Vyse The Legend
Member
Except you can't put a full-sized disk into a handheld. A cart would let you play the same game in the console NX and handheld NX -- assuming the rumor of cross-platform gaming is real, there will be two separate systems, etc.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Will NX return to cartridges (or do away with discs altogether)?
- Thread starter randomengine
- Start date
Except you can't put a full-sized disk into a handheld. A cart would let you play the same game in the console NX and handheld NX -- assuming the rumor of cross-platform gaming is real, there will be two separate systems, etc.
Zombie James
Banned
The smarter and more cost-effective route would be to have optical on the console, digital distribution on the handheld.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I don't know about "smarter." Removing a disc drive from a console allows the console to utilize that space for better hardware.
Skittzo0413
Member
But as said before, a cartridge console gives them more wiggle room and $$ space to add more powerful processing units. It's unwise to completely write off the idea without taking a look at how it affects the value of the system as a whole.
I wonder how Small Wii U would be if it ditched the Disc Drive? Or what could take its' place if it was.
Carts can
- Reduce the size of the box
- Thus reducing packaging/weight/shipping costs
- Have faster load times than Discs
- Potentially gets rid of the need for a mechanical HDD as well
- Reduces heat, so the device can run cooler
- Assuming games can be played on the Handheld, it makes those games cross-compatible as well
The big negative is cart costs. But I wouldn't know how much more they cost or what will be done about it.
Going to Carts helps the box, or the up front cost to the device/system.
Carts can
- Reduce the size of the box
- Thus reducing packaging/weight/shipping costs
- Have faster load times than Discs
- Potentially gets rid of the need for a mechanical HDD as well
- Reduces heat, so the device can run cooler
- Assuming games can be played on the Handheld, it makes those games cross-compatible as well
The big negative is cart costs. But I wouldn't know how much more they cost or what will be done about it.
Going to Carts helps the box, or the up front cost to the device/system.
Adam Tyner
Member
You are correct, sir. It wasn't exactly about the switch being cheaper in the long run (although that'd certainly be the case with hardware) so much as the difference between discs / carts not being nearly as extreme as it's made out to be. Having one SKU for both handheld and console is a genuinely big deal.It was speculated that the savings made by logistics (carts are much smaller and lighter than discs) would actually save Nintendo money if they opted to use high-capacity cartridges. There was a great post here from someone who works in logistics, and I'd link to it now, but I suspect someone will beat me to it
Logistics/supply chain management is a difficult proposal for every corporate entity. You want just enough stock to meet the demand, with the right amount left over for any sudden upticks and seasonality.
Since you wanted me to explain myself, I will do so, but considering how long the post is going to be, you (and everyone else in the thread) will wish I had continued going without the detailed analysis. But since there's a LOT of bullshit spouted about distribution on GAF, now is as good a time as any.
Performance in procurement and distribution is typically measured by the amount of inventory turns you get in a year, or how often you have had to replenish your estimated stock levels at your intended destinations. Too many turns and you're over-spending in logistics and have underestimated demand. Too few and you have risked overspending your warehousing costs or may end up with dead stock at destination retailers, which will cause you to again overspend in logistics to re-distribute to regions that have higher sell-through of the product. That being said, items with high sell-through are generally preferred to have the lowest inventory turn you can get, depending on what your warehousing capacity is.
There are 3 major shipping methods for logistics: ocean, air and truck. Nintendo almost definitely uses a combination of all 3 methods. Each has very different pallet size and container weight restrictions. If your pallet is too heavy, you're charged for it. If your pallet is too tall/wide, you're charged for it. You have to strike the right balance, which is nigh impossible, at times. You almost always leave money on the ground, no matter which way you do it. The difference is in how much money that is.
And you have to maximize the usage of each shipping container, as any unused space basically leads to you paying for cargo space that you aren't using, so you avoid shipping pallets that you can't stack, so part of your pallet space is wasted in packing materials to ensure that your merchandise isn't going to be crushed by the pallet you stack on top of it. And you typically have to standardize this packing procedure, as uniquely packing pallets is a huge time-sink for a warehouse to deal with.
Then factor in where your stock has to go once it lands at its destination point, where it enters the rail and road intermodal networks to distribute them to retailers.
With 2 SKUs for each game, you have to make those calculations twice, with an order of magnitude more complexity, as the handheld SKU may have a higher demand in some regions and with some retailers, while others will not.
Since I don't know what the freight/pallet restrictions are for electronics (I mainly moved raw materials to be manufactured in-house), I'm going to have to use rough numbers and a reasonable facsimile of what their actual logistics scenarios could be.
