Historical question--the video game crash of '83

[VidGameKing]

actually the consoles, use 32-bit processors, with 64, 128, 256 bit bus addressing, and troughput. basicly, they can handle 64-bit, 128, 256-bit, but really they are only 32-bit when it comes to processing power. on the other hand, the GPU or graphics processor speed, and bandwidth could increse exponentially allowing better graphics, faster, more realistic, and taking the actually graphics processing away from the CPU. additioanlly newer Sound processors, DSP, like the EMU10K1, from creative, actually processes the sound, and takes that away from the CPU, with sound a graphics out of the way, what is left for a processor to do? well, game play anyone? you see todays standard of all these new systems are "128-bit machines" is a bunch of baloney! just like the Jaguar, through a combitation of things, you could consider them 128-bit, but some parts are 256-bit, some are 16-bit.

[JB]

actually the consoles, use 32-bit processors, with 64, 128, 256 bit bus addressing, and troughput. basicly, they can handle 64-bit, 128, 256-bit, but really they are only 32-bit when it comes to processing power.

Are you sure? I SWEAR I looked the specs up and the DC and GameCube were both 64-bit chips internally.

 

The XBox, on the other hand, is very obviously a 32-bit CPU, as it's an x86-class chip, and there are no 64-bit x86's in manufacture yet.

 

you see todays standard of all these new systems are "128-bit machines" is a bunch of baloney!

No one actually MAKES bittage claims anymore, aside from Sega claiming the Dreamcast has 128-bit graphics. Which is true. Their video chipset was 128-bit.

 

As I recall, the PS2's emotion engine is a true 128-bit CPU. It's not really a very good chip, but that's beside the point.

 

just like the Jaguar, through a combitation of things, you could consider them 128-bit, but some parts are 256-bit, some are 16-bit.

Except the Jag was all over the map.

MOST systems only have one main processor, or 2 identical ones.

[VidGameKing]

okay look, here we see from the link below us that Hitachi it self sells the SH-4 as a "32-bit" Risc processor, even the SH-5 which is touted as "64-bit" is only that because of the combination of double precision nubers and a higher memory throuput. not by core values, menaing, it's faster, but you still program it just like a 32-bit.

 

 

http://america.renesas.com/products/mpumcu...erJul24Ver9.pdf

[JB]

okay look, here we see from the link below us that Hitachi it self sells the SH-4 as a "32-bit" Risc processor, even the SH-5 which is touted as "64-bit" is only that because of the combination of double precision nubers and a higher memory throuput. not by core values, menaing, it's faster, but you still program it just like a 32-bit.

 

 

http://america.renesas.com/products/mpumcu...erJul24Ver9.pdf

 

'Kay.

 

'S been a while since I loked at it.

[VidGameKing]

it's all good

[AtariDude]

I don't think you can point to any one factor and say that it caused the crash of 1983. I think several factors occured at the same time and each help contribute to the crash. Here are some of the factors that I felt hurt the industry in 1983:

 

1) Too much poor quality products. It is hard to sell a bad game at $40 so bad games had to be reduced to $5 or $10. When that happened, no one wanted to keep spending $30-$40 for a new game, even if it was good because they could get a lot of cheap games for that price (never mind that the cheap games were not very good). So the manufacturers of good games needed to drop the price of their own games and soon they could not make enough profit to warrant remaining in the business.

 

2) cable tv began to become more prominent. Now you have more options in terms of how to spend your free time. You could still play video games but you could also spend time watching HBO or Cinemax or MTV or any number of programs.

 

3) 8-Bit computers began to drop in price and would eventually reach a little where the cost of a computer and a game system were comparable and computers gave you a greater capacity than just playing games. In addition, the quality of computer games were generally better than the video games because they allowed for more complexity (for example RPGs)

 

4) The introduction of CDS. While CD players were expensive at first, they would eventually drop down in price and people have always enjoyed music.

 

5) Lack of replay value on early videogames. Early video games were easy to play but not overly sophisticated. It took time to develop a decent game but most games only held the interest of a player for about a week; after which, the newness wore off and the player wanted to play another game.

 

These are just a few reasons. There are probably other reasons that I might have forgetten.