The return of the cartridge, are you ready?

[QUOTE="L30KinG"]

was'nt dgital download the futere of consoles?

Willy105

The SDXC format you're talking about put forward a purely theoretical limit of 2tb - and that amount would be so prohibitively expensive it would only be useful for archival purposes. There is no prototype or provable working model - it's purely a theoretical limit. The SDXC spec is just that, a "Spec." It does not mean any company is close to realizing this technology in an affordable or even manufacturable way.

The theoretical limit of BluRay is 200gb (more than you're ever need,) but that doesn't mean we're likely to see a 200gb BDRom on store shelves anytime soon, or that we'll see games using 200gb BluRays.

Toshiba announced a 64gb SDXC card for sale beginning spring 2010, the largest one yet to be made available to consumers. That is 3% the storage space as 2TB.... and even at that size it would be much, muchtoo expensive to use for game cartridges.

This sort of talk is no different whatsoever than stuff like the super high capacity HVD disc. Nice in theory, will never be realized for mass market consumer use. The HVD, by the way, has a theoretical limit of 6tb. So, as long as we're pitting theory against theory I don't know why anyone would go with 2tb over 6tb. It's a useless debate though, kind of like arguing what you'd like to eat on the surface of Mars.You won't be going there anytime soon, so what does it matter?

It's not going to happen. Besides, games are never going to need TB of data. Anything over bluray size will be too expensive to produce anyways.

And even if it does, it won't erase the failure of Nintendo in the past.

[QUOTE="Willy105"][QUOTE="L30KinG"]

was'nt dgital download the futere of consoles?

subrosian

It's not going to happen. Besides, games are never going to need TB of data. Anything over bluray size will be too expensive to produce anyways.

And even if it does, it won't erase the failure of Nintendo in the past.

I think when Sony puts out a 100 or 200 gig bluray will be good for a while with out compressing sound or textures on a disc. Some games today come very close to the 25 and 50 gig disc limit and have to compress things.caseypayne69

[QUOTE="Head_of_games"]

You know guys, I bet that sooner or later we will need a terabyte of space.Look:

1. Eventually graphics will become photo-realistic, which will certainly take up a lot of space. And then there's physics, AI, etc which will also all get better and require more space.

2. Downloadable content seems to be becoming more and more standard. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if in the future instead of buying a game cartridge, you bought a "series cartridge" meaning you would get the first game and all previous games and sequels would be downloadable on to that cartridge. Sounds like something companies would do to make more money.

3. Slowly but surely, computers are slowly catching up to us. I bet that in the not too distant future developers, instead of developing a game, will be able to write a program that would develop the game better than any human would, with no drawbacks. And since computers can work faster than humans and do it 24//7, games will inevitably become much larger than they are today.

hakanakumono

Photo realistic games will probably never become financially viable.

[QUOTE="gamer620"][QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

It's not going to happen. Besides, games are never going to need TB of data. Anything over bluray size will be too expensive to produce anyways.

And even if it does, it won't erase the failure of Nintendo in the past.

HuusAsking

Well, SD will be fast enough (that was a big problem) but there's still the issue of security and pirated software.

goblaa

[QUOTE="dkrustyklown"]

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

It's not going to happen. Besides, games are never going to need TB of data. Anything over bluray size will be too expensive to produce anyways.

And even if it does, it won't erase the failure of Nintendo in the past.

hakanakumono

That's not the issue. If they don't need 2 TB of storage, then they won't use such a large card. I presume that would also mean that a game cartridge would be less expensive to produce than a hypothetical 2 TB card. The important part is that since SD media will have far more capacity than what is necessary for gaming, there will be no reason to use discs any more. The reason that the disc replaced the cartridge is because of the perceived limitations on the storage capacity of cartridges at the time. The only advantage that discs had in the past was their sheer storage capacity. With that advantage gone, I just can't justify the use of disc media any longer.

I REALLY like the idea of no moving parts. Everyone else here, as gamers & consumers, should also like the idea of not having moving parts in their consoles, as no moving parts means more reliable, longer-lived gear.

Bluray will still be less expensive than the 50GB SD card. Besides, disc sized media are really better for gaming while small, easily lost cards are better for things like cell phones and laptops. They're not going to put the extra effort into trying to prevent cartridges from easily been pirated when it will be so much easier for them to just continue using existing technology, especially when movies will continue to be released on bluray. It will just make sense for games to continue to be released on bluray.

My Sega Saturn is still going strong. Moving parts aren't really going to stop it from working.

