PC Engine Creator Memories

[jlued686]

Years and years ago, I used to work at NEC Home Electronics and just by chance, I happened work with someone who was involved with designing the PC Engine. It's not every day you meet someone who helped bring about such an iconic piece of video game hardware and it's been something of a lingering dream of mine for a long time to be able to talk to them about their involvement.

I first learned about the connection soon after joining the company. Back then, however, I had no published experience as a writer, let alone conducted an interview before, so I sat on that desire to interview them for a good 20 years or so. But after Joseph told me about his mission to preserve every game to such a definitive degree, I felt it was time to act and make that interview happen, seeing as how, again, preserving memories about games is just as important to us at the Society as preserving the games themselves.

The timing for doing so couldn't have been any better. This coworker of mine recently retired at long last and while attending their farewell party, I finally summoned the courage to ask them if they would be willing to discuss their history with the PC Engine. Luckily for me, they graciously accepted. The main thing I decided to focus on in the interview was how the planning and design process went for the PC Engine from NEC's side. Much has been written over the years about the technology that Hudson contributed to the system and while that's all well and good, I thought it was important to also discuss NEC's side of the story as a collaborator, too, while the people involved with it are still around to talk about it.

I sat down with my former coworker one chilly autumn day in Shibuya in 2015 to discuss times long past, the clouds above threatening to rain. The text of that interview follows below. One thing to note, however, is that this coworker wanted to remain anonymous, so for the duration of the interview, they'll be referred to simply as "K."

Enjoy!

https://www.gamepres.org/en/2017/02/23/pcengine/

[elmer]

Excellent! That was very interesting reading.

Good to get confirmation that the CD wasn't an add-on, but a core driving factor behind the PC Engine's very existence in the first place.

The comment about needing a polygonal-successor was fascinating ... it makes me wonder Why On Earth they chose to release the PC-FX without the 3D chip that's on the PC-FXGA.

[NecroPhile]

Interesting read; thanks for sharing.

+1 on confirming the CD's importance, and +1 on the PC-FX lulz, though it's too bad he didn't address it directly.

[jlued686]

Yeah, I was hoping for a bit more insight on the PC-FX, too. The guy even says that PC Engine never got a "proper" successor.

Poor little PC-FX...

[SignOfZeta]

This is one of the most interesting things about the PCE I've read. Thanks for sharing.

[Addicted]

Thanks for an interesting read.

[SamIAm]

Thanks for sharing!

I suspect that the inside scoop on the PC-FX might be hard to get just because it's not a happy story. Maybe someday, though.

[Pokun]

OK I finally read this, a very good read indeed!

Good to get confirmation that the CD wasn't an add-on, but a core driving factor behind the PC Engine's very existence in the first place.

Exactly what I was thinking.
We had heated discussions in the past about how the CD-ROM² was just an "unsuccessful" or "moderately successful add-on" like the Famicom Disk System, and that the PC Engine is "mainly about the HuCards". Of course these are lies (and that the FDS being unsuccessful are also lies BTW, although it was no CD-ROM²).

Although I guess Hudson's insight in the arcade/console market was an important factor as well in making it into good console hardware. Considering they designed the excellent CPU/sound and video chips.

The comment about needing a polygonal-successor was fascinating ... it makes me wonder Why On Earth they chose to release the PC-FX without the 3D chip that's on the PC-FXGA.

I guess they simply weren't happy about that 3D chip, which delayed its release. According to the interview they where unable to find a partner that could help them make 3D hardware that was good for games. Considering how many 32-bit era consoles failed, I guess only Sony and Nintendo (and maybe Sega) was really successful in doing that in the end.


Another interesting point in the interview is how the countless models of the PC Engine was part of NEC's strategy of aiming the system to different types of consumers. And that the Super Grafx was part of that as well.

But I wonder how much of that is true for the Super Grafx though. From what I heard earlier, it was initially supposed to be a real 16-bit machine competing in the 16-bit era, but it ended up being released earlier and as just a slight hardware upgrade for enthusiasts.

[ccovell]

But I wonder how much of that is true for the Super Grafx though. From what I heard earlier, it was initially supposed to be a real 16-bit machine competing in the 16-bit era, but it ended up being released earlier and as just a slight hardware upgrade for enthusiasts.

The SuperGrafx is an enigma.  Released at the end of 1989 for way too much money and little software support.

Nintendo did showcase their Super Famicom in late 1988, and again in mid-1989, to achieve (theoretically) at least 2 purposes: 1) to trick buyers into thinking the SFC is coming soon, and so save their money they might otherwise spend on PCE or MegaDrive system purchases; 2) to spook other hardware manufacturers into releasing their unfinished hardware projects sooner, and so play their hand first.

