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

[t0rek]

IMHO Nintendo is making a big mistake here. I have to admit that Nintendo has set a lot of standards in the past. But if you compare PS2 and Gamecube graphic levels there's not a huge difference like the one that would be between Revo and PS3 for example. Nintendo should make a good console with enought graphics horsepower to face the competition plus the new controller. Nintendo is risking too much thinking that just a new controller alone would beat the other consoles.
In the other hand, Nintendo claims that it won't compete with the another consoles, that they are not inmediate competence to the Revolution. I don't know WTF are they thinking, becuse Revolution is still a console, like the other two, and most people only gets one console. However with Revolution still will have the cheapest price on the market. That will definetly make a difference, because a lot of people (and a lot of parents trying to save money buying a console to their little kids) will just buy the cheaper one. Plus someone that already has a 360 or a PS3 won't have to make a huge inversion to have a Revolution. That's why the Revolution might be able to survive...

 

[hihihihihihi]

hi

 

[hihihihihihi]

anyone

 

[WhiteX]

as for the price thing, it will not matter much if you only got mario, zelda and metroid to play...

 

[tye stik]

hihihihihihi
Banned

Lol, another one bites the dust... what is that? 3 this month? Bad time for noobs.

 

[zurki]

IMHO Nintendo is making a big mistake here. I have to admit that Nintendo has set a lot of standards in the past. But if you compare PS2 and Gamecube graphic levels there's not a huge difference like the one that would be between Revo and PS3 for example. Nintendo should make a good console with enought graphics horsepower to face the competition plus the new controller. Nintendo is risking too much thinking that just a new controller alone would beat the other consoles.
In the other hand, Nintendo claims that it won't compete with the another consoles, that they are not inmediate competence to the Revolution. I don't know WTF are they thinking, becuse Revolution is still a console, like the other two, and most people only gets one console. However with Revolution still will have the cheapest price on the market. That will definetly make a difference, because a lot of people (and a lot of parents trying to save money buying a console to their little kids) will just buy the cheaper one. Plus someone that already has a 360 or a PS3 won't have to make a huge inversion to have a Revolution. That's why the Revolution might be able to survive...

*lol* funny typing style ...nevermind...
don't get me wrong you hit the point with the price thing (not to forget the backwards capabitlity) ... but i think what you also forget is that nintendo made quite some mistakes in the past like:
- quarrels with squaresoft/rare
- virtualboy (though i don't think that one costed much)
- also as one has stated the fact that the ps1 got the "cool" console...
so they surely won't lay all their hopes on one console... at least that my opinion... as for me i like to play games and stay in reality... :bouncy:

 

[noals]

yes and that do a while man ^^

Huh?

the ps2 was the revolution ^^

for the revo, the backwards capabitlity is cool, i dont have a gamecube but i will want to play the new zelda coming so maybe i will maybe buy one.
that's fun, an old console can make me buy a new one and nintendo understood that you buy a console for games and no for spec.
now they just need to make good game, that's another history.

for the new controller nintendo is also thinking of family game.
all people are watching TV, with the revo they will maybe try a little more to interact with it because the controler look like their TV one.
maybe nintendo is wrong but they will try to touch more people than gamers. ( good price - new controler - backwards capabitlity )

if nintendo can make family play together and stop watching TV, that will be the true revolution.

 

[smegforbrain]

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.

Are there really ways of making games cheaper? I do wonder if the process of making a game these days has improved, gotten cheaper, etc, over the last 20 years.

It wouldn't seem like it, due to inflation alone.

But then, game prices have all but remained static over the last 20 years as well. On average, they may have actually come down.

As much as I don't like to see the prices rise, it surprises me that game prices haven't gone up.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I know I'm making alot more money at the job I'm doing now than somebody was 20 years ago.

 

[Allnatural]

As much as I don't like to see the prices rise, it surprises me that game prices haven't gone up.

They have. Many 360 games sell for $60 US, and the conventional wisdom is that PS3 titles will follow suit. Rising development costs we're told.

 

[Jaz]

Rising development costs we're told.

Nothing new. It's the same with the majority of console launches.

 

[Doomulation]

IMHO Nintendo is making a big mistake here. I have to admit that Nintendo has set a lot of standards in the past. But if you compare PS2 and Gamecube graphic levels there's not a huge difference like the one that would be between Revo and PS3 for example. Nintendo should make a good console with enought graphics horsepower to face the competition plus the new controller. Nintendo is risking too much thinking that just a new controller alone would beat the other consoles.
In the other hand, Nintendo claims that it won't compete with the another consoles, that they are not inmediate competence to the Revolution. I don't know WTF are they thinking, becuse Revolution is still a console, like the other two, and most people only gets one console. However with Revolution still will have the cheapest price on the market. That will definetly make a difference, because a lot of people (and a lot of parents trying to save money buying a console to their little kids) will just buy the cheaper one. Plus someone that already has a 360 or a PS3 won't have to make a huge inversion to have a Revolution. That's why the Revolution might be able to survive...

