Hucard / SuperCD are NOT the same system...

[esteban]

Clarification: the TG-16 + TG-CD is a more cohesive and superior design to the PCE + IFU design.

SUCK ON THAT, Zeta.

Seriously. TG-CD is a streamlined, magnificent  beast.

[Gredler]

Clarification: the TG-16 + TG-CD is a more cohesive and superior design to the PCE + IFU design.

SUCK ON THAT, Zeta.

Seriously. TG-CD is a streamlined, magnificent  beast.

IFU Stands for "Is Fucking Ugly"

Amirite?!

[wiseau]

I too like the giant toilet that hooks up to the back of my turbo grafx, now if only i could find one that's not 400+, and doesn't already come with a turbo grafx, and has a working save...

Come to think of it, what DOES the turbo Booster/CD use to save games?

[SignOfZeta]

Clarification: the TG-16 + TG-CD is a more cohesive and superior design to the PCE + IFU design.

SUCK ON THAT, Zeta.

Seriously. TG-CD is a streamlined, magnificent  beast.

This doesn't make any sense. Bait me with something funnier next time.

[ToyMachine78]

Clarification: the TG-16 + TG-CD is a more cohesive and superior design to the PCE + IFU design.

SUCK ON THAT, Zeta.

Seriously. TG-CD is a streamlined, magnificent  beast.

I agree. The TG setup is a sexy beast. It reminds me of a Klingon warship lol

[SamIAm]

Maybe I'm just being a simpleton, but I can't think of these as one monolithic console.

I mean, from a hardware-designer's perspective, OK. From a programmer's perspective, sure. From a modern collector's perspective ... well, maybe. Hudson's marketing tried to steer everyone toward thinking of them as one system, too.

However, from a user's perspective, especially from the period and especially in Japan, no way.

Users don't really care what's going on under the hood, and smart users don't care about labels. They care how much things cost, and they care what their hardware can do.

I don't think you could tell PC Engine users with a straight face that the CD systems, which until their twilight years were fantastically more expensive than base Hucard systems, were nothing but minor upgrades or missing puzzle-pieces that they had to have in order to say that they had a complete PC Engine. In both major regions, far more people owned systems that could only play Hucards than could somehow play CDs. Did this majority somehow only have half the console?

Furthermore, the base Hucard system as a practical matter couldn't do any of the fancypants voice/cutscene/redbook things that almost singlehandledly sold CD games. It's not some tiny sound upgrade. Let's be honest: CD games, by and large, were not possible on Hucards.

I guess it comes down to how you define a "console" and "console games". To me, there's a certain uniformity to the idea, or a certain standardization, and anything that causes one guy to be able to play a game and another guy to not be able to play a game violates that whole concept. By definition, it becomes necessary to say that these guys have two different consoles.

In the same vein, I don't think of the Famicom Disk System as being the same as the Famicom, either - although the line blurs just a little because of the way FDS games became producible as-is on cartridges. I also am not really impressed that the PCE-CD outlived the base system. Even if the 32X had caught on and outlived the Genesis, I'd still think of them as separate if closely related systems.

[StarDust4Ever]

Maybe I'm just being a simpleton, but I can't think of these as one monolithic console.

I mean, from a hardware-designer's perspective, OK. From a programmer's perspective, sure. From a modern collector's perspective ... well, maybe. Hudson's marketing tried to steer everyone toward thinking of them as one system, too.

However, from a user's perspective, especially from the period and especially in Japan, no way.

Users don't really care what's going on under the hood, and smart users don't care about labels. They care how much things cost, and they care what their hardware can do.

I don't think you could tell PC Engine users with a straight face that the CD systems, which until their twilight years were fantastically more expensive than base Hucard systems, were nothing but minor upgrades or missing puzzle-pieces that they had to have in order to say that they had a complete PC Engine. In both major regions, far more people owned systems that could only play Hucards than could somehow play CDs. Did this majority somehow only have half the console?

Furthermore, the base Hucard system as a practical matter couldn't do any of the fancypants voice/cutscene/redbook things that almost singlehandledly sold CD games. It's not some tiny sound upgrade. Let's be honest: CD games, by and large, were not possible on Hucards.

I guess it comes down to how you define a "console" and "console games". To me, there's a certain uniformity to the idea, or a certain standardization, and anything that causes one guy to be able to play a game and another guy to not be able to play a game violates that whole concept. By definition, it becomes necessary to say that these guys have two different consoles.

In the same vein, I don't think of the Famicom Disk System as being the same as the Famicom, either - although the line blurs just a little because of the way FDS games became producible as-is on cartridges. I also am not really impressed that the PCE-CD outlived the base system. Even if the 32X had caught on and outlived the Genesis, I'd still think of them as separate if closely related systems.

I like the way you think.

The very fact that certain users are excluded from playing games based on their unique hardware setups either becuse they cannot afford or do not want to purchase the required hardware, speaks volumes. There is a reason why the base consoles are 2 or 3 times less expensive than the CDROM units. It is because as you said, the CDROM units were like $200-$300 bitd when they came out, in addition to the base models. Sure some of them broke down over the years, but suffice to say that more users were stuck with the base model hardware. Why else did they continue to release Hucard games for the small but dedicated fanbase that refused to adopt the CDROM even into 1994?

Where is NEC now? It's not like I can just go out to Babbages or K&B Toys and buy a NIB Duo because I want access to the SuperCDROM library. The lower availability of CDROM units dictates that fewer gamers will have access to the disc games than the card games. One could even go further to argue that the 5 Supergrafx games discriminate against non-supergrafx owning customers. Likewise the disc game library discriminates against Hucard only users. The SuperCD System3 and Arcade System games discriminate against owners who only have a system2 card.

PCe >< TG16 thanks to the pinouts. I would even argue the PCe library is less discriminatory than the TG16 because the Hucard ROMs don't check the system region. Hudson/NEC could have easily plugged that loophole by adding a region check code to Hucard games to prevent them booting on US hardware. Nintendo started enforcing PAL/NTSC software lockout once piggyback adapters surfaced. Glad Hudson/NEC didn't go that route.

Basically the PC Engine / Turbografx is like an onion. You got layers, and each new layer requires more hardware to gain access to ever-exclusive clubs. So I'm a level one, actually level two with either the pin adapter, mod, or everdrive allowing me to bypass region lock. 1a = PC Engine; 1b = TG-16. Level 2 = both region hucards. Level 3a, 4, and 5 are the CD systems, ending with Arcade. Level 3b is the Supergrafx. Don't let the smallish number fool you. That club is super exclusive.

So I've worked up the rank from 1b to 2. Yay! And I happily accept my position for the time being. But if we define games by the hardware necessary to play them, no, they are not equivalent.

[Psycho Punch]

Rank 4 forever and ever

edit: supergrafx is such an oddity and different from the usual NEC tree that it really should be considered something like "Rank 三" lol.

PC-FX is rank Welcome to Pia Carrot.