To me it looks like NEC swallowed the bait and did #2.  Hudson even didn't have much confidence in the SGX but were forced to put on a big smile when following NEC's whims.

[SignOfZeta]

What NEC did with the SGX is essentially what they and many other computer manufacturers did at the time: make something for people who have twice as much money. It works for computers because they are expensive and the customers are older so they rarely complained about how their Amiga 2500HD or Macintosh IIfx didn't turn out to be very useful. When you do this with a game console people are less forgiving for multiple reasons.

In the Japan bubble economy Pioneer and Sony made so many awesome/stupid products for many times more than they were worth and most of the really bonkers/quixotic ones are seen as classics. The SGX is just a PCE though, still plastic, still has squeeky sound, still aimed at grade school kids, isn't going to have the same legacy as a $2000 cassette player or an LD-W1. Furthermore, if a game system is seen as any kind of a failure its customers often feel duped.

[Pokun]

Yeah and unlike a computer, a console relies heavily on software support. With only 5 exclusive games, the SGX wasn't very useful for what it costed.

[SignOfZeta]

There were plenty of computers back then with fancy hardware that just sat there without proper software, exactly like a Supergrafx. This was before massively powerful multitasking OSs and universal drivers. If hardware wasn't directly addressed by the only program running then it didn't do anything. You can't even change the processor speed without breaking almost every program on an 80s computer. I imagine the PC-88VA mentioned in the article was very much in that situation.

[elmer]

What NEC did with the SGX is essentially what they and many other computer manufacturers did at the time: make something for people who have twice as much money. It works for computers because they are expensive and the customers are older so they rarely complained about how their Amiga 2500HD or Macintosh IIfx didn't turn out to be very useful. When you do this with a game console people are less forgiving for multiple reasons.

Exactly.

NEC were having some success with the PCE, and as a Home Electronics and Computer company, they probably thought that making a Super PCE for high-end gamers was great idea.

They still didn't quite understand how the console market works, and how developers can't afford to develop games (or even "enhanced" games) for hardware that has relatively-few users.

Yeah and unlike a computer, a console relies heavily on software support. With only 5 exclusive games, the SGX wasn't very useful for what it costed.

Absolutely ... but it could play every PCE game, too.

It was just like a high-end computer vs a mainstream computer.

There were plenty of computers back then with fancy hardware that just sat there without proper software, exactly like a Supergrafx.

Yeah, I never did get many games supporting my 3DFX dual Voodoo2 SLI setup, no matter how much it cost me!

[esteban]

Ok, this sounds quite fascinating!

I will be back later with my thoughts...

STATUS: pending...


OK, this stood out for me:

Numa: Even still, considering the system sold for 24,800 yen, I remember thinking it was an expensive piece of technology, even more so than the Famicom back then.

K: It's worth pointing out that even at that price point, we weren't making any profit on the hardware. Software royalties actually helped us lessen the blow. If we had tried to recoup our research and development for the hardware directly through the console, I bet you it would have come in at somewhere around 50,000, maybe even 70,000 yen.

This is crazy...I was tracing out the cost of PCE hardware and realized that NEC kept a premium price for many, many years...I wonder now if this was simply to recoup costs on hardware losses during first ______ years.

https://archives.tg-16.com/Gekkan_PC_Engine_1993_05.htm#coregrafx_ii_reduced_price

If you read the blurb, you'll see that NEC held the price of CoreGrafx II steady for 2 years, despite SFC/MD competition. I also make the argument that the cheapest PCE (Shuttle) doesn't seem to be worth it (it can't upgrade to CD-ROM).

Considering that Nintendo has profited from hardware sales (historically), it means that the video game market was very difficult for newcomers like NEC to crack into (releasing a console is the "easy" part...creating a viable, long-term, profitable ecosystem is much, much harder).

I had always assumed that NEC was profiting soon after launch from PCE hardware sales (since selling hardware was NEC's forte, and business model, up until this point).

Crazy.

Also, the article mentions, but doesn't make this point clear enough: although NEC had been making a profit selling home electronics (TV, VCR, etc), their profit margins were slashed to nil once cheaper competitors gained massive market share. So, the only *unique* product left in their portfolio was the PCE.

SO NEC COMPLETELY STOPPED MAKING HOME ELECTRONICS (tv, vcrs, etc) in the late 80's and put focus on the PCE/TG-16.

Pretty crazy to "pivot" that way, but it was the right move for the times.

So, I apologize for using the  trendy/hackneyed term "pivot"...