Ah, but have you thought of something? Revolution will not support HD, and if the games are made with HD disabled, perhaps the Revolution can match the horsepower of the other consoles (1 GHz + HD = 3 GHz, so if revolution is one GHz... then it could play the games without HD). Get my point? Even today's processors are boggled down when trying to play HD video. It simply won't play at full speed without the help of the gfx card. And even so, it consumes ~30% CPU on powerful processors, so HD needs a LOT of more horsepower.

 

[Jaz]

Revo is just a GCN extension?

I didn't know this.

One thing is crystal clear from the controller-based development kits, though: Revolution will definitely operate as an extension of the GameCube hardware.

It's not sounding good.

Studio sources regularly reiterate previously reported projections that the hardware will be roughly twice as powerful as GameCube. Development insiders we've spoken to seem unconcerned with power and instead focused on the gameplay possibilities that the new controller may help realize.

Now I was planning on getting a Revo purely based on the price. And now we can see why they're going to be so cheap.

Expect a very short lifespan ahead for the Revo, before it's even released. The average Joe just won't buy into it. With the 360 and the PS3 pushing some serious hardware, I fear that the Revo will not shift many units.

Article from IGN - hands on with the Revo dev kit.

 

[Allnatural]

http://www.emutalk.net/showthread.php?t=31842

 

[Sirmatto]

I know this post is really old, but no one has addressed it, so I will

Nintendo understands the basic consumer, not everyone has an HDTV! Both sonys PS3 and microsofts Xbox360 absoloutely require one for you to enjoy the thing that makes them next gen, "graphics". By releaseing the revoloution a few steps ahead of the gamecube (definately noticeable, but not as wowing as a ps3 on hdtv 1080p) they have managed to keep up with Microsoft and Sony's graphical power when compared to the set up that Revoloution will require (as it will not support HDTV this is your standard television on composite, 4:3).

From what you are saying, it sounds like Nintendo is punishing those who own HDTVs. You do NOT need an HDTV to enjoy the graphics on the Xbox360. Believe me, I have played it many times on your standard composite TV, and the graphics are still amazing. But hooking it up to a 42" plasma TV, it is a totally different game. By not fully supporting HDTV (and 480p is definitely not HDTV), they are alienating a small, but fastly growing percentage of gamers and households.

Nintendo has said time and time again that they believe very firmly that we have hit a wall with immage quality, they believe that we live in an age where graphics are very hard to advance by a great degree.

Where to begin on this one I can remember when Wolfenstein 3D was released, and subsequently, Doom, Quake, Half-Life and the subsequent "pixel pushers," and I and a lot of people said the exact same thing. Granted, we are getting very close to "life-like," but we still have a ways to go. And need I remind you, that all of their first party games (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Starfox, etc) have had graphics that went above and beyond the standard. How will they be able to achieve this when the console cannot even achieve the current standard?

In stepping away from the gameplay mechanics of yore, Nintendo once again plans to make a brand new standard in the gameing industry, perhaps this controller is just the begining.. perhaps this is the key to unlocking the door of gameing Nirvana, only time and software will tell.

While Nintendo has made standards of a few innovations, namely the rumble pack, analog stick, amongst others, there have been a few flops, of which a few have been mentioned since this post: cartridges (while not the inventor, they firmly stuck by them, thinking they were the future), the microphone add-on (x2), three pronged controllers, the VirtualBoy. So we'll see how popular their new controller is outside of their own games.

Don't get me wrong here, Nintendo is a great company, with many nice games, Zelda being one of my all time favorites (minus Wind Waker of course). I plan on hopefully buying a Revolution to supplement my 360. While the Revolution is taking a step backwards in some areas, there and other areas, like backward compatability, great first and second party games, and the price point, which will make me want to purchase it. However, I also think Nintendo is making a few, potentially fatal mistakes, where I believe they could have an almost perfect console.

 

[flowrent]

I don't quite understand the connection betweejn Revo and GC

Revolution will definitely operate as an extension of the GameCube hardware.

Meaning Revo will only work when attached to GC? Wtf?

 

[Dysprosium]

The Revolution uses the same primary hardware as the Gamecube, I believe. Simply more powerful - and even that probably isn't an extreme improvement. From the XBox to the 360 is far higher.

You seem to not notice Nintendo's strategy. They aren't going after pure horsepower (Despite that being awesomeness.), they just want to attract new gamers. Adding new aspects to old genres to interest others. Hell, I might be able to get my father to enjoy playing a game; something he hasn't done since I introduced him to Duck Hunt. XD

Even if Revolution isn't near as powerful as 360, it's price is excellent for gaming. They could sell it for near the same price as a DS ($200 CAD.), and still turn a profit.