[StarDust4Ever]

PC-FX isn't a PC Engine though, just another system to collect for. Is it backwards compatible with SuperCD games? Didn't think so. I guess it's like comparing the SegaCD to a Saturn. I really need to stop comparing NEC/Hudson to Sega...

[deubeul]

1a = PC Engine; 1b = TG-16. Level 2 = both region hucards. Level 3a, 4, and 5 are the CD systems, ending with Arcade. Level 3b is the Supergrafx. Don't let the smallish number fool you. That club is super exclusive.

So I've worked up the rank from 1b to 2. Yay! And I happily accept my position for the time being. But if we define games by the hardware necessary to play them, no, they are not equivalent.

So What's your point on Geny and MD? SF, SNES and Super Nintendo?  Not the same systems?

[StarDust4Ever]

1a = PC Engine; 1b = TG-16. Level 2 = both region hucards. Level 3a, 4, and 5 are the CD systems, ending with Arcade. Level 3b is the Supergrafx. Don't let the smallish number fool you. That club is super exclusive.

So I've worked up the rank from 1b to 2. Yay! And I happily accept my position for the time being. But if we define games by the hardware necessary to play them, no, they are not equivalent.

So What's your point on Geny and MD? SF, SNES and Super Nintendo?  Not the same systems?

Super NES / Super Famicom and Genesis / Megadrive (not counting PAL regions) are practically the same system from a hardware perspective as well as interface. Region modding to play Japanese region games on an American SNES or Genesis is extremely easy. Nice of Sega to put eaily accessible jumpers on the Genesis/Megadrive motherboards that you can wire to a toggle switch. Use a Genie for passthrough if the Japanese carts don't fit the slot; no need to butcher the cartridge port. You don't even need to use codes if you install the region switch. For North American SNES, it's simply cutting off a piece of plastic. A trained monkey could do that.

Turbo / PCe are more involved. I compare the Turbografx / PCe moreso to the NES / Famicom in that you need an adapter to switch regions. Physically they are the same just different pinouts. PC Henshin got me covered. I'm glad that none of the existing PC Engine Hucards check the console region. NEC/Hudson could have easily added region checks to later Hucard releases if they really wanted to. I think they realised imports were lucrative and only helped them financially, hence none of the CDROM titles perform any sort of region check on either system. They certainly could have programmed that in if they wanted to.

[SignOfZeta]

You guys are nuts. "Discrimination"? Defining a console by how easy it is to mod? These are all totally irrelevant external labels.

If it says "PC ENGINE" on it it's a PC ENGINE. It doesn't get any more complicated than that.

If two people have a new computer but one lives in BFE and can't get cable internet and therefore can't play WoW he does not have a different system than the guy who lives in WoW thanks to Berkley fiber.

An audio compact disc with a video tacked on the end is still an audio compact disc. It still plays in my car and still has the Compact Disc Digital Audio logo on it.

You guys have a D&D Players Handbook level maze of ideological bullshit used to hyper segment and categorize a bunch of shit that's all the same shit. 

A few other details:

There is no sales proof that I know of that proves that PCE was all that "segregated". By 1994 it's quite likely that anyone without a CDROM2 had abandoned PCE for SFC at that point. The SFC tanked PCE pretty hard, and basically EVERYONE had a SFC in Japan...and a SFC cost less than a CDROM2 system. The ones buying PCE in 1994 were the hardcore fringe. The days of R Type or Super Star Solider were long gone. The occasional thing like Bomberman 94 was just them being nice, hoping to sell as many copies as possible. I don't think there were a lot of HuCARD only PCE fans by then, all those HuCARD only systems were probably just collecting dust after 1992.

Secondly, by and large what CD-ROM games offered back then WAS in fact doable on a HuCARD. ROM size and CD audio were the only additions and while these things are terrific, they are usually unrelated to gameplay. If you load up Gate of Thunder and turn the sound down while playing through the 1st level, all of that could be done on a HuCARD. The CD doesn't add color. It doesn't make sprites bigger. It doesn't speed anything up (the opposite...). It's main achievement is being able to hold more stuff than any affordable HuCARD could but a giant ass Dracula X HuCARD is totally possible and only the audio would suffer.

In practical terms the PCE became a different system by this point by virtue of the fact that it became a proto-PC-FX, switching almost totally to menu based otaku bullshit. In technical terms though, it's all the same. An N64 with a ram cartridge in it is still an N64. A Honda Civic with a turbo on it is still a Honda Civic. Chocolate milk is still milk.

[deubeul]

Super NES / Super Famicom and Genesis / Megadrive (not counting PAL regions) are practically the same system from a hardware perspective as well as interface. Region modding to play Japanese region games on an American SNES or Genesis is extremely easy. Nice of Sega to put eaily accessible jumpers on the Genesis/Megadrive motherboards that you can wire to a toggle switch. Use a Genie for passthrough if the Japanese carts don't fit the slot; no need to butcher the cartridge port. You don't even need to use codes if you install the region switch. For North American SNES, it's simply cutting off a piece of plastic. A trained monkey could do that.

Yep, you're right, region mod on MD or SNES is far easier, but it still can be done on TG/PCE for next to nothing.

As already better said earlier in the thread, it's a matter of perspective.

When you grew up with cards and one day add the CD library, it was all natural, it still had the same flavor.

When I finally had a Duo, it was still the same feel I had all those years with my GT, that exotic, japanese ambiance/gameplay, that excitement I didn't find on other consoles.

When I talk or think about Hucards, Super Hucards, Turbochips, CDs, SCDs or ACCDs, I always say
"PC Engine".

[CrackTiger]

PC-FX isn't a PC Engine though, just another system to collect for. Is it backwards compatible with SuperCD games? Didn't think so. I guess it's like comparing the SegaCD to a Saturn. I really need to stop comparing NEC/Hudson to Sega...

The PC-FX is the PC Engine equivalent of the 32X. It has the SuperGrafx hardware inside of it and mixes layers and sounds of PCE aesthetics with original 32-bit quality elements.

You can even play the ripped chiptunes on PCE hardware.

[SamIAm]

If you're a Japanese guy in 1992, and you've got a Mega Drive and a Core Grafx, I just don't see why buying a Mega CD means buying an add-on/expansion that people should classify as practically its own system with its own library while buying a Super CD means making your PC Engine whole and gaining access to its complete library.

It ain't the price - both are a shade under 50,000 yen. Is it that the Mega CD has a couple extra chips and now it can scale stuff? Is it because Sega is advertising the Mega CD as some kind of "next-level" thing and put the games in a separate kind of packaging? Is it because you read an article that said the PCE was designed with a CD system in mind?

None of those things would really make a difference to me on the user end. I would be much more concerned that both options cost much more than their base systems (or a Super Famicom, if I didn't have one yet), and that both options would allow the base systems to play games that they never could on their own. To me, they would seem like add-ons that effectively function as separate consoles, and both have separate libraries.

At the very least, I think you have to say that if the PCE and PCE-CD are the same, then so are the Mega Drive and Mega CD.

