and hold more gameplay though.
DarkManiaN_1979
true, the n64 games and others before that generation were very small, but it was anti-piracy. smaller discs of various types means various series of trial and error for hackers/burners in order to make things happen. nintendo, mind you, was also very big on individuality. make the smallest console with the smallest disks of the three consoles that ran the best and was the most portable/durable. that was the theme they went with for individality
Correct, so it was able to have the same multi-platform games as the PS2 and X-Box with compression.
Most GC versions ofmultiplatform games had the same compression or no compression, like PS2 and Xbox versions. It was rare when GC versions had extra compression because the disc, despite being half the size, still has a lot of disc space. Even when extra compression was needed (at rare times), it was used only in FMV's, and FMV's still looked good most of the time, running at 30 FPS and in full screen.
Totally. Burning mini cd's isn't a huge feat. Piracy is something that can't be avoided, and your answer to the question is probably that the games Nintendo brings out are tiny. They're compacted little tiny games that don't even warrant cds up until that console.
Yes I agree with the original post, that if they were on 700mb cds the games would proabably have been even better looking and hold more gameplay though.
DarkManiaN_1979
Gamecube discs had 4.7Gb of memory, which is smaller compared to the DVD's used in the XBOX and PS2. I think DVD's had about 8 Gb's.
1-It was a either fast or faster on some-Batallion Wars has the longest loading screen for a GC game
Wrong. Finding Nemo has the longest loading times/screen for a GC game. Probably due to poor programming (the PS2 and Xbox versions take as long as about 18 seconds), some levels take almost 2 minutes to load while others (usually bonus levels) take 3-20 seconds depending on the level. However, most GC versions/exclusivesload fast (and faster than other versions when it comes to multiplatform games) like Nintendo promised they would achieve with the GC. The PS2 version of Sonic Heroes, for example, takes 20 seconds to load a level while the GC version takes only 8 seconds.
Gamecube discs had 4.7Gb of memory, which is smaller compared to the DVD's used in the XBOX and PS2. I think DVD's had about 8 Gb's. Link-from-Hell
Actually, single-layer Gamecube discs hold 1.5GB, while normal single-layer DVDs, such as what the XBox and PS2 use, hold 4.7GB. I don't mean to condescend, but it's a well-known fact.
Actually, single-layer Gamecube discs hold 1.5GB, while normal single-layer DVDs, such as what the XBox and PS2 use, hold 4.7GB. I don't mean to condescend, but it's a well-known fact.
Yes, that's a fact. Also a fact is the GC loads most of it'sgames fast.
[QUOTE="Link-from-Hell"]Gamecube discs had 4.7Gb of memory, which is smaller compared to the DVD's used in the XBOX and PS2. I think DVD's had about 8 Gb's. JordanElek
Actually, single-layer Gamecube discs hold 1.5GB, while normal single-layer DVDs, such as what the XBox and PS2 use, hold 4.7GB. I don't mean to condescend, but it's a well-known fact.
Oh right, well either way, the Gamecube discs were smaller, so what I read was a lie! Damn false information!
1-It was a either fast or faster on some-Batallion Wars has the longest loading screen for a GC game
Wrong. Finding Nemo has the longest loading times/screen for a GC game. Probably due to poor programming (the PS2 and Xbox versions take as long as about 18 seconds), some levels take almost 2 minutes to load while others (usually bonus levels) take 3-20 seconds depending on the level. However, most GC versions/exclusivesload fast (and faster than other versions when it comes to multiplatform games) like Nintendo promised they would achieve with the GC. The PS2 version of Sonic Heroes, for example, takes 20 seconds to load a level while the GC version takes only 8 seconds.
Nintendogamer33
Don't ask why I played that game but those load screens were really brutal.
Anti-piracy, yes, and also faster loading times. Smaller discs make for less work for the laser - data can be accessed more quickly when the laser doesn't have as far to go.JordanElek
Yeah. I saw a French documentary many years ago when the Cube came out and they were interviewing Miyamoto about the decision to keep the cartridges for the N64 and the switch they were finally making to the discs.
For Miyamoto, the main reason was the loading time. He was explaining how he thought Sony made a bad choice (just remember how slow it was in Resident Evil when you were entering another room...) to have bigger games with longer loading times. He thought it was unbearable to wait, so this is why Nintendo kept the cartridges for the N64.
But then it was necessary to change that for the Gamecube to lower the production costs (Nintendo now had to fight against Sony and Microsoft), to prevent piracy and to make it easier to develop games with nicer music and all the advantages of the discs.
Log in to comment