[QUOTE="santoron"]Simple. Price. Memory cards have dropped substantially in price this decade, but they are no where near as cost effective as DVD or BluRays. Manufacturing discs costs pennies. Memory cards are prohibitively expensive, by comparison. Meory will continue to get cheaper, but it will be a LOOOOONG time before it could compare with discs in price, if ever.

Couth_

why replace something that costs $0.75 per unit with something that costs several dollars? this would simply raise game prices with little real benefit.subrosian

[QUOTE="casualtrashnow4"]cartridges=the most long lasting durable consoles and storage format for games. my snes,nes,64 even jaguar 64 still work lol, i had xbox dvd rom drive wear out on my 2 times last generation plus this gen peoples dvd rom and blu ray drive will eventually wear out everyone needs to go back to cartridges. plus digital download is bad because harddrives wear out alsohakanakumono

Cartridge slots wear out as well.

SD-cards will always fight an un-even battle. It doesn't matter how cheap, effective or big the SD-cards get, all other forms of storage will move at the same speed or faster. When an 10GB SD card have a cost of $1 the disk format available will still be cheap enough so that the SD-cards still won't be the more profitable solution.

The only way SD-cards could return (or any for of cartridge) is if the technology advancement of all other form of storage would stop which won't happen for several reasons.

* The environmental effect will always be against SD-cards compared to any other disk format as the SD-cards takes longer time to produce and requires more expensive and harmful materials.

* The cost of the cards themselves. Why would you produce a more expensive form of storage just for the sake of producing that format?

* The time SD-cards will be cheap enough to have huge games on them the other storage forms will be even more cheaper.

* The time SD-cards would potentiallybe cheap enough to have all games on, digital distribution will be the more effective way for games in every possibly way.

The is no reason to move back to SD-cards as it is more expensive to produce and more harmful to our environment and always will be.

JLF1

I think when Sony puts out a 100 or 200 gig bluray will be good for a while with out compressing sound or textures on a disc. Some games today come very close to the 25 and 50 gig disc limit and have to compress things.caseypayne69

[QUOTE="bronxxbombers"]I have a feeling that before that, we will just have direct downloads, so itll neva happen.FunkyHeadHunter

^^^^THIS^^^^^.....Honestly...dvd, bluray are going to be a thing of the past very soon. My local walmart at one time had quite a few bluray dvds...BUT now they have nearly none...I think its only a matter of time before all moveable media is a thing of the past...everything is going to be downloadable very soon.

As long as I don't have to blow on it again.siLVURcross

I apologise I just could not resist.

It's not going to happen. Besides, games are never going to need TB of data. Anything over bluray size will be too expensive to produce anyways.

And even if it does, it won't erase the failure of Nintendo in the past.

hakanakumono

Wow... your comment is so full of fail, I dont really know where to start..... but lets see here....

1. "It's not going to happen"...... May I borrow your crystal ball? Pahleeeeeaaase!

2. "games are never going to need TB of data"....... OH RLY? so in 1990 we had games that on average were LESS than 2 MB, and 19 years later we have games that are over 20 GB's, you don't think a game could possibly be built in the future, using a TB? or 2 even? LOL!

3. "Anything over bluray size will be too expensive to produce"..... OH RLY? is that why CD's & DVD's still cost upwards of $30.... they must in your world, where the price of technology never drops, apparently. LOL!

4. "it won't erase the failure of Nintendo in the past"...... LOL WHAT?what does that have to do with anything?

[QUOTE="subrosian"]why replace something that costs $0.75 per unit with something that costs several dollars? this would simply raise game prices with little real benefit.imprezawrx500

Just so you know each time you save something on a flash memory (USB thumb drives, SD disks) the device must rearrange it's file path so that it's transistors don't wear out. This means that read times on these devices become increasingly slow. In order to play games from a "flash like" memory they would have to come on a solid state drive or DRAM which will be super expensive. So more or less the cartridge is never coming back it's dead technology. I would expect to see digital downloads as the new way to play games.

I couldnt find anything about this to explane it in depth but here is a wiki article so that you know Im not lying to you =P

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetoresistive_Random_Access_Memory

"Flash and MRAM are very similar in power requirements. However, Flash is re-written using a large pulse of voltage (about 10 V) that is stored up over time in a charge pump, which is both power-hungry and time consuming. Additionally the current pulse physically degrades the Flash cells, which means Flash can only be written to some finite number of times before it must be replaced."

