That other console that's not made by MS or Sony
polycounter lvl 18
Nintendo Revolution unveiled, apparently hot off the presses:
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3140623
Apparently Nintendo is taking a bit of a different route. It's good to see that they're going to focus more on online play and all of that other stuff that seemed to hurt the Gamecube a bit, but they aren't putting much emphasis on "power" and it sounds as if it's going to be very underpowered compared to the other consoles. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I'm not sure how good of an idea it is from a marketing standpoint (the "penis measuring contest" of which system is most powerful always seems to sell consoles). I hope Nintendo knows what they're doing.
Even from that single small image, I believe they definitely have the best looking console (damn, and look how tiny it is). I don't understand what's with the whole vertical thing, though. Did people really buy PS2s just because they could stand them up vertically? I always thought it was a stupid gimmick.
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3140623
Apparently Nintendo is taking a bit of a different route. It's good to see that they're going to focus more on online play and all of that other stuff that seemed to hurt the Gamecube a bit, but they aren't putting much emphasis on "power" and it sounds as if it's going to be very underpowered compared to the other consoles. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I'm not sure how good of an idea it is from a marketing standpoint (the "penis measuring contest" of which system is most powerful always seems to sell consoles). I hope Nintendo knows what they're doing.
Even from that single small image, I believe they definitely have the best looking console (damn, and look how tiny it is). I don't understand what's with the whole vertical thing, though. Did people really buy PS2s just because they could stand them up vertically? I always thought it was a stupid gimmick.
Replies
nowadays though the market consists of far more types of gamers and it seems to me that many people simply buy the hardware to run a particular game, not the best nor fastest hardware because of it's capabilities.
as long as nintendo can bring quality titles to the market, they should have their successes. and product quality in this business is not defined by polygons per frame and pixel shaders although some want to lure us into believing that.
no, i can't imagine anyone buying the ps2 just because of it's ability to stand vertically
Also nice that they switched to a standart disc system.
About that vertical thing; I read that it is a big thing in Japan, because it takes up less space in small flats or someting... doesn't make that much sense to me, but who knows?
It does look nice, but not very 'Nintendo'. No big buttons, no flat plastic case. So all of the next gen consoles also double as having the ability to tip each other over, like dominoes.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think they're trying to lose their cutesy-wootsy kiddy image a bit. I can't blame them. I never had a problem with it, but apparently most people like to act cool like the big kids.
I think they're trying to lose their cutesy-wootsy kiddy image a bit. I can't blame them. I never had a problem with it, but apparently most people like to act cool like the big kids.
[/ QUOTE ]
I never had a big problem with it either (and I really don't mind 'kiddy' games, actually it is the opposide... I don't like those uber cool games like NFS Underground and GTA), but having that bright purple cube sitting in a nice livingroom is quite a distraction.
[ QUOTE ]
I would love to play any past Nintendo game. Especially old two player ones, online, but that's probably getting my hopes up. Contra anyone?
[/ QUOTE ]
Since they are probably running it with an emulator, it could be possible (see zsnes online mode)
[ QUOTE ]
fake
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually I think so too
Thats what... 4 fake revolutions I've seen this week, although admitedly one of them was an NES with a piece of paper with 'Revolution' written on it taped to the top.
Games sell consoles not hardware and Nintendo has been seriously lacking in this department lately.
[/ QUOTE ]
Damn skippy, my GC has been sitting in a dusty corner for about a year and a half. I've got all 3 systems and my PS2 is still the most played.
imho, there's little incentive for developers to make games that'll be on all 3 platforms, due to the revolution's unique controller (that nintendo will most likely make it a requirement to use), but if it's going to be completely underpowered compared to the other consoles, it'll just make doing cross platform games all that much harder to do. developers might just forget about nintendo like they're doing with the current generation. but, if it's weaker, maybe the development costs and time will be cheaper and shorter, drawing more developers. who knows.
who the fuck cares about cross platform games anyway? It's all about pissing on the other mans back dontcha see!!!
http://media.cube.ign.com/articles/615/615030/imgs_1.html
# The secret weapon: The console also will have downloadable access to 20 years of fan-favorite titles originally released for Nintendo® 64, the Super Nintendo Entertainment System® (SNES) and even the Nintendo Entertainment System® (NES)
some details announced today. and vermillion those screens arn't fake apparently.