[Winniez]

Very interesting read.
Considering the price, as cute as the original PC-Engine system is to me it has always felt little cheapish. You can feel the penny pinching. No AV-out, no power LED, No rubber feet, only one controller port, even the information on bottom is molded directly on. Since the actual hardware was pretty costly back then they propably tried to make the rest of the console as cheaply as possible. And recoup some of the losses by selling AV-Boosters and Multitaps.

[CrackTiger]

Very interesting read.
Considering the price, as cute as the original PC-Engine system is to me it has always felt little cheapish. You can feel the penny pinching. No AV-out, no power LED, No rubber feet, only one controller port, even the information on bottom is molded directly on. Since the actual hardware was pretty costly back then they propably tried to make the rest of the console as cheaply as possible. And recoup some of the losses by selling AV-Boosters and Multitaps.

That's the mentality they were afraid of when they decided to make the TG-16 and Turbo CD huge.

You know that you got your money's worth when the Turbo CD box is so big that you can't even fit it through your car door or in the trunk and have to walk it home.

[SignOfZeta]

Very interesting read.
Considering the price, as cute as the original PC-Engine system is to me it has always felt little cheapish. You can feel the penny pinching. No AV-out, no power LED, No rubber feet, only one controller port, even the information on bottom is molded directly on. Since the actual hardware was pretty costly back then they propably tried to make the rest of the console as cheaply as possible. And recoup some of the losses by selling AV-Boosters and Multitaps.

This is like when people complain about the PCE save system.

What DID have an AV out, even as an option (which, via Booster, it was) in 1987?

It doesn't have rubber feet because it's designed to dock in the IFU, which also provides the AV.

I have no clue what you mean by cheap feeling. The core systems are solid little bricks compared to the reletively creaky and squeaky cases on MD, FC, NeoGeo, etc.

[esteban]

Very interesting read.
Considering the price, as cute as the original PC-Engine system is to me it has always felt little cheapish. You can feel the penny pinching. No AV-out, no power LED, No rubber feet, only one controller port, even the information on bottom is molded directly on. Since the actual hardware was pretty costly back then they propably tried to make the rest of the console as cheaply as possible. And recoup some of the losses by selling AV-Boosters and Multitaps.

This is like when people complain about the PCE save system.

What DID have an AV out, even as an option (which, via Booster, it was) in 1987?

It doesn't have rubber feet because it's designed to dock in the IFU, which also provides the AV.

I have no clue what you mean by cheap feeling. The core systems are solid little bricks compared to the reletively creaky and squeaky cases on MD, FC, NeoGeo, etc.

Yeah, the FC/SMS/MD aren't "cheap" feeling, but they have always felt more *fragile* than the PCE hockey puck.

As for durability, the mini-DIN ports (controller, AV out on CoreGrafx) can't really take INSANE ABUSE...but we are talking about build-quality overall...and all the PCE designs have felt really solid to me.

I HATE GLOWING FUCKING LIGHTS when I am trying to watch movies/play games. Unless the console is tucked away, having a glowing light (power on) is an annoying distraction.

Now, a nice DISC ACCESS indicator (facing upwards, like the DUO) is usually not too annoying but it certainly is useful.

So, yes, I might be finicky (I put tape over bright lights that disturb the *experience* of movies/games), but I never thought the PCE power switch was "cheap" solution. It is simple, elegant.

/rant



The rubber feet? Yeah, I like rubber feet, too, but that is easily remedied.

[CrackTiger]

I had a TurboPad ruined bitd because someone walked through the cord while I was playing and the plug stayed in the TG-16 while the cord and plug casing ripped off.  A PCE pad would have just pulled out.

[Winniez]

I didn't mean to say that its not built well, will not last or it should have power LED (I don't even like those things). The hucard mechanic makes it propably more durable than most of the cartridge based systems.

I just pointed out that it feels like they were trying to save some money, sometimes pretty cleverly like with a lack of physical reset button instead opting for pressing select+run.
The omission of power LED seems to be pretty typical cost cutting measure, Nintendo did it with SNES/SFC jr, SEGA with SMS2 and I'm sure there are other examples aswell.

As for the AV-out I think PC-Engine was propably the last major console not to come with one. (not counting cheaper revisions like NES Toploader or SMS2). Master System had one in Japan and West (even RGB ready), western NES had one. And PC-Engine already had it but they chose not to include the socket so you had to either buy the AV-booster or make the cable yourself.

I have also noticed that the PC-Engine casing gets warmer than on other older systems. Propably due to the small size and relatively high CPU clock speed, and it doesn't have any heat shielding inside either. Not that it matters since these are known to be very reliable systems.

[esteban]

I didn't mean to say that its not built well, will not last or it should have power LED (I don't even like those things). The hucard mechanic makes it propably more durable than most of the cartridge based systems.

I just pointed out that it feels like they were trying to save some money, sometimes pretty cleverly like with a lack of physical reset button instead opting for pressing select+run.
The omission of power LED seems to be pretty typical cost cutting measure, Nintendo did it with SNES/SFC jr, SEGA with SMS2 and I'm sure there are other examples aswell.

As for the AV-out I think PC-Engine was propably the last major console not to come with one. (not counting cheaper revisions like NES Toploader or SMS2). Master System had one in Japan and West (even RGB ready), western NES had one. And PC-Engine already had it but they chose not to include the socket so you had to either buy the AV-booster or make the cable yourself.

I have also noticed that the PC-Engine casing gets warmer than on other older systems. Propably due to the small size and relatively high CPU clock speed, and it doesn't have any heat shielding inside either. Not that it matters since these are known to be very reliable systems.

Yes, I see what you mean: to save money.

No doubt the lack of LED power indicator was cost-saving...

As for the "warmth"... ha! I don't know...it would be interesting to compare things. I'm not sure, myself, about the heat generated at console vs. AC adapter (those old AC adapters get really warm, in my experience).

I'll tell you this: the turbotaps always seemed "hollow" to me.. but not particularly fragile or anything...but the stupid ports/mini-DIN connectors can easily be f*cked up by little kids (like my 5 year olds) jamming sh*t in with wanton abandon. 

That's what I see as the fragile Achilles Heal of the PCE hardware...the mini-DIN (or jumbo-DIN, for TG-16) need to be treated with some respect.



As for A/V out...I was happy with my NES and disappointed that TG-16 didn't offer composite + stereo RCA by default.

Pretty lame.

Even though a lot of TV's in use only had CATV/RF connectors, we simply used the VCR's inputs for video game consoles.

So.... no excuse, IMHO, for late-1989 TG-16 not shipping with A/V out (for 1987 PCE...I don't know enough about the state of Japanese home electronics...but I bet A/V out would have been fine).

[CrackTiger]

The most popular choice of video connection during the 32-bit generation in North America was RF.

[esteban]

The most popular choice of video connection during the 32-bit generation in North America was RF.

Why weren't folks using A/V in on VCR's?

Maybe folks on NJ were crazy, but if you had an RF/CATV TV, you used VCR as the conduit for everything (camcorders, video games, etc.)

[imparanoic]

The most popular choice of video connection during the 32-bit generation in North America was RF.

that's quite usual  considering 32 bit era, rgb scart became quite popular in europe and uk, even asia used mostly s video

[CrackTiger]

The most popular choice of video connection during the 32-bit generation in North America was RF.

that's quite usual  considering 32 bit era, rgb scart became quite popular in europe and uk, even asia used mostly s video

Not unusual at all when RGB/scart didn't really even happen here. I didn't finally get a TV capable of using s-video until late in the Dreamcast's lifespan and I had bought a new TV shortly after the Saturn's early launch.

[Winniez]

I remember using NES only with RF eventhough we had a TV with AV-in. I just didn't know any better. It was cool to discover that you could easily record game footage with a VCR.

[ParanoiaDragon]

I had a TurboPad ruined bitd because someone walked through the cord while I was playing and the plug stayed in the TG-16 while the cord and plug casing ripped off.  A PCE pad would have just pulled out.

Same here, though I don't recall the exact incident.  Might've even been me in frustration pulling on the cord, but I don't recall having a habit of doing that, so maybe one of my friends, the type that like to throw controllers when they're pissed off at losing in Bomberman!   I had a few of those.  One of whom, that didn't seem to understand that the point of Bomberman was to kill the other players!  He'd get pissed off at me for playing the game the way it was meant to be played!

[SamIAm]

This is like when people complain about the PCE save system.

What DID have an AV out, even as an option (which, via Booster, it was) in 1987?

Not allowing the user to move individual save files to and from the Tennokoe Bank is stupidity that transcends any time-period.

I mean, it's not the end of the world. If you need to backup a save, you can. Swapping entire memories back and forth is far from an insurmountable challenge. It's not a broken system. Then again, unlike the single controller port or whatever, there is no justification for the inconvenience. It's just bad design.

Also, that they didn't have the foresight to build support for save-memory expansions like the MB128 into at least the 3.0 bios is disappointing. PCE mag writers were worried about the size of the internal memory even in 1989. Sega knew to add bios support for expansion memory into the Mega CD in 1991, so what's NEC/Hudson's excuse? Maybe they didn't think controller-port expansions would be viable at the time, I don't know.

Anyway, if I were introducing the PCE hardware to someone, I'd generally describe it as pretty smartly put together: easy to program, easy to play, compact size, reliable, good capabilities for the time, and the CD expansion is undeniably cool...but the extra save-memory options are so dumb that it's usually better to play only a couple of CD games at a time, then delete your internal-memory saves to make room for the next ones.

If anyone ever makes a program for the Turbo Everdrive that lets you swap individual save files, nobody who has one will touch their Tennokoe Banks or MB128s again.

------------------------

Back on topic, I had once read on a Japanese forum or blog (don't remember which) that part of the reason why the Core II, Duo and PC-FX had relatively high price-tags is that Hudson got all of the software royalties and NEC had to profit on the hardware alone. Either the information was incorrect, the contract conditions changed at some point, or perhaps it's just that NEC's share of the royalties was very small. I'll see what I can find about this later.

EDIT: According to a book called "Game System Wars 1997: Sony, Sega, Bandai, Nintendo" (amazon link), the software royalties went to Hudson. It would be interesting if this were incorrect, because a lot of Japanese gamers on the internet seem to believe it. It's easy to find lots of posts saying so.

An interesting quote from Hudson executive Hiroshi Kudo upon being asked whether the PCE was a success or a failure, presumably later than 1995:
"Given the large quantity of units we sold, I'd say it's was a success. However, one might say it was a failure because it didn't survive until the end [of the generation]. For NEC, it might have been a failure."

Asked the same question, NEC engineer Tomio Goto, who seems to have been involved with 1979's PC-8001 and more, said only "We're proud that we brought CD-ROM technology to the market ahead of other companies."

[esteban]

It was cool to discover that you could easily record game footage with a VCR.

Yes, this was how my brothers and I recorded a lot of music, too (it was easy transfer to audio cassette later).

I don't know if it is still at my parents house, but we had a VHS tape where we recorded the endings of all the games we ever played (because usually there was a unique song that played).

These songs were the "least frequently heard songs" for me...but they weren't always amazing songs.



 I also recorded songs I just thought were kool...Iron Tank NES has some great tune I love and I can still picture the screen where you could safely record music without dying. Hilarious.   

[CrackTiger]

I wonder what Hiroshi Kudo considered the generation to be? The PC Engine launched 3 years before the Super Famicom and had strong software support until at least and year after the Saturn was released (8 years alone). He might just be remembering things wrong.

NEC also published a ton of PCE games, which would have earned them money.


Although it would have been nice to copy individual save files, it was still very cool to have internal saving at the time and so much more library support for saving that Genesis and SNES, which typically only had game saving in games which absolutely needed it.

You could also save files for as many as 50 games or more. I wasn't trying to get as many as I could when I wound up with 3 pages of saves on my Turbo CD or TurboDuo bitd. But I got to that point before discovering a method to measure their sizes.

[SamIAm]

I wonder what Hiroshi Kudo considered the generation to be? The PC Engine launched 3 years before the Super Famicom and had strong software support until at least and year after the Saturn was released (8 years alone). He might just be remembering things wrong.

In the interest of fairness, the word "generation" doesn't appear in the quote. It's just what I assume he's talking about when he mentions it not surviving in the end. I don't think he would have put it the way he did if he felt that it achieved a graceful and timely retirement.

It would be interesting to find when that was said.

I know you guys like to think of the Hucard system and the CD system as this monolithic thing, but he might have been talking about how the Hucard system nose-dived after the Super Famicom came out. Hudson often described a "core" concept with the PCE, but nobody really cared about the core itself by 1992. I don't think sales of CD games were very good in the years after that, either.

Although it would have been nice to copy individual save files, it was still very cool to have internal saving at the time and so much more library support for saving that Genesis and SNES, which typically only had game saving in games which absolutely needed it.

You could also save files for as many as 50 games or more. I wasn't trying to get as many as I could when I wound up with 3 pages of saves on my Turbo CD or TurboDuo bitd. But I got to that point before discovering a method to measure their sizes.

I'm sure that if I had a Tennokoe Bank in 1993, I would have mostly just been thankful to have the option. Even now, the weird swapping system is just a minor drawback. Lack of internal memory has only been a problem for me a handful of times, and not wanting to bust out the Tennokoe is partially just me being lazy.

[CrackTiger]

What did seem like a major oversight bitd was the Playstation lacking internal memory. It really was a shock after playing PCE CD, Sega-CD, 3DO and Saturn. The memory cards also had limited space.