You are entirely missing the point - and you CANNOT use consumer pricing of blank discs to get the cost to *businesses producing media*. The *variable cost* of an optical disc has been cheaper since the SEGA CD, and it is the VARIABLE COST that is all that matters. It does not matter what an optical drive costs, how often an optical drive fails, or what the data transfer rate is. All that matters, the only thing that matters, is how much it costs to stamp one additional copy of a game. - With optical discs, the answer is "next to nothing", with flash memory, the answer is "a couple of bucks" - and that translates into tens of millions of dollars in cost differences for game companies. - ANYONE who does not fully grasp the importance of variable costs in media distribution, please, please, please STOP RESPONDING UNTIL YOU GRASP THE CONCEPT. Don't argue with me - don't assume, don't rant, scream, debate, or interject. It's not a subject up for debate, you are simply wrong - this is my area of expertise - this is *what I do* - if you need help grasping why companies *don't* want to spend several million dollars more *per title*, why the cost of the *media* is far more important than the cost of the *drive*, then please, don't argue. Do some research, ask questions if you have to, but grasp the concept before continuing this fruitless debate :|subrosian

From what I have been reading of your past posts is that you have a job that entitles you with task of making decisions for the *now*. So, apparently, your work involves making business decisions that would bring the most $$$ to the company *now*. You need to think about the *next*. Are these business decisions that you are making for your company *now* going to work for your company in the *next* when the *next* will have more plausible variety of options to choose from? The answer is yes. The business decisions that are best for the company are always going to keep being made regardless of what new technology comes along.

But what if the best business decision involves taking advantage of the *next*? Something that makes the CD look like a floppy disk? Maybe it wont even be physical storage. I don't know what decisions these companies are going to make in the *next*. All I know is that *something* is going to replace spinning storage, that's a given, something better and easier to produce ALWAYS replaces older ideas eventually. Is it going to be flash based media? Don't know. What I do know is that newer, cheaper materials along with more efficient manufacturing processes are ALWAYS being created to make current tech *cheaper* to produce. That kind of scenario can be attached to many things, including flash drives. I know that research is under way to try and find newer materials to make transistor devices cheaper and more efficient. The improvements to the current idea almost always include more efficiency along with making that idea cheaper to produce. Take that idea and add flash media to it. Eventually flash drives with the capacity to store games are going to be *.75* each. Now is the manufacturing process going to make flash drives too expensive to produce regaurdless of how cheap they become? I don't know. But if one thing improves so do others; in this case manufacturing. What if the cost of flash media along with the manufacturing process actually does make them a viable option for a company in the *next*?

Now by the time that happens I'm sure that something even better and cheaper is going to come along, making both spinning storage as well as flash storage obsolete. You are, however, making it sound like spinning storage is the "end all be all" repository for media. I'm just saying that you need to keep an open mind of *what if* scenarios.

As long as I don't have to blow on it again.siLVURcross

If I sounded like I was defending flash drives I actually wasn't. I said that there was a *possibility* of flash drives (just like most everything else) will eventually become cheap enough to mass produce so it can be used as a storage medium for games but by the time that happens something better and cheaper would have already taken over. If you read the last two paragraphs of my post you would see that I actually agreed with you on that idea.

And I'm not arguing about facts, I'm arguing about the plausibility of something else eventually becoming a reality. As far as your vinyl, CD, mp3 metaphor goes I was not arguing whether or not flash drives *will* be used when better options are available, I was arguing about the possibility of flash drives actually being able to be reduced in price as well as the possibility of them becoming cheap enough to manufacture, which would give these types of drives the *option* of being used. Again, by the time this happens flash drives wont be utilized in gaming because something else would have already replaced it.

Currently I am attending school to become an engineer, I have an engineering state of mind. You said that flash drives will *never* be cheap enough to mass market for gaming. I argued otherwise saying that newer, better ways of creating them would allow them to eventually be used for what the TC was describing. It's weird how you think that newer ways of creating certain things which (hopefully) would make them available for a certain medium is in the realm of impossibilities.

Again, I wasn't arguing *for* flash drives. I was arguing about the fact that are always newer ways of making a wide variety of things cheap enough to produce for the general public, flash drive manufacturing is in that variety. Whether or not these newer ways of creating them will allow them to be available to the public in time is a different story. I was using flash drives as an example of these possibilities since there are *ALWAYS* better, cheaper ways of creating something. Again, I was not fighting for flash drives, I was arguing about the fact that there is always a way of *creating* EVERYTHING cheaper, all you have to do is think of the idea and make that idea a reality. So, eventually, super cheap flash drive manufacturing will be created.

As far as flash drives actually being used for games, I think that digital distribution is going to take that job because these new manufacturing processes cant be created fast enough to allow flash storage to beat other, better, more efficient storage mediums, which would be more viable solutions for storing games. Once flash media does reach that point it will be used for a wide variety of things taking advantage of how cheap it has become.