Let's say Nintendo has a game that's launching in about a month. It's just left manufacturing and is ready to ship.
A disc-based SKU is a standard disc in a standard clamshell case, $1.50 to manufacture a piece. In order to ship these, because they can't be stacked loose, they're packaged in boxes that hold about 100 at a time. Of those boxes, in order to meet the size and weight mandates of each shipping method and to pack it with sufficient cushioning, you can only fit 14 boxes on a single pallet. So each pallet holds 1400 copies of a single game. Packing this pallet would cost an extra $2 in materials (pallet, boxes, padding, shrink wrap for the pallet, etc) per box, as a really rough number.
You can load 10 pallets in a 20ft shipping container while still meeting the weight and dimensional restrictions, totalling 14,000 copies per container. You're loading 50 containers to go by ocean freight (as most freight liners ship goods from multiple sources to the same port and that's the most you can allot to the freight liner), totalling 700,000 copies. According to estimates provided by the US government, the cost to ship via ocean from Japan to California, including import/export fees, is $4150 per container, a number that can decrease the more volume you can achieve in a single ocean liner. As a rough number, for 50 containers, let's say their volume shaves that number down to $4000 per container, or $200,000 for the total transportation cost to the port.
Now, you have to collect those containers from the port and send them to a warehouse for re-distribution. Warehouses have limited inventory space. Warehousing costs can vary greatly, depending on if you subcontract or own your own, but let's say the warehousing costs and collection from the port per pallet are averaged to $300.
Next, you have to re-distribute those pallets. To grossly over-simplify, let's say Nintendo only has to send them to one retail chain, who asks to have them sent directly to each of the retailer's distribution centres in 5 US regions. Shipping costs vary depending on origin/destination, but using rail (the slowest method) and assuming these distribution centres are at the railway hubs, let's say all 50 containers cost them $15,000 to ship. This is all assuming that you're sending WHOLE containers and not sending them via smaller amounts.
Let's say every retailer allots the same amount of shelving space. That shelving space is not free. Let's estimate that a 6'x12' dedicated shelf in all their retail outlets costs them a $2,000,000 annual slotting fee (yes, that's totally a thing and typically how places like Walmart actually make their money) and the retailer expects to sell through all 700,000 copies you gave them a month as part of that arrangement..
Nintendo expects to sell 8.4 million copies in the year and keep an extra month of the retailer's inventory needs per month for seasonal sales protection, meaning that they will be required to repeat these costs 13 times in the year. That is your preliminary inventory turn ratio. Meaning the total logistics cost per year for this one SKU is:
Total pallatization costs annually: 500 pallets per shipment x $28 per pallet x 13 = $182,000
Total ocean freight costs annually: $200,000 x 13 = $2,600,000
Total warehousing costs annually: 500 pallets x $300 per pallet x 13 = $1,950,000
Total re-distribution costs annually: $15,000 x 13 = $195,000
Annual slotting fees: $2,000,000
Grand total for yearly logistics: $6.745 million
Grand total for manufacturing: $13.65 million
Total cost per unit annually: $2.24 (74 cents a unit in logistics)
Next you have a cartridge SKU. Assuming they'd be packaged similarly to 3DS games, cartridge plus plastic clamshell case could cost $4 to manufacture in the bulk volume and contract discounts Nintendo would get (but considering that is the presumed estimate for 3DS games using ROM chips, I'd say it's probably lower... but whatever). Because of the smaller size, they can pack them 175 per the same size of box and achieve a similar weight. This nearly doubles the amount of copies you can ship. Let's assume we'll ship the same amount of containers across the ocean and achieve 1.225 million copies for the initial shipment. The retailer now requires less than you can ship, so the warehouse cost will be adjusted up to $450 per pallet. Applying all the same calculations per unit:
Prelim inventory turn ratio - 7.43
Total pallatization costs annually: 500 pallets per shipment x $28 per pallet x 7.43 = $104,020
Total ocean freight costs annually: $200,000 x 7.43 = $1,486,000
Total warehousing costs annually: 500 pallets x $450 per pallet x 7.43 = $1,671,750
Total re-distribution costs annually: $15,000 x 7.43 = $111,450
Annual slotting fees: $2,000,000
Grand total for yearly logistics: $5.37 million
Grand total for manufacturing: $36.4 million
Total cost per unit annually: $4.59 (59 cents per unit in logistics)
You've trimmed your logistics costs by nearly 25% for the entire year on that single SKU and require fewer shipments to achieve the same stocking targets. And that's without me recalculating to shave even more savings by trimming down the packaging.