[imparanoic]

What did seem like a major oversight bitd was the Playstation lacking internal memory. It really was a shock after playing PCE CD, Sega-CD, 3DO and Saturn. The memory cards also had limited space.

but they push the limits on ps1 limited ram, look at tekken 3, vangrant story, metal gear solid, resident evil, the main point, ps1 didn't sell very well in it's first 2 years and had to be price competitive against the saturn which was more expensive, but sold more in asian countries than playstation 1 in it's first 2 years. the fact ps1 was gained significantly from 1997 onwards was to do with price lowering and genre defining games and it's forte, power to process polygons ( unlike the pc-fx or lesser extent sega saturn)

[SignOfZeta]

Anyone who was unhappy with the PCE's save system was welcome to use what came before which was...anyone? I'm not coming up with anything. Everything saved to the disc/cart that I can remember. There must have been something, right? Use the that. Play games on whatever flawless genius that thing was, whatever it is. Enjoy.

As for AV out. It wasn't left out to save money. That saves nothing. It was left out to *generate* money in the form of Boosters. All a Booster is is a breakout box for what's already in the system. They want composite users to pay more. It's the same reason why a XBox memory card was $65 friggn dollars when it only had $0.50 worth of flash in it. Or even more closely related, the XBox DVD remote...which was just a remote, and cost like $40, even though all it really did was authorize DVD playback. The system already had everything it needed but permission. Ultimately the DVD license fees were paid by all customers, those who needed it or not, but the people who actually bought the remote paid more. It's exactly the same with the PCE AV out.

Consoles only make money when people buy accessories. Sure, you can demand you pay only $300 for a system that costs half a billion to engineer, but you're going to be buying $70 controllers, paying to play online, and getting gouged 8x on storage.

[SignOfZeta]

What did seem like a major oversight bitd was the Playstation lacking internal memory. It really was a shock after playing PCE CD, Sega-CD, 3DO and Saturn. The memory cards also had limited space.

See: the post I just made. It's not a flaw, it's a feature. How many fashion color memory cards do you have for PC Engine? None, because they never made any. Sony had every color of the rainbow, licensed goods, Pocketstation, etc. PS2 got even more clever by putting token encryption "Magic Gate" on the cards meaning that any unlicensed PS2 memory card was a violation of the DMCA so even the 3rd party ones are licensed and they never got cheap. 8MB of flash in 2004 for $40. Crazy.

[SignOfZeta]

What did seem like a major oversight bitd was the Playstation lacking internal memory. It really was a shock after playing PCE CD, Sega-CD, 3DO and Saturn. The memory cards also had limited space.

but they push the limits on ps1 limited ram, look at tekken 3, vangrant story, metal gear solid, resident evil, the main point, ps1 didn't sell very well in it's first 2 years and had to be price competitive against the saturn which was more expensive, but sold more in asian countries than playstation 1 in it's first 2 years. the fact ps1 was gained significantly from 1997 onwards was to do with price lowering and genre defining games and it's forte, power to process polygons ( unlike the pc-fx or lesser extent sega saturn)

Also, the mod chip. People don't give $5 mod chips enough credit for moving PS1s. Once the software was free, everyone was very tempted to...switch sides, or whatever.

[SamIAm]

Anyone who was unhappy with the PCE's save system was welcome to use what came before which was...anyone? I'm not coming up with anything. Everything saved to the disc/cart that I can remember. There must have been something, right? Use the that. Play games on whatever flawless genius that thing was, whatever it is. Enjoy.

You say that like they were inventing the wheel. Backing up data and moving files around was not cutting-edge in 1991 when the Tennokoe Bank came out. The basic logistical problems imposed by moving groups instead of individuals should have been immediately apparent.

The only excuse I can think of is that maybe some of the earliest games would have flipped out if you accidentally put two save files in the same memory. Although they could have potentially avoided that by enforcing a simple naming system and a couple of basic file-system rules.

Again, it's not the end of the world, but the Tennokoe Bank was definitely bad design on Hudson's part.

[Winniez]

This has propably been posted here already but an interesting read nonetheless about how it was transformed for the west. http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/225466/stalled_engine_the_turbografx16_.php

[Winniez]

As for AV out. It wasn't left out to save money. That saves nothing. It was left out to *generate* money in the form of Boosters. All a Booster is is a breakout box for what's already in the system. They want composite users to pay more. It's the same reason why a XBox memory card was $65 friggn dollars when it only had $0.50 worth of flash in it. Or even more closely related, the XBox DVD remote...which was just a remote, and cost like $40, even though all it really did was authorize DVD playback. The system already had everything it needed but permission. Ultimately the DVD license fees were paid by all customers, those who needed it or not, but the people who actually bought the remote paid more. It's exactly the same with the PCE AV out.

Yeah, that was exactly my point, same with the multitap, it propably saved a little money aswell. Margins are huge in accessories. You can sell something for 20 that cost a dollar to make.
In retrospect the DVD remote was a big mistake from Microsoft. Back then the PS2 straight out of box DVD playback was a huge selling point. I remember people buying PS2s just to use as DVD players. And if they ever wanted to play games they already had a system ready.