The write speed on flash drives right now is waaay slower than on a HDD.

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

SD-cards will always fight an un-even battle. It doesn't matter how cheap, effective or big the SD-cards get, all other forms of storage will move at the same speed or faster. When an 10GB SD card have a cost of $1 the disk format available will still be cheap enough so that the SD-cards still won't be the more profitable solution.

The only way SD-cards could return (or any for of cartridge) is if the technology advancement of all other form of storage would stop which won't happen for several reasons.

* The environmental effect will always be against SD-cards compared to any other disk format as the SD-cards takes longer time to produce and requires more expensive and harmful materials.

* The cost of the cards themselves. Why would you produce a more expensive form of storage just for the sake of producing that format?

* The time SD-cards will be cheap enough to have huge games on them the other storage forms will be even more cheaper.

* The time SD-cards would potentiallybe cheap enough to have all games on, digital distribution will be the more effective way for games in every possibly way.

The is no reason to move back to SD-cards as it is more expensive to produce and more harmful to our environment and always will be.

imprezawrx500

Ironic that vinyl has come back from the dead and audiophiles preach by it isn't it?

You're literally sitting here and arguing in favor of vinyl during the CD erasubrosian

Actually Trmpt, my job is to make decisions for companies about the future - that's exactly what I do, and I'm damn good at it. I'd appreciate you not making assumptions and what I do and don't know, and what I can and cannot do. subrosian

So we're just supposed to take your word for that, huh? I think not. You haven't demonstrated any reason why your position is any more credible than anyone elses.

You keep harking on "costs", but then you argue from an infinately narrow position. Apparently, you're only concerned with DEVELOPER'S costs, since you keep trumpeting the low-cost of discs. At the same time, you completely ignore drive costs. Spinning optical drives are certainly more expensive than a cartridge slot. Spinning optical drives are also inherently more prone to failure, due to their mechanical nature. So while you obsess over the developer's costs, you ignore the consumer's costs. Sure, they might get cheap discs, but then they also have to deal with expensive consoles that often fail due to normal usage and are much more prone to manufacturing defects.

There's a trade-off involved, and you're only looking through rose-tinted glasses at one side of the trade-off. Perhaps this is because you work on the developer's side of things. You're here beating your chest about how you think that makes you more knowledgeable than everyone else on the subject, but in reality, it only makes you biased. In my opinion, that makes your arguments less credible, not more.

[QUOTE="subrosian"]Actually Trmpt, my job is to make decisions for companies about the future - that's exactly what I do, and I'm damn good at it. I'd appreciate you not making assumptions and what I do and don't know, and what I can and cannot do. dkrustyklown

So we're just supposed to take your word for that, huh? I think not. You haven't demonstrated any reason why your position is any more credible than anyone elses.

You keep harking on "costs", but then you argue from an infinately narrow position. Apparently, you're only concerned with DEVELOPER'S costs, since you keep trumpeting the low-cost of discs. At the same time, you completely ignore drive costs. Spinning optical drives are certainly more expensive than a cartridge slot. Spinning optical drives are also inherently more prone to failure, due to their mechanical nature. So while you obsess over the developer's costs, you ignore the consumer's costs. Sure, they might get cheap discs, but then they also have to deal with expensive consoles that often fail due to normal usage and are much more prone to manufacturing defects.

There's a trade-off involved, and you're only looking through rose-tinted glasses at one side of the trade-off. Perhaps this is because you work on the developer's side of things. You're here beating your chest about how you think that makes you more knowledgeable than everyone else on the subject, but in reality, it only makes you biased. In my opinion, that makes your arguments less credible, not more.

The fact that he's far more educated than anyone else on the matter and is actually the one advising companies to stay with disc based media isn't enough to say that it's going to stay disc based?

The wear of optical media players is irrelevant to the format the gaming market choses. Games are a business and whether it's the disc reader on a PS1 or the cartridge port on the NES (which are wearing out now btw), it's in the business only interest to sell games for the moment and utilize whatever format is most profitable.

So because he's a professional it makes him less credible? I hope you realize that other people can read what you're writing and see how ridiculous it is.

The fact that he's far more educated than anyone else on the matter and is actually the one advising companies to stay with disc based media isn't enough to say that it's going to stay disc based?

The wear of optical media players is irrelevant to the format the gaming market choses.

hakanakumono

So you're just saying that the consumer takes what he's given, and that consumers lack the power with which to demand a better system? Amazing.

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

The fact that he's far more educated than anyone else on the matter and is actually the one advising companies to stay with disc based media isn't enough to say that it's going to stay disc based?

The wear of optical media players is irrelevant to the format the gaming market choses.

dkrustyklown

So you're just saying that the consumer takes what he's given, and that consumers lack the power with which to demand a better system? Amazing.

The consumer isn't going to demand a cartridge system because it's not going to be offered to them, nor is the common consumer going to factor in whether a system uses cartridges or disc based media into their decision. Nintendo, Sony, nor MS will ever release a cartridge based console because it's just not profitable for them to do so. The company that goes with cartridges will lose 3rd parties to the sytems that use disc based media.

And when NES cartridge ports are wearing out, your argument is hardly credible.

The fact of the matter is, Subrosian's point is based on an intimate knowledge of the inner workings of the gaming industry, an understanding of how pricing works, and general common sense.

Your point is based on nothing more than ideals. You have proved time and time again in this thread that you lack an understanding of what you're talking about.

The wear of optical media players is irrelevant to the format the gaming market choses. Games are a business and whether it's the disc reader on a PS1 or the cartridge port on the NES (which are wearing out now btw), it's in the business only interest to sell games for the moment and utilize whatever format is most profitable.

hakanakumono

Wow. Once again, you're alluding to disc players being just as durable as slot readers by pointing at some NES slots that were poorly designed, yet you ignore the many, much older Atari slots that were much more reliable, as well as the SNES, Genesis, and N64 slot readers whose reliability are clearly superior to any disc reader on the market today.

Also, we get a nice dose of putting the horse before the cart by claiming that business needs override consumer needs. I have a bit of news for you. Businesses come and businesses go, but the consumer persists forever. Business interests are secondary to consumer interests. If what you claim were true, then American automobile manufacturers wouldn't be in the dire straights that they find themselves in today. What happened in the 70's, 80's, & 90's was a full-fledged consumer revolt against American manufacturers that insisted on placing their business needs ahead of the interests of consumers. By placing short-term business interests ahead of the consumer's need for a reliable and durable product, they painted themselves into a corner from which they might not be able to extricate themselves.

If you don't think that consumers can rise up and toss aside an established business model, then I suggest you take a look at history, because history is littered by the carcasses of business models that, while good for a time, failed to consistently meet the needs of the consumer.

it pisses me off to no end to watch people continually ignore reasoning in favor of their own fantasies.subrosian

then you must really like system wars to stick around. i, personally, am content to ignore ignorance. one guy thinks that flash media might replace discs in mass distribution. most people know he's wrong.

just curious, how do see storage working when DD dominates the video game industry (assuming you think that will happen)? will i be able to take my copy of madden (physically or digitally) over to my friends house, who doesn't have a copy of the game, and play it on their system? will cloud computing factor into this in any way?

It would be wonderful to see these used as a means of storing game data, but I bet they cost an arm and a leg to produce.

[QUOTE="hakanakumono"]

The wear of optical media players is irrelevant to the format the gaming market choses. Games are a business and whether it's the disc reader on a PS1 or the cartridge port on the NES (which are wearing out now btw), it's in the business only interest to sell games for the moment and utilize whatever format is most profitable.

dkrustyklown

Wow. Once again, you're alluding to disc players being just as durable as slot readers by pointing at some NES slots that were poorly designed, yet you ignore the many, much older Atari slots that were much more reliable, as well as the SNES, Genesis, and N64 slot readers whose reliability are clearly superior to any disc reader on the market today.

Also, we get a nice dose of putting the horse before the cart by claiming that business needs override consumer needs. I have a bit of news for you. Businesses come and businesses go, but the consumer persists forever. Business interests are secondary to consumer interests. If what you claim were true, then American automobile manufacturers wouldn't be in the dire straights that they find themselves in today. What happened in the 70's, 80's, & 90's was a full-fledged consumer revolt against American manufacturers that insisted on placing their business needs ahead of the interests of consumers. By placing short-term business interests ahead of the consumer's need for a reliable and durable product, they painted themselves into a corner from which they might not be able to extricate themselves.

If you don't think that consumers can rise up and toss aside an established business model, then I suggest you take a look at history, because history is littered by the carcasses of business models that, while good for a time, failed to consistently meet the needs of the consumer.

both ford and gm have consistently had higher sales then honda- not toyota though (although if you look at their most recent income statement, you'll see that toyota is losing money right now to).

ford and gm's problem wasn't based purely off of dwindling demand (like i said, they both still have much higher sales then honda). honda isn't in a better position because they make better cars (american cars have been beating japanese in durability according to recent consumer reports). honda's business is much healthier and profitable because they can scale back costs when sales decrease to a greater degree then the american car companies.

considering the forum i won't go any further, but i don't think you should be referencing something that you might not know the facts too.