By the way, the base PC Engine's first retail price in 1987 was 24,800 yen (from which it did not drop much), and the CD-ROM unit with IFU briefcase was 57,300 yen. The Duo, when it first went on sale in September 1991, was 59,800 yen. The Duo-R in March 1993 was something just under 40,000 yen. The Super System Card 3.0 was 9,800 yen.

How the different system cards fit in is a whole other can of worms.

Secondly, by and large what CD-ROM games offered back then WAS in fact doable on a HuCARD. ROM size and CD audio were the only additions and while these things are terrific, they are usually unrelated to gameplay. If you load up Gate of Thunder and turn the sound down while playing through the 1st level, all of that could be done on a HuCARD. The CD doesn't add color. It doesn't make sprites bigger. It doesn't speed anything up (the opposite...). It's main achievement is being able to hold more stuff than any affordable HuCARD could but a giant ass Dracula X HuCARD is totally possible and only the audio would suffer.

Why didn't they release Gate of Thunder on a Hucard, then? Could it be that maybe the CD music was considered a critical feature of the game?

Could it be that whether or not Rondo of Blood could work on a giant Hucard doesn't even matter because a Hucard that big had a 0% chance of existing?

Needless to say, I don't buy your reasoning at all. It's completely stuck in the hypothetical. That you could get the first stage of GOT running on a Hucard is little more than an interesting factoid.

An N64 with a ram cartridge in it is still an N64.

And every game that needed a RAM cartridge came with one, so everyone who owned a plain N64 could play it.

[CrackTiger]

I consider Sega/Mega-CD games part of the Genesis/MD library, just as I count Neo Geo CD games as part of the Neo Geo library. I also count all of those SNES games with a couple extra chips inside and Sattelaview games. I also count Mega Modem and Sega Channel games as real. Same with FDS games.

There are some variants that I think can stand alone as an independent library as well as being part of the larger library it's based off of, like 32X, Mega LD, etc.

It seems ridiculous to me to argue that 32X CD games are a unique console library and platform, separate from the 32X cart console library and platfirm, Mega-CD console library platform and Mega Drive cart console library platform.

Even though the Duo replaced the Core hardware with the launch of the Super CD format and no 32X cart consoles or 32X CD consoles were ever released.

The problem with discussions like this is that a majority of game world fans inherit ideas from mags, youtube and the group mentality. They assume that everything is done the same way and reverse engineer their logic from absolutrs they've been told. That's why the PC Engine has to be the "NEC" system, "cause Nintendo. It's an 8-bit generation system, cause that how generations work, you count the bits rattling around inside the cpu. "Everyone knows that..."

[StarDust4Ever]

If you're a Japanese guy in 1992, and you've got a Mega Drive and a Core Grafx, I just don't see why buying a Mega CD means buying an add-on/expansion that people should classify as practically its own system with its own library while buying a Super CD means making your PC Engine whole and gaining access to its complete library.

It ain't the price - both are a shade under 50,000 yen. Is it that the Mega CD has a couple extra chips and now it can scale stuff? Is it because Sega is advertising the Mega CD as some kind of "next-level" thing and put the games in a separate kind of packaging? Is it because you read an article that said the PCE was designed with a CD system in mind?

None of those things would really make a difference to me on the user end. I would be much more concerned that both options cost much more than their base systems (or a Super Famicom, if I didn't have one yet), and that both options would allow the base systems to play games that they never could on their own. To me, they would seem like add-ons that effectively function as separate consoles, and both have separate libraries.

At the very least, I think you have to say that if the PCE and PCE-CD are the same, then so are the Mega Drive and Mega CD.

By the way, the base PC Engine's first retail price in 1987 was 24,800 yen (from which it did not drop much), and the CD-ROM unit with IFU briefcase was 57,300 yen. The Duo, when it first went on sale in September 1991, was 59,800 yen. The Duo-R in March 1993 was something just under 40,000 yen. The Super System Card 3.0 was 9,800 yen.

How the different system cards fit in is a whole other can of worms.

Finally someone who gets it. Thanks for sticking up to me SamIAm. BTW, I have tried the green eggs and ham ie PCe/TG-16 and do like it much!

It seems there are two horses in this race, the haves and the have nots. The haves don't accept the fact that the have nots should have a say when it comes to how games are categorized. The haves just assume it's a standard fare upgrade despite being twice as expensive as a base unit, both then and now, and everybody simply gets one or misses out. They fail to get the gist that it is a separate system with unique hardware and software requirements. The have nots may occasionally bitch and moan about being excluded but ultimately either accept the fact that they have been barred access, or they pay up for the CD system. As for me, I've accepted that I can't play SuperCD games without buying more hardware and am okay with that. There are still tons of great gameplay experiences available on the Hucard format. I just wish people would treat them as the two distinct libraries that they are. Props to Aetherbutt for giving a nod to us poor folks by creating the first ever physical release Hucard homebrew, Atlantean!

CD Audio isn't everything. There's good and bad chiptunes as well as good and bad redbook audio. I used to hate the lameo pop/rock scores from noname poser groups that played as bgm tracks in many PS1/PS2 games. Devs used to work really hard composing chiptune soundtracks for their games, and all that turned into with the comeuppance of disc based media containing compressed or uncompressed PCM, was that developers didn't have to work at producing music for their games, and instead many took the low road of licensing the cheapest crap to use as score. Nintendo apparently still used MIDI well into the Game Cube era to great effect, and many Wii / Wii-U games contained fully orchestrated soundtracks by way of the Japanese equivalent of the Philharmonic.

I am by no means suggesting that SuperCD games used "filler" soundtracks; in fact judging by gameplay videos on Youtube, as well as my own personal experience with a handful of SuperCD games released on Virtual Console (I would personally love to play Star Parodier on real hardware as I have a soft spot for cute-em-ups), many titles had fantastic scores which really complemented the native synth output by the PCe/Turbografx. In fact you can play and appreciate them in most any CD player. It was really the PS1 era where many 3rd party devs rushed to produce games, that game soundtracks took a backseat.

[SamIAm]

I consider Sega/Mega-CD games part of the Genesis/MD library, just as I count Neo Geo CD games as part of the Neo Geo library. I also count all of those SNES games with a couple extra chips inside and Sattelaview games. I also count Mega Modem and Sega Channel games as real. Same with FDS games.

Well, at least you're being fair.

I still think that these consoles and libraries are best classified as separate and only appreciated as closely related.

[NecroPhile]

I don't think you could tell PC Engine users with a straight face that the CD systems, which until their twilight years were fantastically more expensive than base Hucard systems....

In Japan only; here they were soon relatively cheap (especially compared to the cost of a plain ol' CD player), and the TurboDuo was quite a bargain considering the value of the included games.

If you're going to base you argument on a very narrow and specific time frame, why not say the CD isn't just a separate system but that it doesn't exist at all because you couldn't buy one in October 1987? 

I guess it comes down to how you define a "console" and "console games". To me, there's a certain uniformity to the idea, or a certain standardization, and anything that causes one guy to be able to play a game and another guy to not be able to play a game violates that whole concept. By definition, it becomes necessary to say that these guys have two different consoles.

Following this logic to its ultimate conclusion, the PCE is really five different systems - Hueys, CDs, Super CDs, Arcade CDs, and GE CDs. 

It's completely stuck in the hypothetical.

Bullshit.  The capabilities of the system are well known not hypothetical.

And every game that needed a RAM cartridge came with one, so everyone who owned a plain N64 could play it.

Wrong.  DK64 did but Perfect Dark and Majora's Mask did not, ergo those two games must be for a different system. 

It seems there are two horses in this race, the haves and the have nots. The haves don't accept the fact that the have nots should have a say when it comes to how games are categorized. The haves just assume it's a standard fare upgrade despite being twice as expensive as a base unit, both then and now, and everybody simply gets one or misses out. They fail to get the gist that it is a separate system with unique hardware and software requirements. The have nots may occasionally bitch and moan about being excluded but ultimately either accept the fact that they have been barred access....

Nobody thinks less of you because you don't have a CD system, nobody is discriminating against you, and nobody is stopping you from buying a CD system or playing 'em for free in Mednefan.  The only 'have nots' are the people that have decided to limit themselves to hueys only.

As for how they're categorized, who really gives a shit?  It's interesting to discuss and each side has their reasons (some more logical than others), but there's no definitive write or wrong answer.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the matter, and one person's has no bearing on what another person buys, plays, etc.

[CrackTiger]

Before the Genesis and TG-16 launched, there was magazine coverage and ads showing the Turbo-CD along side the TG-16, with pics of the physical discs and screenshots of Monster Lair and Fighting Street. I got a Genesis at launch and became a Sega fanboy because magazines told me that it was a war and I had to choose a side. But even before I soon gave in and got a TG-16 with plans to buy the Turbo CD within months, I still never once thought of the CD games as a separate console or library. And throughout the console war generation, none of the hardcore and casual gamers I knew thought any different. I never even heard anyone try and argue something so silly until at least 15 years later. We didn't hear someone say the other day that 'technically' the CD-ROM predates the PCE launch. We lived reality ourselves.

Now we have people who didn't get into 16-bit for a decade or two and people who had a narrow isolated view at the time because their parents bought them a SNES (especially if they graduated from NES), trying to rewrite history and create rules for everything. No group feels the need for a selective sets rules more than SNES fans (with Nintendo fans close behind), who are stuck in a console war mentality and are so insecure about the console they know is superior either way. A 21Mhz cpu in a cart counts as a real game, but a CD game that uses no redbook or adpcm is fake. A Saturn game that uses a ram cart for extra load space the same as the PCE worked is fake. A Nintendo 64 game that uses an upgrade which physically replaces and increases the system ram is real.

The games are the games. Get over it.

[wiseau]

Well if the CDs were separate then it'd be one of the most pathetic libraries you'd ever see at a mere 20-something games, or 40-something with a special addon. Think the only thing below that would be the Jaguar CD.

[esteban]

Clarification: the TG-16 + TG-CD is a more cohesive and superior design to the PCE + IFU design.

SUCK ON THAT, Zeta.

Seriously. TG-CD is a streamlined, magnificent  beast.

This doesn't make any sense. Bait me with something funnier next time.

Ok.

Aesthetically, IFU PCE is a mismatched hodgepodge of a bodge.

It looks like something two cosmonauts had to improvise in order to get the Salyut 1's plumbing functioning for another few hours.

Two warts slapped on cheap plastic.

The IFU looks best when the briefcase cover is soundly locked in place, concealing the warts.

Don't get me wrong—the PCE and CD-ROM units are gorgeous independently. Gorgeous. Therein lies the tragedy.

You see, the MegaDrive was always an ugly wart. Slapping it on top of (or next to) a CD unit wasn't going to help matters.

One would hope that the PCE would fare better.





IN CONTRAST:

TG-CD + TG-16 intimately achieve Unity*. There is a deliberate design present. Seamless. Streamlined. Cohesive. Coherent.

"Behold the obsidian monolith!"

And so it began.

[hoobs88]

Following this logic to its ultimate conclusion, the PCE is really five different systems - Hueys, CDs, Super CDs, Arcade CDs, and GE CDs. 

What are you referring to by "GE CD"?

[NecroPhile]

What are you referring to by "GE CD"?

The Games Express CDs that required use of their own custom system cards.

[CrackTiger]

There's at least two types of Games Express system cards. One of which can only be played on a Duo or Super CD combo.

[hoobs88]

I wasn't aware of those. Thanks for clarifying!

[NecroPhile]

There's at least two types of Games Express system cards. One of which can only be played on a Duo or Super CD combo.

True.  I guess that makes it six different systems.... or seven if you include the 1.0 card and Altered Beast........ or nine when you count the SGX and LA. 

[elmer]

This is all just craziness perpetrated by collectards in order to segment their obessions in to measurable goalposts so that they can see who has is the biggest tool! 

Here's an example that Americans will probably find a bit easier to understand that Europeans ...

Let say I'm buying a truck, but I think that I might want to buy a travel trailer later (large caravan to Brits).

The truck comes from the factory with a hitch so that I can attach the travel trailer, but if I'm going to be pulling a heavy travel trailer (my choice), then I'm going to need an larger cooler in the engine to stop it overheating, and I'm also going to need a brake-controller in order activate the electronic brakes on the trailer when I brake in the truck.

Now ... I can buy the truck in a "base" package that doesn't have any of these extra frills, because most people don't want them.

I can also buy the truck in a "limited" package that already includes the upgraded engine cooler and nice leather seats. But not the brake-controller.

But the dealer will quite-happily take my money to install the factory-supplied engine cooler package onto the "base" truck.

Either way, they'll charge me to add a brake controller.

So I can have ...

"base" package
"limited" package
"base" package, plus cooler upgrade, plus brake controller
"limited" package, plus brake controller

Only a very strange person thinks that these are all totally different trucks! 

IMHO, it's the same truck in all the cases, just with some options that I can choose to buy, or not, depending upon how I want to spend my time "playing".

The real "difference" comes when I'm deciding between a Ford, a Chevy, or a Toyota.

[NecroPhile]

Don't forget the truck nuts!

[StarDust4Ever]

Before the Genesis and TG-16 launched, there was magazine coverage and ads showing the Turbo-CD along side the TG-16, with pics of the physical discs and screenshots of Monster Lair and Fighting Street. I got a Genesis at launch and became a Sega fanboy because magazines told me that it was a war and I had to choose a side. But even before I soon gave in and got a TG-16 with plans to buy the Turbo CD within months, I still never once thought of the CD games as a separate console or library. And throughout the console war generation, none of the hardcore and casual gamers I knew thought any different. I never even heard anyone try and argue something so silly until at least 15 years later. We didn't hear someone say the other day that 'technically' the CD-ROM predates the PCE launch. We lived reality ourselves.