Let's take that same cartridge and put it in a thinner and smaller clamshell container made of a cheaper to produce plastic (why do you think they did it with Blu-Rays?), cutting that material cost to $3.50 per unit. Now that it's twice as thin and smaller, let's say I can package 300 per box, totalling 4200 per pallet, 42,000 per container and 2.1 million units in a 50-container shipment and the warehousing costs increase to $600 per pallet, as you're now storing the merchandise for much longer than you were originally before it's redistributed to the retailer.
Prelim Inventory turn rate - 3.27
Total pallatization costs annually: 500 pallets per shipment x $28 per pallet x 3.27 = $45,780
Total ocean freight costs annually: $200,000 x 3.27 = $654,000
Total warehousing costs annually: 500 pallets x $600 per pallet x 3.27 = $981,000
Total re-distribution costs annually: $15,000 x 3.27 = $49,050
Annual slotting fees: $2,000,000
Grand total for yearly logistics: $3.73 million
Grand total for manufacturing: $31.85 million
Total cost per unit annually: $3.91 (41 cents per unit in logistics)
Puts it within spitting distance of a disc cost per unit, and all I had to do was trim the fat on product packaging.
Now try managing these numbers for 2 SKUs of essentially the same game and paying the manufacturing costs to have both media types on a shelf. It's messier, harder to manage possible demand and overall less cost-effective. It took me most of my evening to get these calculations done, and that's when I'm spit-balling numbers. With one SKU, that's one set of shipments, one consumer/retailer demand to account for, 1 less SKU that could be left to languish if accidentally over-stocked, which also costs money.
TL
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
I would buy the shit out of a Nintendo console in 2017 that used carts just for the novelty factor alone
Zombie James
Banned
It's very naive to think removing an optical drive is what's going to incentivize Nintendo to include better hardware, imho.
Skittzo0413
Member
I disagree. Nintendo (for whatever reason) prioritized small form factor and low power consumption with the Wii U, and if they continue with that philosophy with the NX (who knows if they will) then removing the optical drive undoubtedly gives them more room to use more graphics/processor cores, as it removes X amount of power draw and X amount of heat generation, not to mention cost.
If, say, they said the Wii U could not draw more than 30W (pulling that number out of my ass), and removing the optical drive removes 5W from that draw, then they have room to add 5W more with, say, another set of GPU cores.
It's a very simple and reasonable prospect, and I fail to see how it's naive.
It's not. Nobody manufactures actual ROM chips of that scale and nobody wants to. All "ROM" you see today in consumer devices is Flash chips with rewriting disabled. The very same Flash chips that go into MicroSD carts etc.
Why? Because ROM makes it impossible to adjust concrete product supply to market demand on the fly. Flash is always needed and always made. Your otherwise unreusable ROM chip with game XY permanently etched onto it is not.
Drive cost = pay once
Game cost = pay many times
Licensing = nil if you forego movie playback (see: Wii U)
Power = 3~5W, drop in the bucket, nobody cares
Storage needs = what storage needs? It's Nintendo. Look at the Wii U storage solution. No reason to expect a fundamental change.
randomengine
Banned
Amiibo proves that Nintendo fans love their physical icons to display and worship.
xDUMPWEEDx
Banned
I don't see it happening, but if it does, I would be down with it. Cartridges just aren't as practical as discs. Cartridges definitely have that cool, retro, factor though.
And ensure retail sinks your NX handhelds. I'm sure this would go over super great in Japan too.
It's best not to give it to them on a plate, though. Make them work for their excuses.
They could always tie digital downloads to an exclusive amiibo. That'll keep retailers happy.
Skittzo0413
Member
It all depends on their priorities. If they are prioritizing making an attractive console so that more people buy into the ecosystem, then cartridges start to make more sense. If they feel confident that they can/want to support the system with their shared library and not strongly pursue third parties, then the cartridge cost becomes less of an issue.
If, on the other hand, they are talking closely with western third parties and want to do as much as they can to please them, then cartridges might not make more sense. However, maybe they are saying to the third parties: "We can give you much more powerful hardware but we won't be able to include an optical drive. Do you feel comfortable releasing games on cartridges up to 64GB or digital only?"
It's silly to dismiss this discussion just because cartridges have the stigma of being way more expensive than discs. Do we even know how true that is? When factoring in the logistics, how much more expensive are carts, really? And aren't 50GB blu-ray discs a LOT more expensive than "mere pennies?" Aren't they more on the level of ~$1?
randomengine
Banned
Not in Japan.
