"Basically, take a GameCube, double the clock rate...and you're done"

[Doomulation]

It would, I guess, if it were not for sony and microsoft. They continue to believe in moer horsepower and graphics are the way to go. From what I've seen, only nintendo dares to break this tradition and "revolutionize" the way games are made. Heck, nintendo created the first d-pad used for the original nes. Now nintendo will create the future controller.

 

[SegaBOI]

They also pioneerd the Analog stick and the rumble feature, hell nintendo fatherd the controller that all hardware manufacturers use today.. they created the "norm".

 

[WhiteX]

as a matter of fact...
analog stick - vectrex (1982)
source EGM

 

[Jaz]

It would, I guess, if it were not for sony and microsoft. They continue to believe in more horsepower and graphics are the way to go.

To a point I agree with you.

But, and it's a big but, look at all the Nintendo fanboys who would have looked at the ealry screenshots of say, PDZ or PGR3, and said to themselves or, normally, out-loud "That doesn't look too hot".

It's an agruement that will always contradict itself. The Nintendo groupies will say that it's not always about raw power or graphics, but they'll still critisise Microsoft or Sony for producing games that don't "look next-gen" enough.

The fact remains that technology is getting better, and the average gamer does expect out-of-this-world graphics. It's what they want. They want to turn on their machine and be dazzled. Microsoft and Sony get this. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, eh?

Nintendo on the other hand seem to be doing everything that they can not to appeal to the general public. Sticking moreso to the fanboys and the "hardcore" gamers.

Don't get me wrong, I am a gamer. Sure, I love my Xbox 360 but I have no doubt that at some point I'll own a PS3 and a Revolution as well. I play games because I love playing games.

For the majority of today's gamers, the choice isn't that simple. If they're not "hardcore" then chances are that they're only likley to have one machine sitting under their TV. And chances are it's going to be the one that impresses them the most when they walk into a game retailer and see the latest hit running on the said hardware.

In my logic, this will be a 360, and eventually a PS3.

At best, the Revolution aims to be a novelty. And as we all know, novelty's soon get old.

 

[WhiteX]

I am no Fanboy, Jaz!
Ahem!...i agree with the novelty thing and i kinda like horsepower, however, i am more interested in innovative and unique franchises not consoles.

 

[Doomulation]

To a point I agree with you.

But, and it's a big but, look at all the Nintendo fanboys who would have looked at the ealry screenshots of say, PDZ or PGR3, and said to themselves or, normally, out-loud "That doesn't look too hot".

It's an agruement that will always contradict itself. The Nintendo groupies will say that it's not always about raw power or graphics, but they'll still critisise Microsoft or Sony for producing games that don't "look next-gen" enough.

The fact remains that technology is getting better, and the average gamer does expect out-of-this-world graphics. It's what they want. They want to turn on their machine and be dazzled. Microsoft and Sony get this. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, eh?

Nintendo on the other hand seem to be doing everything that they can not to appeal to the general public. Sticking moreso to the fanboys and the "hardcore" gamers.

Don't get me wrong, I am a gamer. Sure, I love my Xbox 360 but I have no doubt that at some point I'll own a PS3 and a Revolution as well. I play games because I love playing games.

For the majority of today's gamers, the choice isn't that simple. If they're not "hardcore" then chances are that they're only likley to have one machine sitting under their TV. And chances are it's going to be the one that impresses them the most when they walk into a game retailer and see the latest hit running on the said hardware.

In my logic, this will be a 360, and eventually a PS3.

At best, the Revolution aims to be a novelty. And as we all know, novelty's soon get old.

I get what you say, but if there was no putting for graphics, would there be a demand for it? My point is that, today's gamers are used to graphics because that's basically what the consoles have all focused on.
People will always edge towards what they are used to. Right now, they're mostly used to graphics, because that's what most of the majority of consoles had.
But still, if we look at the gamecube, we that it had the best graphics capabilities out of the three next-gen consoles today, but it didn't sell well. We might argue that it's the developers; not being so many games for it, but wouldn't developers flock to a popular system?
Bottom line: we consumers tend to turn to what we're used to--and that's what the xbox 360 & ps3 will offer. But what if we try the new ways of revolution, might we change our opinion?

 

[SegaBOI]

as a matter of fact...
analog stick - vectrex (1982)
source EGM

First analog stick used on a standardized controller was N64 however.. as well as createing one of the new standards for manuvering in a 3d space.

The Vectrex analog stick was more of a joystick persay..

 

[noals]

xbox360 and ps3 are sure more powerfull than the revolution, maybe the revolution controler won't be so great but nintendo is trying something different and it's good for the gamming world.
the only interesting things in a console are game and im just waiting to see what game there will are with all 3 next-gen console out.

for now there are just old game with better graphics on xbox360...
and also, dont forget that xbox360 and ps3 will be 400bux and the revolution will be around 100, that make a difference too.

 

[Jaz]

My point is that, today's gamers are used to graphics because that's basically what the consoles have all focused on.

But it's only a natural progression - otherwise there is surely no need for new machines, just maybe new peripherals (like the new Revolution "pad", for instance). Lets face facts - the only reason new consoles are created is to take advantage of the latest hardware. And 99% of that is graphical power.

People will always edge towards what they are used to.

For sure. Which is why the PS2 was so popular - despite it being a crummy piece of machinery with a largely poor games library.

But still, if we look at the gamecube, we that it had the best graphics capabilities out of the three next-gen consoles today, but it didn't sell well.

Exactly - just look at Resident Evil 4!

As you say, it didn't sell well. I feel that this is somewhat a brand issue. People these days are label-crazy. Weather it's jeans or perfume, and even consoles.

