|
Post by spenoza on Nov 8, 2020 22:55:24 GMT
In the end, no matter how you want to draw dividing lines (be it tech and compatibly that it adds, or whatever) - nothing will cut the PCE library as "PCE games, and then there's PCE CD games", except ignorance. On the contrary, you’re ignoring the most powerful argument (which doesn’t discount the idea that CD titles are part of the system’s library, but does clearly indicate there WAS in fact a divide): the PC Engine Shuttle. I mean, there’s the practical argument that all the Core units require an additional purchase (or two) to play the various CD titles, meaning those unwilling to spend more money cannot access a large part of the library. But the Shuttle is a system with NO path to CDs. It only plays HuCards. I know it has most of an expansion port, but even if a CD peripheral or adapter was originally planned for it, it never materialized. Further, even after the CD peripheral was released, NEC didn’t make a complete, combined unit (the Duo) until late 1991 and that same year released the 3rd version of the core, the Core 2. In this sense, the library really is a split library. On the one hand, CD titles are just as much PC Engine games as HuCards, but the library simply isn’t a big happy amalgam. There was a user base of HuCard-only users that was 3-5 times (depending on which numbers you go by) the size of the CD-capable audience. While most of those users had an upgrade path, the price of that upgrade path meant it was always going to be a premium product and not the ground floor experience. I’m sure as the SNES gained momentum that many users abandoned the PCE, and perhaps that meant those who invested in the CD capabilities were more likely to still be invested in the platform as a whole. And if that was going to be the case, the risk of excluding some users was worth
|
|
|
Post by turboxray on Nov 9, 2020 3:40:15 GMT
In the end, no matter how you want to draw dividing lines (be it tech and compatibly that it adds, or whatever) - nothing will cut the PCE library as "PCE games, and then there's PCE CD games", except ignorance. On the contrary, you’re ignoring the most powerful argument (which doesn’t discount the idea that CD titles are part of the system’s library, but does clearly indicate there WAS in fact a divide): the PC Engine Shuttle. I mean, there’s the practical argument that all the Core units require an additional purchase (or two) to play the various CD titles, meaning those unwilling to spend more money cannot access a large part of the library. But the Shuttle is a system with NO path to CDs. It only plays HuCards. I know it has most of an expansion port, but even if a CD peripheral or adapter was originally planned for it, it never materialized. Further, even after the CD peripheral was released, NEC didn’t make a complete, combined unit (the Duo) until late 1991 and that same year released the 3rd version of the core, the Core 2. In this sense, the library really is a split library. On the one hand, CD titles are just as much PC Engine games as HuCards, but the library simply isn’t a big happy amalgam. There was a user base of HuCard-only users that was 3-5 times (depending on which numbers you go by) the size of the CD-capable audience. While most of those users had an upgrade path, the price of that upgrade path meant it was always going to be a premium product and not the ground floor experience. I’m sure as the SNES gained momentum that many users abandoned the PCE, and perhaps that meant those who invested in the CD capabilities were more likely to still be invested in the platform as a whole. And if that was going to be the case, the risk of excluding some users was worth I didn't discount the Shuttle. It's just a cost reduction PCE that came out in late '89. It's hardly relevant, or about as relevant as the GT. Sure, at point in time the library was split, but the Duo line combined them. That's the part where I mentioned the CD medium took over the hucard as the standard for the library. '91 isn't late in the PCE life. And the fact that two more Duo models were made more or less solidifies this. Regardless of the reason, it happened. And that's all that really matters.
|
|
|
Post by spenoza on Nov 9, 2020 4:06:17 GMT
Clearly we’re into the semantic weeds at this point. And while I completely agree that CD title are fully PCE titles and no some minority add-on library, I don’t think it actually affects one core element of the OP: that there were levels of accessibility to the PCE library, and what would the PCE library have looked like without moving to CD? What if the Duo hadn’t unified the library and CD titles hadn’t come to dominate?
|
|
|
Post by Black_Tiger on Nov 9, 2020 5:39:12 GMT
The Sega Master System II doesn't play card games.
The Genesis 3 doesn't work with the Sega-CD, PBC, 32X or even the Genesis game Virtua Racing.
The Intellivision II is incompatible with some official and unlicensed games.
This is typical of the console industry.
Cassette, Play Cable, Intellivoice and ECS games are all part of the Intellivision library.
CD, Mega Modem, Sega Channnel, MegaLD and 32X games are all part of the Mega Drive library.
Console war b.s. and game mags bitd have kept people reverse engineering checklists to disqualify games to this day.
The same logic that says PCE CD games aren't real PCE games means that the Xbox Series X disc games aren't real either, only the stock Series S games are.
Whenever this nonsense comes up, the irrationality is proven as soon as you begin applying it to other consoles.
|
|
|
Post by spenoza on Nov 9, 2020 13:11:54 GMT
It’s not irrationality or ignorance, it’s just a different perspective. There is no “one true path” to these issues. That’s why they tend to degenerate into semantics. A couple of you folks could stand to come down off your high horses for a bit. Seriously...
|
|
a
Deep Blooper
Posts: 40
Fave PCE Shooter: 1943 Kai
Fave PCE Platformer: what's a platformer?
Fave PCE RPG: No.
Currently Playing: Soldier Blade Special
|
Post by a on Nov 9, 2020 19:09:48 GMT
It’s not irrationality or ignorance, it’s just a different perspective. There is no “one true path” to these issues. That’s why they tend to degenerate into semantics. A couple of you folks could stand to come down off your high horses for a bit. Seriously... Plenty of high horses in the PCE world.
|
|
|
Post by spenoza on Nov 9, 2020 20:20:19 GMT
Plenty of high horses in the PCE world.
Plenty of high horses in EVERY fandom and forum. If you've already got a chip on your shoulder about this one, perhaps this isn't the best place for you.
|
|
|
Post by turboxray on Nov 9, 2020 20:40:49 GMT
It’s not irrationality or ignorance, it’s just a different perspective. There is no “one true path” to these issues. That’s why they tend to degenerate into semantics. A couple of you folks could stand to come down off your high horses for a bit. Seriously... Have you not been around to other retro gaming forums in the past 15 years??? A 'different perspective' does not absolve it from ignorance. It definitely can be irrational when people are confronted with points that easy invalid opposing points, but are just dismissed as 'PCE fanboys want to redefine shit'. I've seen it over the past two decades. There is a LOT of ignorance in the retro gaming community related to PCE history and library, and where it fits in. To this day you still get back-handed compliments such as "impressive for an 8bit system", when the relation of the context is something that's superior on the SNES or Genesis. That's ignorant. That's irrational. Honestly, the whole PCE library thing shouldn't even be an argument. It's not even that complex of an idea to understand. It only boils down to 'semantics' when people are too close minded to understand the PCE library, or how its technical specs put it into the same generation as the SNES and Genesis, etc.
|
|
|
Post by dshadoff on Nov 9, 2020 20:51:34 GMT
I mean without the CD add on. People like to talk like the CD add on is just part of the system, they call CD games simply PC Engine games so often, omitting the fact that its a CD. It seems that the PCE CD “is” the PC Engine to a lot of people. It’s almost like the original console has been erased in the minds of these people.. .. Why? What is wrong with it? Is the base PC Engine so lacking that you MUST own a CD drive to enjoy it? Personally I would rather play Super Star Soldier than Nexzr, and I’d rather play Raiden with the chip music. And many other good hucard titles. PC Engine is a great console! Going back to the original question... Both HuCard games and CDROM games are PC Engine games. But if there was ever a question of compatibility or if one wanted to stress the type of music employed, one would be more specific as to HuCard or CDROM... at least in my experience. The only hardware which was HuCard-only was the (failed) Shuttle Grafx, and the (not-too-popular-because-of-cost) PC Engine GT. Any base CoreGrafx or PC Engine which wasn't upgraded to CDROM within the natural life of the PC Engine now has UperGrafx or SSDS3 hardware choices available. And of course, emulators all support CDROM games as well. So neither format should be thought of as the quintessential PC Engine medium, because for ~98% of people, both choices exist. This, of course, does not belittle the HuCard. The differentiation which often gets glossed over is the difference between CDROM and Super CDROM -> again, because CDROM didn't last so ling before it was superceded by Super CDROM. So as a result, Super CDROM games are often simply referred to as "CDROM". This is both correct (in the "optical disc as compared to electrical device" sense) and incorrect (in that "CDROM" is a specific term which means something else in this specific instance).