Zombegoast
Member
I hope so. Games are becoming bigger for all the wrong reasons and installing the whole game into the HDD.
Except for hundreds of millions 3DS carts
At best they can hope for an attach rate of maybe 10 games per console; so if the difference is 1-3 dollar per game than can easily be offset by the cost of the drive. Or they can lower the retail price of the system, since they need to sell consoles before can sell any games.
A Wii U like storage solution won't work with modern games unless they actually use carts. Optical drives are too slow for modern games and they can't force people to install games unless they add a HDD big enough for more than two games. So using carts could elimiate the need for that, and they can again just have enough internal storage for one or two full games, some dlc/indies and VC and let those who need it use an external drive
MoogleWizard
Member
Cartridges with no load times for me, please.
test_account
XP-39C²
Both 3DS and Vita have load times, so that (no load time) wont happen with NX.
Jawmuncher
Member
I think cartridges would just hurt them. Since it's just another hurdle for third parties to deal with.
Bruce Springsteen
Member
if it's digital only they're going to have to release 500GB systems, I think Nintendo is too cheap for that even
they said they won't sell the system at a loss
they said they won't sell the system at a loss
Well that isn't happening unless they do NeoGeo-Sized 500-pin carts with a direct bus to both the CPU and GPU.
but hopefully it can still be pretty fast
They only have to eat a couple dollars out of profit. $12 fee from Microsoft/Sony, just becomes at $10 fee from Nintendo, problem solved.
How does this make any sense? Why would you need to load games if you are buying the cartridge with them?
Any theories of Nintendo going all digital with NX (either for the handheld or home console) are pure insanity. I can't see any console manufacturer abandoning traditional physical media in some form until the majority of sales (say 75% at least) are digital. The backlash against the Xbox One's initial plans go a long way to show people are extremely happy to have digital as an option, but are not at all ready to give up traditional psychical media. And the Xbox userbase are far more engaged with a variety of online interactions that the ecosystem offers than Nintendo's core userbase. Insanity is the only was to describe speculation that they'll go all digital.
Switching to 3DS style game cards is entirely logical, and I think likely, for NX.
Firstly there are the obvious benefits for the shared library aspect, which is one of the very few details Nintendo have actually shared about their plans for NX.
There are huge savings to be had for manufacturing/shipping/stocking one set of physical media rather than discs for a home console and game cards for a handheld. Terrell's post quoted above outlines this, and it can't be understated how happy retailers would be to have a single "Nintendo" section, rather than segregating according to device. Bolstering their retail presence would be hugely desirable for Nintendo.
Removing the loudest/biggest/most prone to failure component of every console they've shipped since the Gamecube has a variety of benefits. They can reduce the size of the console, or keep it similar size and not have to compromise in other areas to reduce the form factor. Their costs of servicing hardware go right down when they eliminate the most common fault (faulty disc drive), and the console will be able to run a lot quieter.
There are disadvantages and downsides, but on the whole, given Nintendo's strategy, I think it's the likeliest direction they'll take. I think the associated increase in game manufacturing costs would be more than offset by the advantages, and will be less and less of a factor going forward, given the gradual shift to digital.
Edit: Download stations at retail outlets are a logistical nightmare and not at all a viable alternative to traditional physical media.
Switching to 3DS style game cards is entirely logical, and I think likely, for NX.
Firstly there are the obvious benefits for the shared library aspect, which is one of the very few details Nintendo have actually shared about their plans for NX.
There are huge savings to be had for manufacturing/shipping/stocking one set of physical media rather than discs for a home console and game cards for a handheld. Terrell's post quoted above outlines this, and it can't be understated how happy retailers would be to have a single "Nintendo" section, rather than segregating according to device. Bolstering their retail presence would be hugely desirable for Nintendo.
Removing the loudest/biggest/most prone to failure component of every console they've shipped since the Gamecube has a variety of benefits. They can reduce the size of the console, or keep it similar size and not have to compromise in other areas to reduce the form factor. Their costs of servicing hardware go right down when they eliminate the most common fault (faulty disc drive), and the console will be able to run a lot quieter.
There are disadvantages and downsides, but on the whole, given Nintendo's strategy, I think it's the likeliest direction they'll take. I think the associated increase in game manufacturing costs would be more than offset by the advantages, and will be less and less of a factor going forward, given the gradual shift to digital.
Edit: Download stations at retail outlets are a logistical nightmare and not at all a viable alternative to traditional physical media.