[esteban]

As for AV out. It wasn't left out to save money. That saves nothing. It was left out to *generate* money in the form of Boosters.

Well, I did end up buying a TurboBooster Plus, back in the day.

Why?

MOTURBO

[CrackTiger]

I meant that my friends and I really were shocked at the Playstation not saving games out of the box and I saw lots of normal people react when buying a Playstation for FFVII, being told that they couldn't even play the game without also buying a separate memory card.

Some people try to claim that PCE CD games aren't real PCE games because a real game should be fully functional on a base console out of the hox, like most NES & SNES games. If this is such a legitinate concern, it would disqualify all Playstation RPG games.

[SignOfZeta]

Yeah, the $299.99 price of the PS was not really truth. It was as actually %10 more than that. This also brings the US 1995 price point only $70 less than Saturn and not $100 as is often said.

[SignOfZeta]

Anyone who was unhappy with the PCE's save system was welcome to use what came before which was...anyone? I'm not coming up with anything. Everything saved to the disc/cart that I can remember. There must have been something, right? Use the that. Play games on whatever flawless genius that thing was, whatever it is. Enjoy.

You say that like they were inventing the wheel. Backing up data and moving files around was not cutting-edge in 1991 when the Tennokoe Bank came out. The basic logistical problems imposed by moving groups instead of individuals should have been immediately apparent.

The only excuse I can think of is that maybe some of the earliest games would have flipped out if you accidentally put two save files in the same memory. Although they could have potentially avoided that by enforcing a simple naming system and a couple of basic file-system rules.

Again, it's not the end of the world, but the Tennokoe Bank was definitely bad design on Hudson's part.

Moving files was not new, but the PCE was the first console to save to the system (that I can think of) and whatever they had then in 1987 they were stuck with forever. The Bank was years later and designed to reduce some of the headaches but it was still bound by the original design. It was also bound by old tools, a budget, and a release date. Home brewers have done much better, but they did it decades later with multitasking computers and emulators that don't require you burn a rom every time you change something.

[SamIAm]

Moving files was not new, but the PCE was the first console to save to the system (that I can think of) and whatever they had then in 1987 they were stuck with forever. The Bank was years later and designed to reduce some of the headaches but it was still bound by the original design. It was also bound by old tools, a budget, and a release date. Home brewers have done much better, but they did it decades later with multitasking computers and emulators that don't require you burn a rom every time you change something.

The CD-system bios and the games themselves were able to recognize where individual save files started and stopped, so there shouldn't have been any formatting problems. Unless Hudson gave a deadline of "before lunch", whoever made the Tennokoe Bank should have been able to set up individual file copying with literally just a few more lines worth of code, especially if he never wasted time on the silly four-banks structure and just made it one big pot.

The problems caused by copying the entire internal memory are incredibly obvious. These guys worked on computers all day, and yet they screwed up what is essentially a copy/paste tool with the most basic possible GUI. First of its kind or not, that's inexcusable IMHO. This was the same company that made an operating system for the X68000 in 1986, for crying out loud.

[esteban]

Moving files was not new, but the PCE was the first console to save to the system (that I can think of) and whatever they had then in 1987 they were stuck with forever. The Bank was years later and designed to reduce some of the headaches but it was still bound by the original design. It was also bound by old tools, a budget, and a release date. Home brewers have done much better, but they did it decades later with multitasking computers and emulators that don't require you burn a rom every time you change something.

The CD-system bios and the games themselves were able to recognize where individual save files started and stopped, so there shouldn't have been any formatting problems. Unless Hudson gave a deadline of "before lunch", whoever made the Tennokoe Bank should have been able to set up individual file copying with literally just a few more lines worth of code, especially if he never wasted time on the silly four-banks structure and just made it one big pot.

The problems caused by copying the entire internal memory are incredibly obvious. These guys worked on computers all day, and yet they screwed up what is essentially a copy/paste tool with the most basic possible GUI. First of its kind or not, that's inexcusable IMHO. This was the same company that made an operating system for the X68000 in 1986, for crying out loud.

IN DEFENSE OF TENNOKOE BANK

(1) I think you are overlooking an important factor: ease of use for all consumers, including average/dumbass/child.

For mainstream consumer goods, it's much better to design a system that a dumbass/child can understand.

(2) Copying en masse  = dead simple, fast, efficient and the operation you are performing is immediately obvious. Period.

Engineers and average users know that the contents of a bank will *always* fit when swapped back and forth between HuCARD and  real hardware—dead simple conceptually and in actuality.

No prompts/messages warning about files/banks being "too large" to move/transfer.

(3) I can't help but think that engineers/designers were not just worried about users *actually* losing data...but also with users *seemingly* losing (or losing track of) data. Manually managing files is tedious, boring, annoying and potentially quite messy, confusing. You can lose track of stuff. Users will absolutely do silly things when (a) given full access and (b) system allows for flexibility/complexity. Allowing users to f*ck things up only frustrates the customer (the *last* thing Hudson/NEC want to do).

(4) I don't disagree with you: Hudson *should* have included advanced file management tools for the "power user", but these advanced tools should have been "hidden" from the average dumbass/child. It's OK if most folks never used the advanced tools. 

ASIDE: If file management with mouse+keyboard still sucks today on modern PC OS (and we have benefit of modifier keys to select multiple files at once), individual file management would be cumbersome on PCE with controller, menus, message boxes, etc. Every operation would take many steps and require many confirmations. And you would grow numb to warnings from the incessant dialog boxes.





 FURTHER THOUGHTS...

The design decisions to deliberately limit how a user manipulates/manages files has interesting implications:

(a) "Bank" as a metaphor for time. I can't help but love thinking about how a "bank" can represent an era of time (what *constellation*—group— of games was I playing two years ago?) It's a nice *group* snapshot of a time period.

(b) "Bank" as a metaphor for "comrade"...this is when you help out/play with a friend/family member (especially when they have their own console, separate from yours). When you copy/swap files, you are capturing a unique piece of their gaming life. Again, it might not actually be a snapshot of a single person's gaming life...but rather *every person* who uses the damn console (siblings, parents, yakuza, etc.)

(c) "Bank" births a new Prank. Are there any anecdotes about people pulling pranks on unsuspecting family/friends by "deleting" save files?

[ParanoiaDragon]

i recall buying Beyond the Beyond, & being frustrated that I could't save.  Has enough money for the game, but not for the memory card.  I don't recall how long I sat on the game before getting a card.  Maybe I figured it'd have a password system for people who didn't have the card yet??

[SamIAm]

IN DEFENSE OF TENNOKOE BANK

I dunno, man, I don't think there's anything too complicated about the individual-file solution, especially with a little basic idiot-proofing of the interface. In fact, I think it's easier in a lot of ways.

Let's take a look at the problem the Tennokoe Bank causes. Imagine you have Save-A, Save-B and Save-C in your internal memory. You want to keep Save-A and Save-B on deck, but you don't need Save-C at the moment; you just don't want to delete it.

Now along comes Save-D, from a new game you want to play, and it won't fit into the internal memory. If the Tennokoe Bank worked like I think it should, you would be able to copy out Save-C to make room, and that would be that. Save-A, Save-B and Save-D would all be happily in the internal memory for you to have easy access to, and Save-C would be quickly and efficiently tucked away.

Instead, however, the reality is that you have to put Save-A, Save-B and Save-C all into the Tennokoe, and now the only thing in your internal memory is Save-D. Want to play the game that uses Save-A, then a little more of Save-D? That's two more memory swaps.

And then there's the temptation to do something really stupid: copy Save-A/B/C to the Tennokoe Bank without actually swapping, and then just delete Save-C from the internal memory to make room for Save-D. Now you've got two copies of A and B floating around, only one of which you're going to make progress with. Heaven help you if you get them mixed up a couple of weeks later, and especially if you then go on to delete something without checking it.

It's worth mentioning that since there are four banks, that's four times as much potentially wasted space on the Tennokoe since you probably can't fill each bank perfectly.

It's all this versus just copying single files back and forth from a single big bank. There's no complex file system or anything, either, it's just two lists: internal memory and Tennokoe memory.

Sounds like a piece of cake to me. 

[ccovell]

IN DEFENSE OF TENNOKOE BANK

(1) I think you are overlooking an important factor: ease of use for all consumers, including average/dumbass/child.

You do have a point; I can see stupid kids saying, "Wakkanaiiii".  However, some PCE games make gamers delete files before continuing, showing a screen with saves and their byte sizes, so even little kids should have gotten used to copying saves and watching their sizes anyway.

FURTHER SIPS OF THE HOOKAH...

(a) "Bank" as a metaphor...
...
...

Or maybe you don't.

Yeah, the current Bank functionality was an incredibly wasted opportunity.  Moving around save files (and even intelligently duplicating them as I did in my BRAM ROM) as a software programmer isn't rocket science.

[esteban]

Purely as conversation, you guys really don't think it's neat that an entire Bank is preserved at a time?

I mean, regardless of whether you like the system, the implications of it are totally intriguing.

[SignOfZeta]

I'm sure that at the time they though it was a clever idea and a more simplified system. It isn't, and I'm sure whoever got stuck programming it knew that.

As long as we agree to blame management and not the worker I'm prepared to drop my case at this time.