Now we have people who didn't get into 16-bit for a decade or two and people who had a narrow isolated view at the time because their parents bought them a SNES (especially if they graduated from NES), trying to rewrite history and create rules for everything. No group feels the need for a selective sets rules more than SNES fans (with Nintendo fans close behind), who are stuck in a console war mentality and are so insecure about the console they know is superior either way. A 21Mhz cpu in a cart counts as a real game, but a CD game that uses no redbook or adpcm is fake. A Saturn game that uses a ram cart for extra load space the same as the PCE worked is fake. A Nintendo 64 game that uses an upgrade which physically replaces and increases the system ram is real.

The games are the games. Get over it.

Here's food for thought:

The Turbografx launched in 1988 or 89 or whenever. The exact date doesn't matter. Followed shortly thereafter were the CDROM docking unit which plugged into the expansion port of the console, CDROM unit, and system card, expanding it to play games with redbook audio on CDROM format. So starting off the bat you get the benefit of Turbochip games, followed thereafter by CDROM games if you plunk down the money for a CDROM unit, available separately for retail.

Must all be be the same system because you can play both Turbochips and CDROMs on a prperly equipped Turbografx, right? Keep reading...

The Nintendo Game Cube launched in 2001. Also launched in 2001 was the Game Boy Advance. Shortly thereafter followed the Game Boy Player, which included a docking unit that plugs into the expansion port of the Game Cube, and a special Game Boy Player disc which allows Game Boy and Game Boy Advance games to be played on the Game Cube hardware. One can argue that the expansion port on the base of the Game Cube was specifically designed to accomdate the Game Boy Player.

By that logic, the Game Cube was specifically designed to play Game Boy games. Therefore all Game Boy and Game Boy Advance games should be considered a part of the larger Game Cube library simply because they were playable on properly equipped Game Cube using an attachment available separately at retail.

See how silly that sounds? Nobody would argue that Game Boy Advance carts are Game Cube titles, nor that Super Game Boy enhanced Game Boy carts are somehow SNES games simply because they have an enhanced color pallet with screen borders and are playable on the TV through the game console. Well there was one specific Game Boy title, Space Invaders, with a built in 128 kbyte SNES ROM that executed from RAM, but I digress...

So if Game Boy Advance and Game Cube games are considered separate entities with unique libraries, then the Hucards and Super CDs should be considered separate libraries as well. All can be considered Duo games yes, but not all of them play on the original Turbografx / PC Engine, so blanketly referring to CDROMs as PCe or TG-16 games is a misnomer.

[ginoscope]

Don't forget the truck nuts!

You had to go there I have to see trucks with nuts on them everyday on the way home here in Texas.  Like who really thought it was a good idea to dangle nuts to the back of a pickup.  Talk about compensating lol.

Anyway on topic the way I have always seen it is that if I can use the system by itself then it's a new system.  In the case of turbo and sega cd those units would not function without the main unit.  I know the cdx, X-eye, and duo would debunk this theory but that is how I have always looked at it.

I remember when I got my CD system and being a CD snob and hucards were garbage lol.  I missed out on some great late releases like New Adventure Island and Neutopia 2.  If I could go back and slap 16 year old me I would.

[elmer]

By that logic, the Game Cube was specifically designed to play Game Boy games. Therefore all Game Boy and Game Boy Advance games should be considered a part of the larger Game Cube library simply because they were playable on properly equipped Game Cube using an attachment available separately at retail.

Errrr ... nope. And even suggesting such a silly thing makes me wonder if you're just trolling. 

Adding a completely different, and separately-released, console's hardware onto the bottom of the GameCube doesn't suddenly make a GameCube into a GBA in any sane person's eyes.

Neither did adding a Creative Labs 3DO Blaster into a PC suddenly make 3DO games into "PC" games, and nor does having a PC-FXGA in a PC suddenly make PC-FX games into "PC" games.

They're separate systems.

But adding a CD-ROM player into a PC so that you can play all the PC games that were released only on CD-ROM doesn't mean that those games (like Diablo, Myst, etc) suddenly aren't "PC" games and need a whole new "collecting" category.

There's a difference between expanding the storage means of an existing console/machine, and adding in the entire hardware from a different and separately-available console just so that you can play its library of games.

By your logic we should have totally different categories of PC games for 5.25" floppy, 3.5" floppy, CD, LD, DVD, and Blu-Ray.

That's "collector" thinking, not "player" thinking!

[CrackTiger]

The other day I saw a pair of silver nuts hanging off of the far right corner of the bumper of a cherry red old beater of a sports car. I imagined the driver looking similar to his car.

[SignOfZeta]

The GBA player is honestly a lot more like a Sega CD than a PCE CD in that it's loaded with chips. Most of a GBA is in a GB Player.

Which really makes it more like the old cards you could put in an Amiga 2000 that were basically an entire IBM AT. At that point it's kinda two systems at the same time.

For what it's worth, the argument that Mega CD is the same as Megadrive works perfectly to me, but for the fact that Sega made the stuff and they seem to think the add-ons make for different systems. It's not like there are any controller ports on a Mega CD, you need the Megadrive (a beautiful looking system, btw) to do anything so it's all just "Genesis" to me. Sega disagrees.

Similarly, if it's ever proven that Mona Lisa is a self portrait we're still going to call it Mona Lisa because that's what it's called per the guy that made it.

Going back to the metric of "will it run the same code":

PCE - %90

Mega CD - (depends, maybe %90, maybe very little)

GBPlayered out Cube - nothing

The GB Player argument is the worst one yet.

[esteban]

^ Beautiful?! Ridiculous.

[TurboXray]

Haha. It's clear that the PCE outsiders have a very Sega/Nintendo centic view of PCE. Look, if you're stuck in such a mindset.. then that's all on you. The majority of people that had the Duos BITD regard the library as a single entity, with hucards being legacy. If you're so rigid that all definitions in the retro scene need to fit neatly together, universally, well.. sucks to be you. Good luck with that. Meanwhile, I'll continue to enjoy the hucard and CD library as a single entity with worry or qualms.

[StarDust4Ever]

By that logic, the Game Cube was specifically designed to play Game Boy games. Therefore all Game Boy and Game Boy Advance games should be considered a part of the larger Game Cube library simply because they were playable on properly equipped Game Cube using an attachment available separately at retail.

Errrr ... nope. And even suggesting such a silly thing makes me wonder if you're just trolling. 

The point I was trying to make was that CD System started it's life as add on hardware. We also don't refer to GBA games as DS simply because they run on a DS Phat or DS Lite. In fact I played GBA more often than not on my DS Phat because the GBA SP was so tiny it hurt my man hands.

First came PCe. Then the CDROM. Then the Duo. I think we can both agree that SuperCD and Hucard are Duo games. The Duo system is an Umbrella over both formats. The original PC Engine and Tubografx only played Hucards. So when I think of PCe or TG-16, I think of Hucards. When I hear the name Duo, I think of both.

So the all encompassing Duo system is both formats. That's why it's called a "Duo" meaning two. PC Engine or Turbografx simply did not ship with CDROM capability, so the Super CD cannot fit under the umbrella of stock hardware. Just compare these two images. Do they look remotely like the same thing?