they always think design and function first before everything..
although if this is true then it's a bit of a letdown that revolution wont be as powerfull as the other two consoles ..
i have faith though
# The secret weapon: The console also will have downloadable access to 20 years of fan-favorite titles originally released for Nintendo® 64, the Super Nintendo Entertainment System® (SNES) and even the Nintendo Entertainment System® (NES)
[/ QUOTE ]
If that is for free, than it is really a secret weapon, otherwise it will be too much of a problem paying for them (paying $1 for a game with a creditcard??? no thanks)
Um, do you enter your CC details EVERY time you go to amazon? Or do you use your stored profile?
If they can keep the price signifigantly lower than PS3 and XB2, they could have a sleeper success on their hands. Having old school style arcadey games just goes along with this. I don't think it'll be so much of a kids' machine as a girls' console. Now don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with that.
I've been trying to get my wife into playing games, but it's been pretty much a lost cause. She sees computers as work machines, and consequently won't play PC games. And she doesn't like the way the other consoles look, so isn't interested in buying them. She would definitely find this little machine cute, and would probably be interested in the games.
The only things I've ever gotten her to play in the slightest were Oddworld and Spyro for the PS1.
2nd: isn't there usually a minimum fee for every transaction?
1st: lots of people exspecially in Europe don't own a credit card (including me), and other methods of payment kinda suck for this kind of payment.
[/ QUOTE ]
just get a Visa?
dont have to live in the states to have a card to pay with
And there is no other need for a credidcard I can see (at least for me and obviously a lot of other people in europe)
Nintendo is trying something that I don't believe Sony or Microsoft even considered: using their resources to focus on mass-market appeal rather than playing the "space race" of graphical hardware. A decade ago this wouldn't have been a viable strategy, but I think now might be the right time for it. Think about it; even with the current generation of consoles, graphical capability (or lack thereof) hasn't really been a hindrance on game design... the only purpose for improved graphics is to make the game shiny and purty.
Sure, there are marginal visual improvements on more powerful hardware, but very few people recognize things like HDRI or real-time Global Illumination. They can tell one looks a slightly better than the other, but they can't say exactly why.
If Nintendo prices this machine at 60-75% of the cost of the other consoles (depending on how much they cost), I believe they'll have much more than just a "sleeper success." I think people are going to be surprised.
If what I've read so far truly is all there is to know about the Revolution they are fucked. Nothing that revolutionizes gaming. Hell, nothing my PC can't do better! If that's all they have they can just as well give up because there is no need for their "revolution" in this world. Hell, first they talk about completely changing gaming forever and all they deliver is the Phantom in a smaller case. Way to go, you better hope your Reggie Fils-Aime can dig you out of that hole you just jumped into!
Speaking as one who has worked with and tested games on all systems, Nintendo has by far been the underdog when it comes to pure computing power in their systems. But I do give them credit for making good games.
Gameplay is the key to victory.
I plan on *NOT* buying any of them. So its not like i have a favorite, i hate them all equally
Speaking as one who has worked with and tested games on all systems, Nintendo has by far been the underdog when it comes to pure computing power in their systems.
[/ QUOTE ]
The N64 was more capable than both the PS1 and Saturn; the Gamecube was more capable than the PS2. What the hell are you talking about?
The fact PS2 is backwards compatible alone makes its far more "capable" in that regard.
Hardware wise, the GC is *slightly* better by 8mb ram and 185mhz cpu. Even though their software renderer blows hard.
Doesnt matter anyway as Nintendo plain says they arent about making their machine faster. So it sounds to me like they are going to rely on gameplay, their strong handheld market and their hardcore fanboys to keep them afloat.
Safe sailing, nintendo, beware the kraken beast that is MS.
I can't believe that shit ...im so disappointed I really thought they were gonna do something amazing and win back there glory days. They obviously only care about there handheld market at this point
[/ QUOTE ]
Are you disappointed because they're not partaking in the hardware penis measuring contest, or because you expected some wierd new VR technology? I don't understand why people put so much emphasis on specs, especially now-a-days when differences in power don't mean as much.