|
|
|
Post by spenoza on Nov 9, 2020 21:30:22 GMT
Dave's got it. And to address a question from the OP, The PCE IS a little lacking without the CD attachment, in that the PCE is RAM-starved. Even with the original CD-ROM2 format, which was a relatively small RAM cache, you could use that RAM cache to do stuff you couldn't do with ROM and the limited RAM of the PCE. I don't think the PCE is massively lacking, however: some of what's done on HuCard is fantastic. But the fact that the CD-ROM introduced such a cheap (relative to the media, not the add-on itself) path forward for expanding the system's horizons meant there wasn't as much incentive to explore HuCard add-ons, and the one mapper that was developed was used only for Street Fighter II. Sure, the PCE could have used other memory mappers on HuCard, but the PCE was not designed the same way the NES and SNES were.
The NES and SNES were VERY cartridge-friendly in terms of expanding the system's capabilities via add-on chips on-cartridge. Is it fair to view the massive variety of NES mappers as all part of the same system? I mean, the abilities the MMC5 and the VRC6 added to NES games were WELL beyond the capabilities of the base NES. What about the SA1 or SuperFX games on the SNES? The SA1 chip added, among other things, another whole CPU, same as the SNES one only running 3x as fast. Those games are well beyond the base capabilities of the system. But nobody asks (that I've read), "Why did people make all those mapper chips for the NES? Why didn't they just keep making base NES games? What would the NES have been like if there hadn't been any mapper chips?" Same for the SNES.
I imagine you're finding that question easier to ask about the PC Engine because of the physical format difference, in which case, given the library as-is, why would you want to dip your toes into the PCE scene and not also get CD capabilities? The PCE CD and Super CD portion of the library are not some tiny segment like every other add-on in the history of consoles. Why cut yourself off from so many great games? The PCE is not a cheap console to get into right now, even going HuCard-only. Make the extra investment, relatively minor accounting for inflation compared to the original cost, and get BOTH. Both is best.
|
|
|
Post by dshadoff on Nov 9, 2020 22:06:19 GMT
...And this begs the question: "If you were to add a piece of hardware to the PC Engine that doesn't exist in the CDROM attachment, what would it be, and what would you actually use it for, in a game ?"
Even now, I really don't know if there is much that I would add, except perhaps better ADPCM sound (but that would require storage, which would be an additional challenge). Today, it might be possible to add a huge SPI Flash memory and some RAM, and load from SPI at very fast speeds - but that's today's equivalent of 1989's CDROM.
|
|
|
Post by spenoza on Nov 9, 2020 22:15:56 GMT
...And this begs the question: "If you were to add a piece of hardware to the PC Engine that doesn't exist in the CDROM attachment, what would it be, and what would you actually use it for, in a game ?" Even now, I really don't know if there is much that I would add, except perhaps better ADPCM sound (but that would require storage, which would be an additional challenge). Today, it might be possible to add a huge SPI Flash memory and some RAM, and load from SPI at very fast speeds - but that's today's equivalent of 1989's CDROM. The SuperGrafx added a little more system RAM and a second graphics chip, and I think that would have been enough for me. I wish the SuperGrafx hadn't been so badly mishandled. They should have sat on the technology a while until manufacturing costs had slid further and offered it as a replacement Core.
|
|
|
Post by imparanoic on Nov 10, 2020 1:24:40 GMT
you also have to consider that rom was expensive back then, for a small company making games, if they don't make good games with the resources and allocate money to manufacturer hucard, if they get the numbers wrong, the company can go bankrupt, hence why some hucards are so rare, production was never in high numbers in the first place, on the hand, CD rom was affordable and could store much more data, less risky for smaller game developers, but the caveat was less user bases, even lesser with super cdrom cards 3 and arcade card.
|
|
|
Post by SignOfZeta on Nov 10, 2020 1:30:56 GMT
Eh...there’s more to it than that. Once you put a game on a CD people expect CD music, voice acting, cut scenes, etc. That stuff can multiply the cost of a game massively. You also needed more expensive gear to develop the game itself.
|
|
|
Post by imparanoic on Nov 10, 2020 2:28:55 GMT
Eh...there’s more to it than that. Once you put a game on a CD people expect CD music, voice acting, cut scenes, etc. That stuff can multiply the cost of a game massively. You also needed more expensive gear to develop the game itself. you could argue the same, compression techniques to save on rom space and optimisation takes time and money as well.
|
|