I own Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon on CD and I also own it on vinyl record. Additionally, I own MOON8 by Brad Smith, a demake for the NES as chiptune album. I would not consider the CD and Vinyl release of DSOTM as part of the same format, and certainly not the chiptune cart which sounds nothing like the other two.


Same album, different format. Likewise I wouldn't consider the CD and Hucard versions of Bonk III the same format either, even if it plays mostly the same on a Duo system. You can't play CDs in a record player any more than you can play SuperCDs on a stock PCe/Turbo. The media is incompatible.

[Psycho Punch]

This is the dumbest argument yet, and you still stand by it. Ok.

[CrackTiger]

So the all encompassing Duo system is both formats. That's why it's called a "Duo" meaning two. PC Engine or Turbografx simply did not ship with CDROM capability, so the Super CD cannot fit under the umbrella of stock hardware. Just compare these two images. Do they look remotely like the same thing?

The SG-1000 simply did not ship with Sega My Card capability, so the Sega My Card cannot fit under the umbrella of stock hardware.

Just compare these two games. Do they look remotely like the same thing?

[SamIAm]

Only a very strange person thinks that these are all totally different trucks! 

IMHO, it's the same truck in all the cases, just with some options that I can choose to buy, or not, depending upon how I want to spend my time "playing".

The real "difference" comes when I'm deciding between a Ford, a Chevy, or a Toyota.

Surely you are looking at different lines of vehicles from those manufacturers, right? A Camry vs. a Carolla, that kind of thing.

Assuming that you are, here's a question: how different does a car have to be in order for you the consumer to accept it as belonging in an entirely different line, and not merely being a variant? Will changing the body alone do it? Will changing the stuff under the hood alone do it? It's not an easy question to answer, and I think we could get a range of subjective takes.

My point is this: if the manufacturer added something to one model that more than doubled its price and gave it the ability to do something really fantastic that no other vehicle could do, would they be justified in giving it a different name and selling it as its own line even if all the other stuff was the same as another line?

I think they would.

This is why dismissing the CD drive as "just storage" like it's some minor option is doing it a disservice IMHO. From a user-centric viewpoint, especially in the context of the time, it practically makes the PC Engine into a car that can drive underwater. A little sound upgrade, like the Master System's FM module, would be a minor option, but they weren't selling this as a little sound upgrade. One Japanese ad I saw said "This system can hold games 1000x larger than Dragon Quest 3!"

Now, did Hudson and co. brand the CD system as a new line? Well, no. Branding, frankly, is the main reason why I think old-timers say it's all PCE.

Alternatively, was Sega's "Welcome To The Next Level" nothing but hype, and the Mega CD nothing but a Siamese twin-head that suddenly sprang out of the Mega Drive's collar one day? Perhaps it was.

And perhaps it mostly doesn't matter!

Mostly, I don't think about this at all. The only reason why I'm giving my two cents now is because I believe that if you're going to lay out the history for future generations and newcomers like StarDust4Ever, it's nice to draw a big fat boundary between the Hucard system and the CD system. I think that anybody who expects this to be like a console and not like a bloody PC, whether they came from a Sega-oriented background or not, would find it odd and confusing to think of all this different crap as one thing.

[StarDust4Ever]

Mostly, I don't think about this at all. The only reason why I'm giving my two cents now is because I believe that if you're going to lay out the history for future generations and newcomers like StarDust4Ever, it's nice to draw a big fat boundary between the Hucard system and the CD system. I think that anybody who expects this to be like a console and not like a bloody PC, whether they came from a Sega-oriented background or not, would find it odd and confusing to think of all this different crap as one thing.

BTW my background is more Nintendo as I have every console just about, but I had plenty of friends bitd with Sega systems. I started retrogaming with NES in 2002 and expanded from there. I didn't really branch out from there until I got a Genesis in 2011 and Atari in 2012.

I honestly didn't even know what a "Turbografx" was until Nintendo announced it for Virtual Console on the Wii in 2006. I had so much fun playing the TG-16 VC titles that I really missed them so in 2014 I shopped around and bought a Turbografx on eBay.

Still wish I could play Star Parodier again though without jumping through hoops to boot into the Wii menu on my Wii-U. I only ever bought Star Parodier and Cho Aniki from the CD library on my Wii due to the extra storage requirements of the compressed audio. Star Parodier was hella fun; Cho Aniki not so much. They should never make a SHMUP with a player ship that big. Nearly impossible to dodge shots with all that humongous man junk in the way...

[elmer]

The real "difference" comes when I'm deciding between a Ford, a Chevy, or a Toyota.

Surely you are looking at different lines of vehicles from those manufactures, right? A Camry vs. a Carolla, that kind of thing.

Nope, absolutely not. That's your line-of-thinking, not mine.

To me, the camra vs corolla choice is one of basic capability within the same manufacturer's line.

Like a Sega Master vs a Sega Genesis.

Or a PC Engine vs a SuperGrafx.

The CD-ROM2 & Super CD-ROM  systems were add-ons to the basic package, not machines in their own right.

You can't play a PCE CD game with just a CD-ROM2 ... you need an original PCE/SuperGrafx to plug into it.

Your "big" choice is which manufacturer do you want to trust with your money ... Ford, Chevy, Toyota ... or maybe Nintendo, Sega or NEC.

Yes, the CD-ROM2 and IFU were horribly expensive when they came out.

The still doesn't make them separate machines.

That's just because CD-ROM technology was horrendously expensive back then.

The CD-ROM2 was actually the cheapest CD-ROM player that you could buy back then ... and "yes", it's a SCSI CD-ROM, so you can plug it into a PC. I posted the advert for NEC selling that before.

That's the point ... you've got to look at the actual history at the time in order to really understand what was going on back then.

It's fine to sit here 30 years later and say ...

The only reason why I'm giving my two cents now is because I believe that if you're going to lay out the history for future generations and newcomers like StarDust4Ever, it's nice to draw a big fat boundary between the Hucard system and the CD system. I think that anybody who expects this to be like a console and not like a bloody PC, whether they came from a Sega-oriented background or not, would find it odd and confusing to think of all this different crap as one thing.

... but by doing so, you're missing the real story and history, and over-simplifying things just to avoid confusing folks who don't want to be bothered to actually think or learn.

Any comparision to a PC is 100% applicable.

Just look at who made manufactured this console, and their previous history.

They're a PC company! This was their first "game console". They didn't necessarily understand what people expected from a "game console".

And why should they?

You're talking about few years after the great videogame crash, and the subsequent totally-unexpected success and rise of Nintendo into becoming a household name.

NEC had sold lots of PC-88 series of machines. Why is it so hard to believe that someone could believe that there might be a market for an "expandable" console?

You don't have to look far to see the PC Engine Modem and Keyboard ... and the Mouse actually shipped!

Just because Nintendo and Sega only wanted to make "games" machines, doesn't mean that that's how NEC originally saw the opportunity for the PC Engine.

Even if we ignore all the interviews that tell us that NEC/Hudson designed the PCE to be a CD-ROM machine from the start ... just look at the physical evidence, and how NEC's "cheap" CD-ROM unit fits into exactly the same depth as the PC Engine in an IFU.

They were designed together! It shows!

Now ... compare that to the Mega-CD.

It's a f**king mess ... both as a physical piece of hardware sitting underneath the original MegaDrive, and as a technical design.

The Sega CD is a totally separate processing unit that disables the Genesis CPU and DMAs the screen directly to the Genesis VDP for display. It's the 1990's equivalent of OnPlay or Twitch.

From a technical POV, I couldn't decide to laugh or cry when I first saw the developer docs for the silly thing back when it came out.

In comparison, the CD-ROM2 works with the existing PCE, and doesn't replace or shut-off anything.

[SamIAm]

To me, the camra vs corolla choice is one of basic capability within the same manufacturer's line.

Like a Sega Master vs a Sega Genesis.

???

Do these two not qualify as different consoles, then?

If they don't to you, that's fine, but in that case I think our sense of what the word "console" means is so different that we won't get much out of debating much further.

Your "big" choice is which manufacturer do you want to trust with your money ... Ford, Chevy, Toyota ... or maybe Nintendo, Sega or NEC.

I have a very hard time believing that you're not giving any consideration to which of each company's multiple product lines is best for you.

By this logic, there are no Nintendo consoles. There is only "the" Nintendo console, and it is in a constant state of evolution.

Have I misunderstood you?

The CD-ROM2 & Super CD-ROM  systems were add-ons to the basic package, not machines in their own right.

You can't play a PCE CD game with just a CD-ROM2 ... you need an original PCE/SuperGrafx to plug into it.

I very much support thinking of the PCE-CD hardware as an expansion of the Hucard system. I'd say the same for the Mega CD.

This whole thread started because of confusion over the games more than the systems. Are PCE-CD games PCE games? Are Mega CD games Mega Drive games?

There are good reasons to say yes and no to both. Any acknowledgement of the "no" side will virtually always be on the grounds that the hardware has essentially become something else.

The Sega CD is a totally separate processing unit that disables the Genesis CPU and DMAs the screen directly to the Genesis VDP for display. It's the 1990's equivalent of OnPlay or Twitch.

From a technical POV, I couldn't decide to laugh or cry when I first saw the developer docs for the silly thing back when it came out.

In comparison, the CD-ROM2 works with the existing PCE, and doesn't replace or shut-off anything.

That's fascinating and all, but I would suggest thinking back to the Japanese guy in 1992 choosing between a Super CD and Mega CD.

I don't believe his choices are really that profoundly different from his perspective as a consumer and gamer.

... but by doing so, you're missing the real story and history, and over-simplifying things just to avoid confusing folks who don't want to be bothered to actually think or learn.

Any comparision to a PC is 100% applicable.

Just look at who made manufactured this console, and their previous history.

They're a PC company! This was their first "game console". They didn't necessarily understand what people expected from a "game console".

Is the PCE a game console? No, seriously, is it a game console?

If you want to say it exists as its own weird PC-hybrid thing, then that's fine. You listed lots of good reasons to do so.

But if it is a game console, then I see nothing unfair about breaking it down on the same terms as other consoles.

One of the core ideas of a console as I see it, and as I think the layman sees it, is that if you have it, you should be able to play all of the games for it. Uniformity and standardization are key. In other words, if someone has a PC Engine but cannot play a PC Engine game, then it's actually not a PC Engine game, or he doesn't actually have a PC Engine.

Obviously, with things like the N64 RAM expansion, it's not such a black-and-white world. However, if we seek to answer the question "What is the PC Engine?" and we start with "It's a game console." then we are setting people up to have certain expectations.

Defying those expectations is not a bad thing, but does it have to start with teasing people with a slice of cake on the other side of a glass wall and letting them bang their heads into it and then we say "Oh, you didn't know?"

That doesn't seem like a good way to start a lesson to me. Is it the best choice we have to teach PCE history?

...I guess it could be.

But I don't like it, and when people ask me to talk about the PCE library/libraries, one of the first things I'm going to do is say that there are Hucard games and there are CD games. To me, anyway, this division is one of the defining characteristics of the PCE.

[TurboXray]

But if it is a game console, then I see nothing unfair about breaking it down on the same terms as other consoles.

And therein lies the problem. It's not about fair or unfair, it's about your, and others unfamiliar with PCE history, inability to reconcile that not everything needs to neatly fit into some universal category. Things in life are rarely that simple, and when you do force these things - you omit important details that otherwise describe these things/situations/categories/etc.

 If a person is coming from the outside, into the PCE scene and wants to be part of it, understand it, then they need to take the time to understand the history and perception of the consoles as it was, is, and perceived. Not forced into some contrite defines so that they can easily make purchasing decision. That responsibility solely falls on them, to learn about it, and become informed. I mean, that's true of ANYthing you decide to put your money and time into. Making.. no changing(!) definitions just to suite outside company and potential increase based? No. Just, no.

 This attempt to redefine the PCE, strips of its history, and of its origin, and of its story. These are PC Engine games; hucards or CDs. From a hardware level, to capable level, to a consumer level. If Amercian importanting Japanese games BITD, without internet, can figure this stuff out - Japanese game consumers easily had a bigger advantage at their hands. I don't buy this whole confused Japanese gamer audience thing. NEC clearly made their choice of which format was dominant with the release of the Duo in 1991, going forward. I don't understand why this is so hard for people to understand. And I don't understand why this artificial division in the library along hucard and CD games needs to exist to please history revisionists and other centric retro gaming views.

 As far as people new retro gamers coming to the PCE scene and trying to figure stuff out - they get the "buy a Duo" advance.. and what did they almost always do? Buy the hucard only systems because the Duos are too "expensive". Then complain about their upgrade options, followed by a defensive claim that CDs are a different "platform". Why? Because they bring their Sega/Nintendo centric views into the picture and think they know better or whatever. If you don't want to buy Duo on top of that TG16 or PCE that you bought, then fine. Don't enjoy the rest of the majority of PCE awesome titles. Limit yourself to hucards and division addon mentality. While you at it, slap a SegaCD sticker on your CD setup if you do eventually get one. I'm sure it'll make you feel right as rain.

[SignOfZeta]

Nobody questions the significant practical differences between the formats, but that doesn't make for different systems. The format alone doesn't mean fuck. If I write a song about how future generations will be so paralyzed by masturbatory OCD bullshit that they'll need adult diapers and put an MP3 of it on a thumb drive and hand it to you then you have an MP3. If you copy that fucker and send it in an email you have an MP3. If the guy that gets that email makes a Torrent for it then thousands of people will have the MP3. If one of them backs up their HD with a portable HD then the MP3 will be one two machines. If someone backs up the backup onto DVDs...that's another MP3. It's ALL FUCKIN MP3s though, understand?

Now if anyone burns that song onto a standard CD-R in audio CD format...then you have another system. Even if the audio program is identical it's now in CDDA format which is totally different. If I sent you a multitrack wave format unmixed version of the song, that's totally different. If you zip it, it's different. If you remix it and add a verse about people who are only 42 acting like they were in The Great War and save that shit in Real Player format, that's different.

BUT!

Your computer can play ALL THAT SHIT.

Your computer is the Duo. The song about how crazy you are is the game. The MP3 is the HuCARD. The CD is...a CD.

This thread sucks.

[elmer]

Ah ... a good argument ... excellent! 

???

Do these two not qualify as different consoles, then?

Nope ... of course they do.

As do the Corolla vs Camry, or in the case of my argument, the Toyota Tacoma vs Toyota Tundra (1/2 ton truck vs 3/4 ton truck).

You choose your basic "capability" (i.e. console generation), but yet you still have "options" within that "capability" (i.e. console generation) that effect what you can haul (i.e. play).

I'm sorry if that was a unclear to those many (most) folks that haven't actually either owned a truck, or had to figure out how to make the darned thing pull a small mobile home (caravan to Brits) behind it.

I have a very hard time believing that you're not giving any consideration to which of each company's multiple product lines is best for you.

Nope, I am ... which is why I consider the CD-ROM2/Super CDROM as part of the same product line as the PC Engine.

Have I misunderstood you?

We may be getting caught up on semantics! 

I very much support thinking of the PCE-CD hardware as an expansion of the Hucard system. I'd say the same for the Mega CD.

This whole thread started because of confusion over the games more than the systems. Are PCE-CD games PCE games? Are Mega CD games Mega Drive games?

1) Definitely "yes".

2) "yes" ... but only because Sega really, really, really, wanted sell the Mega-CD as an add-on and not as a different console (which it 90% was), and so crippled it by making it output its video through the regular Genesis output, requiring all the DMA nonsense.

They didn't even bother with that silly sham when it came to the 32x. 

That's fascinating and all, but I would suggest thinking back to the Japanese guy in 1992 choosing between a Super CD and Mega CD.

I don't believe his choices are really that profoundly different from his perspective as a consumer and gamer.

You're right ... that's the difference between "reality" and "marketing", which is why the marketing folks get paid so well for selling their souls! 

I'm more interested in the technical truth and the thinking and reasons behind it than I am in how the end-product is positioned to the "great-unwashed" in order to get them to buy it.

If you want to count all games with "Blast Processing" as a separate "collectable" category just because the adverts told you that Sonic was something "special", then go for it.

I'd prefer to look at it all from an "academic" or "industry" perspective, rather than an "advertising" perspective.

Is the PCE a game console? No, seriously, is it a game console?

If you want to say it exists as its own weird PC-hybrid thing, then that's fine. You listed lots of good reasons to do so.

But if it is a game console, then I see nothing unfair about breaking it down on the same terms as other consoles.

Yes, it is a "game console", at least in my experience and in hindsight.

But do you know what that meant exactly to NEC's executives "at the time"?

They certainly didn't market it or really treat it like Nintendo or Sega did.

They had very different relationships with developers ... much more like a home computer manufacturer.

They let Hudson take a huge portion of the royalties, almost as though they were just licensing the technology (a bit like 3DO later on).

There's a deeper story here, and I don't think that it's been fully told, yet.

Whatever it is ... the relationship between Hudson and NEC is totally different to how Nintendo and Sega behaved at the time, and trying to look back on the history of the PCE in the same terms as the NES/SNES/Master/MegaDrive is an oversimplification that doesn't do justice to just how revolutionary the PCE was at the time that it came out, or its place in history as the very first CD-ROM game console.

One of the core ideas of a console as I see it, and as I think the layman sees it, is that if you have it, you should be able to play all of the games for it. Uniformity and standardization are key. In other words, if someone has a PC Engine but cannot play a PC Engine game, then it's actually not a PC Engine game, or he doesn't actually have a PC Engine.

That "idea" doesn't work, even for all the Nintendo machines.

You're fine for the NES and SNES, which bumped up the cost of every cartridge by putting special chips on board, but you've got the RAM expansion requirement for the N64, and then you've got the MegaCD, 32x, SATURN RAM, etc requirements for Sega.

There's a long history of requiring "add-ons" to be purchased in order to play certain console games, from those early RAM add-ons, to light-sensor guns, to mice, to Nintendo's Wii-Plus controller, or Sony's Move, or Microsoft's Kinect.

Now we're just about to enter the era of the PlayStation VR.

That doesn't seem like a good way to start a lesson to me. Is it the best choice we have to teach PCE history?

...I guess it could be.

"The truth is complex" beats the heck out of "Here's an artificial arbitrary line" IMHO.

But I don't like it, and when people ask me to talk about the PCE library/libraries, one of the first things I'm going to do is say that there are Hucard games and there are CD games. To me, anyway, this division is one of the defining characteristics of the PCE.

It's one of the simplest ways of describing things to folks at a party that have little knowledge, and uncertain interest, in the subject.

But by the time that someone has bothered to come to this forum and actually spend their money to buy a machine ... then I hope that we can help them enter a "bigger" world where shades-of-grey exist, and everything is much less simple, and much, much more interesting!

[SamIAm]

I should have let my last post bake a little longer. I don't want to cover up or obscure the history of the PCE for the sake of making life easier.

Basically, I still think that PCE-CD game = PCE game as an unquestionable truth is dubious.

When it comes to any system, game hardware or otherwise, an addition or modification that comes at such an extreme cost and makes such an extreme difference in the system's capabilities could arguably be said to make it a different system altogether.

That was the point of my take on your car analogy.

I'm more interested in the technical truth and the thinking and reasons behind it than I am in how the end-product is positioned to the "great-unwashed" in order to get them to buy it..

I don't see that as the current juxtaposition, though.

To me, regardless of how they conceived it, how they built it, or how they advertised it, the way that the end user experienced it is a really big deal.

I didn't have one of these back in the day, so maybe I should just shut up, but I am incredibly skeptical that people who bought the CD system assumed that they were merely getting Hucard games on a hi-fi format. I suspect they thought they were getting something more. You know, like Dragon Quest x1000.

Maybe that changed after the Hucard went down in flames and the CD system was the only thing left. Which, by the way, it seems like many old-timers were unaware of being precisely what happened in Japan until recently.

Anyway, I think gamers did get something more with games like Ys 1&2. Put that on a 4mb Hucard (heck, put it on two of 'em), and I guarantee nobody would care about it like they do now. It would just be another (good) game. The same goes for a lot of CD games.

This is why I remain unconvinced by MP3 and movie analogies. Take it off the CD, and it's not the same game. At worst, it will simply not be possible.

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

EDIT: Ah, screw it.

[StarDust4Ever]

Fact still remains there are a lot more working Hucard only systems floating about than working CD-ROMs so not everyone who wants one can have without paying a premium. Law of supply and demand. Some gamers will have to settle without the CDROMs. I unfortunately am one of them.

[deubeul]

I learned something today.

When I play Gate Of Thunder, I'm not playing on PC Engine.

OK...

[SamIAm]

I'm just saying I think there's an argument to be made...just one valid argument among many fine counter-arguments...that you're playing on PC Engine CD.

Or Super CD-ROM2, or whatever.