Revolution isn't an extention for the Gamecube. The early development kits are merely "suped-up" Gamecubes with a wired Revolution controller. Apparently the updated dev-kits, sent out to developers recently, further reflects Nintendo's new design.

 

[Doomulation]

From what you are saying, it sounds like Nintendo is punishing those who own HDTVs. You do NOT need an HDTV to enjoy the graphics on the Xbox360. Believe me, I have played it many times on your standard composite TV, and the graphics are still amazing. But hooking it up to a 42" plasma TV, it is a totally different game. By not fully supporting HDTV (and 480p is definitely not HDTV), they are alienating a small, but fastly growing percentage of gamers and households.

I would rather not pay an extra $200 for hardware that supporst HDTV when I cannot utilize it, though, so I believe nintendo is right here. I must remind you that even today's processors have a very hard time to decode 1080p AVC (HDTV). How then, will the hardware be able to do it without extreme processors? And with those processors and hardware comes a price. A price nintendo avoids to make the console more affordable. I would rather get a console at $200 than $500 if I were to give it as a present to someone.

Where to begin on this one I can remember when Wolfenstein 3D was released, and subsequently, Doom, Quake, Half-Life and the subsequent "pixel pushers," and I and a lot of people said the exact same thing. Granted, we are getting very close to "life-like," but we still have a ways to go. And need I remind you, that all of their first party games (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Starfox, etc) have had graphics that went above and beyond the standard. How will they be able to achieve this when the console cannot even achieve the current standard?

And why must we push this? We can never be satisfied with something. I think Metroid Prime, which works flawlessly on the cube, looks very much like the top 3D games ever produced. I think that is top quality and there is no need for anything else.
Imo, they should actually focus on making more sprites and stuff inhabit the screen at once, which would add a detail of gameplay.

While Nintendo has made standards of a few innovations, namely the rumble pack, analog stick, amongst others, there have been a few flops, of which a few have been mentioned since this post: cartridges (while not the inventor, they firmly stuck by them, thinking they were the future), the microphone add-on (x2), three pronged controllers, the VirtualBoy. So we'll see how popular their new controller is outside of their own games.

Don't get me wrong here, Nintendo is a great company, with many nice games, Zelda being one of my all time favorites (minus Wind Waker of course). I plan on hopefully buying a Revolution to supplement my 360. While the Revolution is taking a step backwards in some areas, there and other areas, like backward compatability, great first and second party games, and the price point, which will make me want to purchase it. However, I also think Nintendo is making a few, potentially fatal mistakes, where I believe they could have an almost perfect console.

A lot of companies are interested in this controller, and I would think many companies want to try it out for themselves, but the actual question is: will they dare? Will they dare to produce for a console, which only has a small percentage in the homes.

 

[blizz]

Not that IGN are well known for the bullshit they peddle or anything... anywho I remain undecided until I see the thing.

 

[WhiteX]

Moves that add up to M$, i mean, with Big N putting up a poor show and the huge price tag we´re expecting from Sony, M$ can take this gen out.

 

[Sirmatto]

I would rather not pay an extra $200 for hardware that supporst HDTV when I cannot utilize it, though, so I believe nintendo is right here. I must remind you that even today's processors have a very hard time to decode 1080p AVC (HDTV). How then, will the hardware be able to do it without extreme processors? And with those processors and hardware comes a price. A price nintendo avoids to make the console more affordable. I would rather get a console at $200 than $500 if I were to give it as a present to someone.

I see where you are coming from here, but I still think it's going to hurt Nintendo in the long run. If only there was a way to release two consoles...one HD enabled and one at standard resolution. But two consoles would be way too confusing for the consumers.

And why must we push this? We can never be satisfied with something. I think Metroid Prime, which works flawlessly on the cube, looks very much like the top 3D games ever produced. I think that is top quality and there is no need for anything else.
Imo, they should actually focus on making more sprites and stuff inhabit the screen at once, which would add a detail of gameplay.

But that's one of the perks of gaming...the bar is raised every so often...it keeps the gaming world from becoming stagnant

A lot of companies are interested in this controller, and I would think many companies want to try it out for themselves, but the actual question is: will they dare? Will they dare to produce for a console, which only has a small percentage in the homes.

While I may have sounded cynical towards their controller, I am actually very intrigued with it. But like you said, to produce for it is almost like a dare. And with gaming revenue supposedly "razor thin" (all the talk about raising the cost of video games), not a lot of companies are able to take a dare. All of Nintendo's innovations, successes and failures, were just that: innovations. Most of them were great, but some of them just didn't have the corporate backing that they need to succeed. Granted Nintendo can make one hell of a game to go with a new gizmo, just that one game is not going to make it a success.