Bruce Springsteen
Member
would be a disaster
They aren't going digital only. They have a ton of work to do for most to trust them with digital purchases, even though I haven't really had problems with transfers.
They probably saw the price of Wii U as being extremely prohibitive to its' success (on top of pretty much everything else) and will try their hardest to make the initial border to entry cheaper than Wii U, even if it means prohibitive actions elsewhere. Will it cut into their third party cuts? Possibly. But it's not like they're getting anything from them now, so 25% is better than 0%.
Its not going to happen, but cartridges would be fantastic
I hate the idea of a disk spinning full time while you play it. Yes, i hate it for years
They used to say cartridges were too expensive in the n64 days. But considering they now charge $60-$70 for a game in a single disc, i dont think a cartridge could be higher than this
Also, cartridges are cuter than discs. And probably last longer
Third parties are not coming
Be it discs, carts, digital, whatever
It dosent matter what nintendo do, 3rd parties are not coming
So nintendo is kinda free to do whatever they want
(But carts are not going to happen)
I hate the idea of a disk spinning full time while you play it. Yes, i hate it for years
They used to say cartridges were too expensive in the n64 days. But considering they now charge $60-$70 for a game in a single disc, i dont think a cartridge could be higher than this
Also, cartridges are cuter than discs. And probably last longer
Third parties are not coming
Be it discs, carts, digital, whatever
It dosent matter what nintendo do, 3rd parties are not coming
So nintendo is kinda free to do whatever they want
(But carts are not going to happen)
MoogleWizard
Member
Aren't load times still better with cartridges though? I don't remember 3Ds having particularly long times (since I forgot about them obviously lol), whereas disc based systems have always had long load times.
If they really do care about loading performance, they could just as well spend that Flash money once and put a 32GB~64GB dedicated drive cache in the device to make the 1~2.5 most recent games fast. Permanently installing all games side-by-side is not the only way to hide optical disc latencies, if they do become a bother. Microsoft has been doing this with their first two, even though they regressed with their latest. But it's existing, well understood tech nonetheless.
Two points to the logistics thing:
1) I find it completely disingenuous to expect a potential 50Cents of savings on a plastic box when a whole plastic box costs low single-digit pennies at most.
An empty Blu-ray case (minus paperwork, minus disc) weighs 40 grams.
40 grams of tin is 70 US Cents
40 grams of copper is 20 US Cents
40 grams of aluminum is 3 US Cents
40 grams of steel is 0.1 US Cents
40 grams of plastic ... well ... there's a reason people make shit out of plastic.
2) If shipping over the ocean seems costly here's a novel idea: local manufacturing for each major market. Discs can be pressed, packages can be made, labels can be printed anywhere. Or if you want to go bits and pieces: discs can put into labeled packages and shrink-wrapped anywhere. They don't have to travel around the world as complete product.
Your first reply was still on the first page of the topic. All of your (wrong) assumptions had been addressed in the posts prior.
The savings from logistics (due to smaller cases) for stocking, shipping etc, the savings from dropping a big-ass optical drive prone to failures etc far outweigh the cost savings of a BR disk.
The smart thing to do would be to use the same medium for both your devices, as it would further bring down cost, and opens up the possibility to go cross platform with certain games.
Yeah, just checkout all those western devs games on the 3DS that sold millions.. oh wait.
AcademicSaucer
Member
GAF --> Internet --> GAF strikes again
zephervack
Member
Nintendo has a really strong retailer presence, for example, they usually have very good visibility in Wal-Marts, I dont think they want to lose that.
If anything, at retail they will sell you a fake "cartridge" that only serves as a physical key that lets you launch the retailer bought, digitally installed game.
If anything, at retail they will sell you a fake "cartridge" that only serves as a physical key that lets you launch the retailer bought, digitally installed game.
Vyse The Legend
Member
And you think there are no million-selling, western dev games on the 3ds because of the... cartridge? Don't be daft.
I specifically meant on cartridges since that post said it's a non factor.
Skittzo0413
Member
I edited my post- I actually meant they might say "we can't include an optical drive" rather than "hard drive" like I originally said.
But as to your point about shipping, have you checked out Terrell's post? It's not just about the literal savings on plastic, it's about the amount of game boxes they can fit in a shipping box, how many boxes they can fit in each shipment, retail space, two separate plastic box vendors/contracts (handheld and console games), and how all of those savings potentially remove the cost hurdle of the cartridge itself.
Local manufacturing is for sure an interesting idea, but considering they get their components from a variety of vendors they would all need to have local manufacturing facilities. Unsure if it's feasible.