GC more "capable" than the PS2? dude where are you getting this info from cause its dead wrong.
[/ QUOTE ]
GC CPU: 405 MHz
PS2 CPU: 300 MHz
GC total RAM: 42 MB
PS2 total RAM: 38 MB
GC mem bandwidth: 3.2 GB/sec
PS2 mem bandwidth: 3.2 GB/sec
GC texture pipelines: 8
PS2 texture pipelines: 1
GC Pixel Fill Rate (no textures): 12.8GB/sec (anti-aliased)
PS2 Pixel Fill Rate (no textures): 2.4 G/sec
Did I miss something? Regardless of the specs, anyone who isn't legally blind can see that the GC has better visuals than the PS2, hands down.
Straight from the Nintendo site states:
http://www.nintendo.com/techspecgcn
Clock frequency : 485 MHz
System Memory : 40MB (TOTAL)
Main Memory : 24 MB
A-Memory : 16MB (81MHz DRAM)
Texture read bandwidth : 10.4GB/second (Peak)
Main memory bandwidth : 2.6GB/second (Peak)
So how did you magically add 2mb memory and loose 80mhz?
Anyway Im not here to debate hardware or to flame anyone for having a favorite console. To each their own.
I stand by what I said.
See now i know that info is wrong..
Straight from the Nintendo site states:
http://www.nintendo.com/techspecgcn
[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, I got it from here. I guess I should've gone to Nintendo's site.
[ QUOTE ]
I stand by what I said.
[/ QUOTE ]
Really? You said that "Nintendo has by far [my emphasis] been the underdog when it comes to pure computing power [...]" I think you'd have a hard time trying to argue that the PS2 is even equal to the GC, let alone more powerful "by far." I don't really have a favorite console manufacturer, it just irks me when people praise one console and shun another because they buy into the hype. It seems to be how Sony gets most of their customers.
until you clarify you're honestly not convincing anyone me thinks.
As for the new revolution it's apparently going to be 2-3 times more powerful than the cube.
-- Freedom of design: A dynamic development architecture equally accommodates both big-budget, high-profile game "masterpieces" as well as indie games conceived by individual developers equipped with only a big idea.
This is interesting (although it's probably just management speak... What could it entail? Slimmed down freeware development-kits maybe? Free games that could be pimped on the some sort of Nintendo-only network? No idea, but I do think it sounds interesting.
Nintedo seems to be doing the Mac thing. Focusing on their hardcore fans, while trying hard to create a nitsch of their own. Good luck Nintendo, I won't buy your crap anymore until I see something I want to play...
Frankly I could careless of convincing anyone of anything.
Just the disc size/format alone was holding back the GC. Im just glad they fixed that in the new console.
If what I've read so far truly is all there is to know about the Revolution they are fucked. Nothing that revolutionizes gaming. Hell, nothing my PC can't do better! If that's all they have they can just as well give up because there is no need for their "revolution" in this world. Hell, first they talk about completely changing gaming forever and all they deliver is the Phantom in a smaller case. Way to go, you better hope your Reggie Fils-Aime can dig you out of that hole you just jumped into!
[/ QUOTE ]
consoles are ment to play games only (or they used to be) but pcs do a wide range of things. not everyone wants to spend $2000 on a computer to be able to make their games run the best that they can be run. Consoles are about having a SET platform where games will run how they are MENT to be run. Spending $150-$300 on a console makes it easier for people whose computer probably doesn't run games at their maximum potential. You got a nice PC? Fine. Keep the PC out of this. Consoles are consoles and lets just keep them seperate.
Are you disappointed because they're not partaking in the hardware penis measuring contest, or because you expected some wierd new VR technology? I don't understand why people put so much emphasis on specs, especially now-a-days when differences in power don't mean as much.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ohhh your one of those people ....ok well anyways Nintendo had NOTHING worth showing off and everything they did show off was nothing more then marketing double talk . It's like the Nintendo DS to me is the equivlent of going to McDonalds and instead of getting a double quarter pounded your getting one with CHEESE ..owwww ahhhhh... whatever Nintendo is nothing but hype . You win consol wars with Amazing graphics and amazing looking games . They have great games no doubt but they are so half hearted about the consol I dont even see why they are even spending the money they should have gone the way Sega went . I really hope someday Sega and Nintendo try and make a real effort to win back there consol fans but it's not happening this generation.
You win consol wars with Amazing graphics and amazing looking games . They have great games no doubt but they are so blah blah blah
[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds like you want to live in a world where there is only one amazing profitable console to choose from. When did this become a war? Damn you nerds and your small penises.
I'm still waiting for the controllers. I think a whole new dimension of gameplay can be created simply by improving the input devices. Compare driving a car to flying a plane. If they follow the same path as the others and use the same controller with a new coat of paint, then I'll be disappointed. I'll be satisfied with less than expected graphics, and a smaller price tag, as long as it's what a console should truely be...fun.
edit: I remember reading somewhere days ago that the Revolution will be quite powerful.
Hmm, seems that 2-3 number was incorrect...
http://www.cube-europe.com/news.php?nid=7774
Ohhh your one of those people....
[/ QUOTE ]
One of what people? I haven't owned a nintendo system since the NES, and I was only five years old at the time. I'm just not as impressed by flashy graphics anymore. During the 32-bit era, I remember being blown away by the Saturn/PS1/N64, and then again when the Dreamcast/PS2 rolled around (I read gaming mags and websites religiously, looking for more screenshots and drooling). Back then, advancements in hardware actually contributed to advancements in gameplay (by allowing much larger, expansive environments, several times more characters, etc.), but now it seems to be more about polish and bragging rights.
Of course, everything I've said is under the assumption that the system is going to be much more affordable... if it ends up being in the same price range as the other consoles, and you're paying for compactness in place of capability, then I retract everything I've said; I don't believe that's the case, though.
consoles are ment to play games only (or they used to be) but pcs do a wide range of things. not everyone wants to spend $2000 on a computer to be able to make their games run the best that they can be run. Consoles are about having a SET platform where games will run how they are MENT to be run. Spending $150-$300 on a console makes it easier for people whose computer probably doesn't run games at their maximum potential. You got a nice PC? Fine. Keep the PC out of this. Consoles are consoles and lets just keep them seperate.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, besides that I agree that consoles and PCs are completly different things (PCs run good strategy games and FPS, consoles only crap
PCs arn't really more expansive!
Lets say that about everyone has a PC that can surf the Internet with and write their letters... so that amount of money doesn't count, because you spend it no matter what (even if you buy a console).
Now if you buy a console, you need to spend about $150-200 for it, plus a few extras (extra controllers, memory cards etc) and a every game costs about $10 more than PC games.
Count that together, and you spend at least $300 for you console (only counting the extra 10 bucks for the games).
Now show me a Internet PC (that isn't you grandmas old 486) that you can't be upgraded to a steaming hot gaming machine with $300.
It might not be the the five million GHZ + Geforce 10000 PC, but you will be able to play games with better graphics than consoles can offer for atleast the last 75% of their life span (and the first 25% only slightly superiour).
And if you buy the console the day it comes out, the calculation is even more in the favour of the PC, since you will not get a next-gen console for less than $250 the day it comes out (except for maybe the Revolution, which for other reasons can't be compared, if it really is that slow).
In other words, PC and consoles are two different things, but it is not true that gamingPCs are more expensive.
Look, im not trying to start another goddamn pointless console flamewar. I am simply saying from what I HAVE WITNESSED FIRST HAND that the GC is not as capable as the PS2. Take it as you will, I am not saying either is better than the other.
Frankly I could careless of convincing anyone of anything.
Just the disc size/format alone was holding back the GC. Im just glad they fixed that in the new console.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll give you a nod on the disc size holding back the GC but as far as the rest of the hardware goes I'm having trouble believing your arguement.
If I remember right the arcade hardware for SC2 was pretty close to a PS2(correct me if I'm wrong). However of all three versions the GC one ran the smoothest and had the quickest loading times.
"But in my job, what gives me the most satisfaction is seeing someone pick up a controller and finding surprise and delight. What catches their heart still catches my heart. Thank you very much."
It just seems so innocent and idealistic. I wish game development was about this instead of money. But, tis not the way the world works. I think this pretty much clinches my support of the Revolution.