As we are heading to launch this week of the SNES Mini Classic, I was wondering, why?
I already heard how the NES was designed differently to look less like a toy because of the videogame industry crash in the US but, the SNES didn't really need to be redesigned.
I was trying to look up articles and there's isn't much, there's one here from Nintendolife that references another source which is Nintendojo interviewing NoA employee Lance Barr which can only be found here apparently: https://assemblergames.com/threads/interview-with-the-nes-case-designer.8530/
There is more in the link above but I posted the parts relevant to the thread.
Lance Barr was also involved in the design of the NES for the US so I wanted to include quotes from that since it's interesting.
How the NES was designed for the US and the redesign version:
Why the SNES was designed the way it was for the US:
Why NCL handles the design process of the hardware for all markets worldwide now:
And according to the Nintendolife link:
I already heard how the NES was designed differently to look less like a toy because of the videogame industry crash in the US but, the SNES didn't really need to be redesigned.
I was trying to look up articles and there's isn't much, there's one here from Nintendolife that references another source which is Nintendojo interviewing NoA employee Lance Barr which can only be found here apparently: https://assemblergames.com/threads/interview-with-the-nes-case-designer.8530/
There is more in the link above but I posted the parts relevant to the thread.
Lance Barr was also involved in the design of the NES for the US so I wanted to include quotes from that since it's interesting.
How the NES was designed for the US and the redesign version:
ND: What do you do for Nintendo now?
LB: My title is Product Design Director. I manage both graphic design and industrial design projects within Nintendo of America.
ND: Can you tell us about the prototype process and inspiration for the final case design of the NES?
LB: The original design of the NES was worked out over several months including a stay of a couple of months while I worked in Japan at NCL. The design was conceived as a wireless, modular system, designed to look more like a sleek stereo system rather than a electronic toy. After the first public showing in the US at the Consumer Electronics Show, I was asked to redesign the case based on new engineering requirements. To reduce costs, the wireless function was eliminated, as well as some of the modular components such as the keyboard and data recorder. But the biggest change was the orientation and size requirements to accommodate a new edge connector for inserting the games. The new edge connecter was a "zero force" design that allowed the game to be inserted with low force, and then rotated down into the "contact" position. The case had to be designed around the movement of the game, and required the shape and size of the NES to grow from the earlier concepts. Many of the features remained, such as the two-tone color, left and right side cuts, and overall "boxy" look, but the proportions change significantly to accommodate the new edge connector.
ND: When it came time to redesign the classic NES, why did you decide to go in such a different direction, rather than shrink the original console design, like Sony did with the PSone and Slim PS2?
LB: We considered a reduction in scale, but the point of the redesign was reduction in manufacturing costs so everything was evaluated. The redesigned NES did not use the "zero force" connector, but instead relied on a direct insert connector. Form following function, the new connector placed the game 90 degrees to the main PCB and eliminated much of the bulk needed for the old electronics and connector. The redesign was made several years after the original, which was designed in 1984. The boxy look was out and I thought it was time for a more sleek and inviting look.
Why the SNES was designed the way it was for the US:
ND: The Super NES design is quite square compared to the Super Famicom. What was your motivation for going in that design direction?
LB: The Super Famicom was maybe okay for the market in Japan. For the US, I felt that it was too soft and had no edge. We were always looking at future modular components (even the NES had a connector on the bottom), so you had to design with the idea of stacking on top of other components. I though the Super Famicom didn't look good when stacked and even by itself, had a kind of "bag of bread" look.
Why NCL handles the design process of the hardware for all markets worldwide now:
ND: Why is it that all the case designs have been handled by NCL from 1995 on? Do you have any input into those designs at this point, in order to ensure American appeal?
LB: Individually designing a product for a given market would definitely appeal to more consumers, and would be seen as having a more current, in style look. Because of the low cost of packaging, companies almost always individually design for each market--regardless of the language requirements since they know that for the cost, you can better reach your intended audience. But with products, the realities of manufacturing and time to market make it necessary to design in a single, world-wide style. Nintendo started to do this beginning with Nintendo 64. Of course the down side of this is that a given design never quite fits the needs of a particular market as well as it could had it been specifically designed for that market. Within these bounds, Nintendo localizes the hardware for each market, mainly thorough variations in color.
And according to the Nintendolife link:
Lance Barr is still at Nintendo of America after a long 34 year career, where he resides as its Design & Brand Director.