Sony made gaming "cool". It's not cool to have a Nintendo anymore because of their arguably "childish" approach, which in all fairness is probably the most traditional approach to gaming.

We might argue that it's the developers; not being so many games for it, but wouldn't developers flock to a popular system?

Most people say that it's the games that sell a console. I disagree. Look at the Dreamcast. Look at the Gamecube. To a certain degree, look at the Xbox. All had the support of some major publishers, each with it's own AAA exclusive titles. Yet each one probably sold less than it should of.

But what if we try the new ways of revolution, might we change our opinion?

Possibly. And whilst I'm one of the most spectical people on this forum with regards to the Revolution, I am looking forward to playing on one.

However, I still think that Nintendo have been a little too creative this time. There is a very fine line between a genuine inovation and a novelty. And I really do feel that they've crossed it.

We'll find out soon enough though, I guess.

 

[blizz]

Better graphics in a game make it more expensive to make. And it means that the games get a higher RRP.

Look at the games on the 360 and you can see the differences already. Microsoft showered Rare in money for PDZ and Kameo, but look at Tiger Golf by EA. The difference is obvious. (I'm not going to link to screenies I'm too lazy).

This is why Nintendo took that route. They've made the Revolution more cost effective to develop for. Of course not every 3rd party is going to dev for it just because of that!. But if you're a start-up aiming at the hardcore gamer market, with a limited budget, The Revolution is an ideal choice.

 

[Jaz]

Fair point dude, but the majority of consoles that are launched have high production and development costs and therefore high game prices. It's understandable. And as they get used to the hardware, the prices will fall.

As you said, the 360 games are expensive. Ranging from £45-£50. But remember the N64? I remember games being £60-£65.

 

[Doomulation]

But then there is also the issue... even with the new ways of getting games cheaper, I would still not believe they get cheaper. Only more expensive, in fact, especially due to HD.

 

[Nin_10_Dough]

But, and it's a big but, look at all the Nintendo fanboys who would have looked at the ealry screenshots of say, PDZ or PGR3, and said to themselves or, normally, out-loud "That doesn't look too hot".

It's an agruement that will always contradict itself. The Nintendo groupies will say that it's not always about raw power or graphics, but they'll still critisise Microsoft or Sony for producing games that don't "look next-gen" enough.

The selling point for the xbox 360 and the ps3 are their graphics. As you said, it is the main stream appeal. Considering the price for the xbox 360, are you impressed so far with the graphics? So far the gameplay is identical to what we are all used to. Due to hardware limitations in the past (n64,psx)you couldn't have massive maps and........ (well stuff was limited ). On the cube,ps2 and xbox it wasn't a problem. Although it does infact look better, it is pretty much the same experience. That is why the xbox is dubbed as xbox 1.5 by some.

I disagree about what you said about screen shots. They usually look better than the real thing. You can't see stiff model animations or drops in fps.

 

[WhiteX]

but smth that M$ said is in fact true, the more we go further inside the third dimension, the least "drooling" the graphics leap will be and you can never compare a game of a dying gen with one newborn.

EDIT: and i just saw NFS most wanted on a X360 and it Kicks major ass!

 

[Jaz]

EDIT: and i just saw NFS most wanted on a X360 and it Kicks major ass!

And that is one of the worse launch titles.

Wait until you've seen COD2 and PGR3 running in HD.

 

[Jaz]

So far the gameplay is identical to what we are all used to.

I disagree (see below), but...

I play my Xbox because I enjoy it. Therefore the prospect of playing Xbox games with enhanced graphics and HD can only be a good thing.

Due to hardware limitations in the past.

Whenever a new machine is unleashed, only then will you see the true limitations of it's predocessors.

It's early days, but take Kameo for example. There is one part where there is literally 100's of enemy goblin things on the sceen at one time. Something that just could not be possible without the raw processing power of the 360.

The same with Dead Rising.

So I disagree. I think in some ways it does enhance and improve gameplay.

Maybe not in such a radical way as the Revolution aims to do, but I stand firm with what I've said in the past: It's an interesting concept, but novelties don't last long, whatever form they're in.

How often do you play games like Time Crisis, or Sega Bass Fishing? Not many. Themed-controllers are a gimick, aimed for a different experience.

Now and again we like a bit of variety in our control methods - but surely it will only work with a set few genre's?

 

[WhiteX]

As i said earlier the true revolution, the next gen is getting seen in the wrong end, not hardware, but software, new franchises, innovative ones.
Take half life 2 for an example, it is way better than doom 3 with all the eye candy, if nintendo can replicate that with revo, fine it will rock but if not i do not believe it can make it, if nintendo find games that can use the cotroller capabilities in a cool way, that also do not stray too much from what we know and love, fine it will rock.
Take for another example, Katamari damacy, it is revolutionary, but on software, not hardware, sony did not have to make a gimmick to let you play it and the game is ugly as hell but still was a major success.
I surely hope that Nintendo get the job done with it´s "other gen" and hope as well that the 3rd paties find cool ways to use it as well or it will be virtual boy all over again...

 

[noals]

There is one part where there is literally 100's of enemy goblin things on the sceen at one time. Something that just could not be possible without the raw processing power of the 360.

blah !
Ikusagami on ps2
65 000 ennemy at the same time... ( i dont know on the screen but check the screenshot )

Revolution? It's already here.

yes and that do a while man ^^

 

[raksmey1309]

Is it really on PS 2??
Wow Cool.

 

[Jaz]

Ikusagami on ps2
65 000 ennemy at the same time...

That looks insane!

yes and that do a while man ^^

Huh? :huh: