Slashdot Mirror

"Give me a *story*, dammit... at least of comic-book quality. (And no, "Demons have invaded the earth and you must kill them" is not a story. It's an excuse.) Can't some enterprising company hire someone like, say, Brian Azzarello / Warren Ellis / Alan Moore to put a storyline worth a damn into a game?"

Check out Hostile Waters: Antaeus Rising. Warren Ellis was hired to write this. It's a sort of blend of action and realtime strategy, where you can take control of the units yourself. It had a decent storyline (nothing particularly brilliant), good script and above average gameplay. I only ever saw one copy anywhere (the one I fished out of the bargain bin), so good luck finding it.

The author asks for a game where you're on a desert island, and surviving for food, building shelter, and the likes.

Well, here you go, buddy.
Survival Kids (gamespot.com).

One of the greater games that just slipped under the radar (like so many of them often do).

You may be correct that the GC "is not" sold at a loss, but it was sold at a loss after the late 2003 price cut. Source

IGNcube: Okay. Now GameCube is selling for $99 and it's doing great. But is Nintendo losing money on each unit sold?

Perrin: I would say that our losses are really negligible. It's such a small amount. Plus with the amount of software that's being sold we're still definitely in a solid profit situation. We're not in the position that I know that Microsoft has been in with the loss Xbox hardware.

Perrin Kaplan is the NOA vice president of corporate affairs.

As far as I know, though, you are correct that at no other time has Nintendo had to sell a console for a loss, which shows just how much trouble they are in.

There was a Dreamcast game based on The Ring. It followed the storyline set in the sequel about a "ring virus" and it seems to be very different than the movies. More of a "spiritual successor" to the movie, than a direct interpretation. http://dreamcast.ign.com/articles/134/134989p1.htm l

Sony showed a real time tech demo of an explosion (full physical simulation with fluid dynamics) running on cell hardware. As far as i know it was both simulated and rendered (voxel renderer) on the cell.

http://streamingmovies.ign.com/ps3/article/614/614 943/sonycon_demos_unreal_02_wmvlow.wmv

I have never read anything this ignorant, this misguided before. And I'm a regular /. reader!

Before your embarrass yourself in another post, see this (WMV, I'm so sorry):
http://media.ps3.ign.com/articles/615/615000/vids_ 1.html

Ever project manager, CEO, etc. make stupid comments. The Toy Story comment was very, very stupid. But anyone with half a brain knew it wasn't possible. MS is constantly making stupid comments, yet you mention NONE OF THEM. On top of this, Microsoft is the KING of hype. Look at the MTV Xbox load of crap. All hype, no substance. These tech demo show the true power of Cell and RSX in REAL TIME. The video shown at E3 were real, and I don't care if you do not believe me. Anyone with a trained eye can see this by merely comparing the videos against the released screenshots.

Cell is the revolution in computing, Cell is the supercomputer killer. The PS2/PS3 ARE NOT SUPER COMPUTERS! They are game consoles, they may compare some of the power to those of super computers. But super computers don't have TV and digital audio outputs. Stop over reading into what people say.

And the fan boy comment is proving that you are exactly that, a fan boy yourself. The PS2 has sold over 90 (I think it's 90) million consoles worldwide, and all this while pulling a profit. In fact the PS side of Sony is keeping them alive (at least to investors).

I won't begin to even get into how much the PS2 has evolved without evolving. It's got 24 mb of fucking RAM!! DUDE, do you not see the games it can push?! How dare you disrespect such an underpowered machine, and what people have done with it!

I'm not explaining this any futher...

-mo

Because every developer on the floor knew that the most impressive demos for the PS3 were totally prerendered. They could even name the people who worked on them. And for some reason no one in the games journalism community would point blank persistently ask Sony and groups like Axis Animation what the deal was. Look at this article where it's all speculation and guessing. The public deserves to know that what they were shown is not exactly how a game is going to look on PS3. Meanwhile, closed door demos of the Xbox 360 were actually impressive. I don't work for either company or work in games for that matter, though I do love them. I am totally neutral about both machines. My bias is negative towards Microsoft as I'm a Mac zealot and my Xbox is my least favorite console. I went into E3 feeling Microsoft had blown it. Then I saw what it could do, held the controller in my hand, and now am impressed and rather excited about the Xbox 360. And privately a developer told me that they aren't anywhere near having the machines run full speed or utilizing their full power in the very obvious Mac G5 dev kits they're running everything from. But I will say this: HDTV is going to be a requirement. The PS3 remains vaporware in my mind - I recall claims of rendering scenes of the Final Fantasy movie on PS2's "emotion engine". And ultimately what's even sadder is there were a mere handful of games at E3 that made me excited. Okami, the new Zelda, We Love Kattamari, Shadow of the Collossus, Stubbs the Zombie, and that's pretty much it. Horsepower may be here, but games are as stunted, as juvenile, and as retreaded as ever. Future marines vs. monsters and bimbos galore. Meanwhile next gen gaming is going to cost more, Microsoft have shunted most PC development to the Xbox, killing the richness of PC games for the most part other than MMORPGs. And now we're going to have live updating advertising in games, along with additional content that will have to be purchased. Want that sword +2? You can buy it for $4.99. Welcome to gamer hell.

So:
He got money for From Hell and League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
He didn't get money for Constantine, V for Vendetta, and presumably Watchmen

it's warming to know that these actually run game code full speed

Full speed? I was under the impression (as are most media outlets) that the G5 'alpha kits' seen at the show are nowhere near able to run Xbox 360 game code at full speed.

Anyone read this article? Seems IGN thinks the 360 will be a superior gaming machine. http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

Have you read this article, IGN seems to think that the 360 will be superior to the PS3, let me know what you think. http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

Not to mention, the PowerPC processor is the only edge Macs have left on PC hardware.

Personally, I think that is a load of crap. I didn't buy my Mac Mini because of the chip, I bought it for iLife (in the interest of full disclosure, I'm an "adder", not a die-hard Mac user).

Apple's chip strategy leaves me baffled. How can the PPC provide an edge when users are still waiting for the "promised" 3.0 GHZ chips that were supposed to be available within a year of the G5's release? Even the XBOX360 alpha units, which are G5 towers, are said to be only a third of the power of the console. I might add that we're talking about console that will likely cost only $300. The thing that has always bothered me about Macs is the length of the "speed bump cycle". The x86 world is abuzz about multi-cores and such, and here we are, still stuck with "Power"-books that don't even have G5s.

Offtopic aside: How cool would it be to see Mac on Linux run on an XBOX360 hacked to run Linux?

Fabulous hardware design, a remarkably stable and well thought out OS, and excellent (sometimes unrivalled) media software are the Mac's edge. I like Windows and Linux, but I don't think they do quite as good a job as Apple does in all three of those areas. Change the guts of a Mac and you'll still have more than "an overpriced PC running a pretty gui on top of BSD".

There is infinitely more to the Mac than the CPU that it runs on.

There was a fairly thorough XBOX360/PS3 spec comparison at IGN:

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/617/617951p1.html

It's IGN, though, so take this with a measure of salt -- the individual articles at AnandTech are much better.

One pithy fan suggested the new movie be called "Spaceballs I", and the original one renamed Spaceballs It-Was-Always-Episode-IV. We'll let you know what Brooks decides on.

"Perhaps most surprising, the Revolution will give players access to Nintendo's back catalog of games. That's right: you'll be able to download classic titles for the Nintendo 64, Super NES, and original NES systems -- in addition to playing your library of GameCube titles."

Here is the correct Elder Scrolls link to the IGN article. It currently links to IGN's Hellgate article.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/617/617488p1.html

This is the correct link to the IGN Elder Scrolls: Oblivion story.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/617/617488p1.html

While it does look great, I don't think it's the leap in graphics that it should be. When this generation's consoles first came out, we were amazed at the graphics. Everything looked so much better than N64/Playstation/PC graphics at the time. Now, the difference is much smaller.

Let's take Half-Life 2, running on the Source engine.

The graphics in Gears of War are only moderately better than HL2.
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_24657 11.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_21184 30.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_17664 01.html

With the Lost Coast levels that are coming out soon (adding High Dynamic Range lighting), the difference will be even smaller.

Today's high end graphics cards can run HL2 at or above HD resolutions, with higher FPS than the consoles will put out.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2278 &p=11
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2278 &p=10

It's still 6 months until the Xbox360 release. By then, the next generation of video cards should be out, or very close to release. That'll narrow the gap or even eliminate it altogether.

This may be the first console launch in history where the consoles fail to outdo PCs in the graphics department.

The major exception to this that I've seen is Killzone 2. It has substantially better graphics than any Xbox360 game that I've seen. However, there's still a lot of controversy over whether the pics and movies that have been released were actual gameplay footage, non-game in-engine footage, or prerendered CG.

Who knows, maybe Microsoft (possibly) and Sony (probably not, they have a reputation of overhyping their graphics and system specs; I doubt their games will look any prettier at release) haven't finished optimizing their console designs, meaning that the graphics that we see today aren't as good as they will be at release.

While it does look great, I don't think it's the leap in graphics that it should be. When this generation's consoles first came out, we were amazed at the graphics. Everything looked so much better than N64/Playstation/PC graphics at the time. Now, the difference is much smaller.

Let's take Half-Life 2, running on the Source engine.

The graphics in Gears of War are only moderately better than HL2.
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_24657 11.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_21184 30.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_17664 01.html

With the Lost Coast levels that are coming out soon (adding High Dynamic Range lighting), the difference will be even smaller.

Today's high end graphics cards can run HL2 at or above HD resolutions, with higher FPS than the consoles will put out.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2278 &p=11
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2278 &p=10

It's still 6 months until the Xbox360 release. By then, the next generation of video cards should be out, or very close to release. That'll narrow the gap or even eliminate it altogether.

This may be the first console launch in history where the consoles fail to outdo PCs in the graphics department.

The major exception to this that I've seen is Killzone 2. It has substantially better graphics than any Xbox360 game that I've seen. However, there's still a lot of controversy over whether the pics and movies that have been released were actual gameplay footage, non-game in-engine footage, or prerendered CG.

Who knows, maybe Microsoft (possibly) and Sony (probably not, they have a reputation of overhyping their graphics and system specs; I doubt their games will look any prettier at release) haven't finished optimizing their console designs, meaning that the graphics that we see today aren't as good as they will be at release.

While it does look great, I don't think it's the leap in graphics that it should be. When this generation's consoles first came out, we were amazed at the graphics. Everything looked so much better than N64/Playstation/PC graphics at the time. Now, the difference is much smaller.

Let's take Half-Life 2, running on the Source engine.

The graphics in Gears of War are only moderately better than HL2.
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_24657 11.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_21184 30.html
http://media.pc.ign.com/media/492/492830/img_17664 01.html

With the Lost Coast levels that are coming out soon (adding High Dynamic Range lighting), the difference will be even smaller.

Today's high end graphics cards can run HL2 at or above HD resolutions, with higher FPS than the consoles will put out.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2278 &p=11
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2278 &p=10

It's still 6 months until the Xbox360 release. By then, the next generation of video cards should be out, or very close to release. That'll narrow the gap or even eliminate it altogether.

This may be the first console launch in history where the consoles fail to outdo PCs in the graphics department.

The major exception to this that I've seen is Killzone 2. It has substantially better graphics than any Xbox360 game that I've seen. However, there's still a lot of controversy over whether the pics and movies that have been released were actual gameplay footage, non-game in-engine footage, or prerendered CG.

Who knows, maybe Microsoft (possibly) and Sony (probably not, they have a reputation of overhyping their graphics and system specs; I doubt their games will look any prettier at release) haven't finished optimizing their console designs, meaning that the graphics that we see today aren't as good as they will be at release.

I *was* just comparing straight Ghz to Ghz after all.

My bad, I've always been bored by the "watch a blank screen while a box counts to a million 15X faster than an older box" game.

If what they're saying is "they can take old Xbox games (recompiled, obviously) and run then 15X faster on the new Xbox 360", they're lying. It just won't happen. The latency and bandwidth has not improved enough for that to be true, and the architecture is not easily exploitable for game software.

Of course the Xbox 360 couldn't take Halo and run it at 900 fps, there's a ceiling, as you said. However, how about Halo with 15x more polygons? Xbox 1 theoretical poly throughput is 150 million. 15x that is 1.8 billion... quite a bit lower than the theoretical peak of 6 billion on Xbox360. Seeing as Halo hardly pushes 150 million polygons, I'm pretty sure Xbox 360 could handle 15x as many textured, lit and shaded polies as the Xbox 1. You could translate that into more enemies and bigger and more detailed environments. I bet it could do all that without even needing more than one core (leaving the others to improve physics, gameplay and/or AI) as all of that has more to do with the GPU than the CPU. So what's *your* definition of more powerful?

Of course, what they're saying is "the Xbox 360 has a peak MFLOPs 15X higher than the original Xbox", which is true, but utterly meaningless when it comes to games. The PS3 will have an utterly insane peak MFLOPs number (something like twice as high as the Xbox 360) but it certainly won't run games twice as fast.

Oops, sorry, got carried away... :-P

Anyway, not even comparing Mhz, MFLOPS or any other theoretical number, we've got Rare, running on alpha hardware (purportedly 1/3 the power of the final Xbox 360), creating a game that can handle 150 enemies with more polygons, more effects and a broader expanse of scenery that's all moving when they could barely scrape together 30 on the original xBox. http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/616/616768p1.html

I think all 3 new consoles are going to be a large leap in performance over their predessesors.

BTW, you still pretty much have to pay for Xbox Live to play against other players anytime you want. I don't expect there to be no fees with PS3 online games (EA will probably start collecting fees as soon as they can). PS3 has built in WiFi (Xbox 360 is only WiFi ready), Xbox has HDD, PS3 does not have HDD built in. PS3 generally has more hardware features but Xbox has more connectivity to Windows and a unified online interface.

This is what concerns me about Nintendo. They're sitting still, keeping to their own ways. Meanwhile, the video game market is evolving. More and more gamers don't WANT innovative and creative games anymore.

On the contrary, Nintendo seems to be pretty much the only console maker (although I do admit the PS2 has some great RPGS) that hasn't succumbed to pandering to the graphics-whore "frat-boy" mentality. They may not be in 1st place, but they're still profitable, and they still have fans. I don't see what's so wrong.

I believe it is called Game Boy Player, or something like that. It was released in Japan in February. What does it do? It's a game cartridges with a memory slot that let's the GBA play movies and MP3s.

Errm, no. The Game Boy Player would be this, and what you're thinking of would be this.

Marketing is another big thing Nintendo doesn't seem to get. Reggie and the DS commercials were a step in the right direction, but it's still not enough. An example would be the PSP release. Nintendo has the technology to compete with Sony's handheld.

Are these numbers wrong? Where do ya get the idea that the DS isn't doing just fine competing with the PSP already?

if you check out NintendoOn.com it points mysteriously to an IGN article containing a link to a video that it calls a hoax. However, we know that IGN is in cahoots with Nintendo (Gamespy being the online content provider for DS and presumably Revolution). Also, if you check out the video, it's got amazingly high production values for a hoax.

Here is the palm infocener article: :inux is the future

Here's a size comparison photo of the GB Micro: GB Micro. It looks to be about the size of a NES controller, something I would hardly call uncomfortably small.

Did anyone else notice the three ethernet ports on the back of the PS3? Is there any speculation as to what the heck we'd want or need 3 network connections for?

Just a few quick observations of the PS3.....according to This Article The Xbox360 will be significantly smaller than the current generation Xbox. However, as you can see, the Current Xbox is 12.75 inches wide by 3.5 high. According to This Article the PS3 is going to be BIGGER than the current-gen Xbox!! How is that going to go down in Japan, where apparently the main reason for Xbox's failure was its bulk.

Another brief observation, that Gamespy link shows, under DVD playback, that the PS3 is compatible with "Playstation 3 DVD's," are Blu-Ray discs too expensive, or are the simply unnecesary for many games?

Just a few quick observations of the PS3.....according to This Article The Xbox360 will be significantly smaller than the current generation Xbox. However, as you can see, the Current Xbox is 12.75 inches wide by 3.5 high. According to This Article the PS3 is going to be BIGGER than the current-gen Xbox!! How is that going to go down in Japan, where apparently the main reason for Xbox's failure was its bulk.

Another brief observation, that Gamespy link shows, under DVD playback, that the PS3 is compatible with "Playstation 3 DVD's," are Blu-Ray discs too expensive, or are the simply unnecesary for many games?

Apparently IBM had a demo of a cell powered blade at E3. Article: http://gear.ign.com/articles/615/615521p1.html/.
The blades have two cell processors a piece, making the system more than just a PS3 that runs Linux.

From this article at IGN:

http://cube.ign.com/articles/615/615045p1.html

it appears that they think Link will turn into a wolf by night, and Zelda into an eagle (or falcon, or something) by day, sort of along the lines of the characters in the movie "movie Ladyhawke." I'm just basically parrotting this from the article, though.

I think it could lend itself to some interesting gameplay. Maybe cooperative multiplayer, sort of like with Tingle in the The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker? Hopefully it would be more in-depth than that was, though.... My wife was bummed to have to sit out all of the boss fights. :(

Hmm, I suppose I spoke a little too uncertainly and didn't back up my claim as I should have.

From this article.

UPDATE - 6:22PM - We have just been updated by our away team at the SCEA conference that not only will 1080p be supported by the system, but that this is considered the standard resolution for the system. Every game for the system will be in incredible, indelible, indubitable HD.

So yes, 1080p is the standard resolution of the PS3, as I said. Not that it really affects me at this point, I don't have that kind of money...

The best part is how it can eject CDs at high speed and cause them to fly through the air. Or maybe this is the 3d projection system hinted at earlier.

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.

Does this mean that Nintendo will let us mess with it? I would love to be able to program it. Not only would that increase sales, it would foster talent and good will towards Nintendo. Considering how large the GB/GBA development community is, I would think that would be a good thing. Also, the devices that people use to develop for the GBA Nintendo is always fighting because they can be used for piracy. But if you could develop from the get-go (or maybe with a $50 or $100 kit) people wouldn't need to reverse engineer things to run their own code.

Will Nintendo do it? I kinda doubt it, but I would really love it if they did.

Either way, if it makes it easier to make good games without needing huge teams of programmers to endlessly tinker to get decent performace, it could still be a very good thing.

On a side note though, the Zelda screens don't look as good as many of the PS3/X360 screens. Let's hope there is better to come (based on how much better the GC got though, it should still be great).

Pictures of the Zelda trailer
http://cube.ign.com/articles/615/615045p1.html

Pictures of the Zelda trailer
http://cube.ign.com/articles/615/615045p1.html

Hello Revolution

Hello Revolution

Was that pun intended?

http://cube.ign.com/articles/522/522559p1.html?fro mint=1

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/614/614619p1.html

I'm alarmed by the prospect of the Revolution using DVD discs. Why this fear? I'm afraid that its limited storage space will limit game designers.
Right now you might be thinking, "Are you insane? DVD-9 discs can store 9 gigs of data! What do you mean, limited?" Well, here's what I mean.
As most people probably know, both the Xbox and the PS2 use DVD discs. They both support DVD-5 and DVD-9. The support for DVD-9 indicates something; some games are too big to fit on one DVD-5 disc. This can be conclusively proven by looking at some recent games, like Xenosaga Episode II (see the bottom of the page, "Lasting Appeal"), which use multiple discs. At smallest size, these games are unable to fit on a single DVD-5 disc. At largest, they're too big to fit on a single DVD-9.
That's a lot of data.

I recently read in an article (probably in Game Informer, though I can't find it at the moment) that many recent games, including Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater, only barely miss filling a DVD-9.
That this is on the PS2. A current-gen system.
I think that says something.

What I'm getting at here is that games are getting bigger and bigger. There's no way around it. As our technology improves and our systems become capable of bigger and better graphics, we must supply more and more data in order to make said graphics.
If a PS2, whose capabilities are far eclipsed by the next-gen systems, almost requires multiple discs, how will those next-gen systems fit all their data in the same space? Better graphics require more data: bigger textures, more polygons, more custom shaders, etc. So how will it all fit?
And bear in mind that this isn't even taking into account the data needed for the actual game. A lot of code and other data is needed for the actual game. Furthermore, the Revolution is supposed to be, as Nintendo says, "revolutionary". How much extra code will it take to do cool things with these "revolutionary" features? A lot, I imagine.

This poses a problem. Where will all that data go? It has to go somewhere. Sure, wonders can be worked with compression, and yes, Nintendo has somehow managed to shove DVD-5 games from other systems into the 1.8 gigs offered by its proprietary format, but there is a limit to how small things can get. Furthermore, too much compression will result in decreased performance, which is a bad thing.

This is definitely a big problem. Sony got around it by flinging enormous Blu-Ray discs into its next-gen system, aided somewhat by the fact that it partially owns that standard. For Nintendo or Microsoft to use Blu-Ray would require licensing the technology, and you can be sure Sony would charge them up the wazoo for both the drives and the discs.
That's a problem.

The way I see it, both Microsoft and Nintendo are in trouble if they use normal DVD drives on their next-gen systems. Nintendo possibly more so, depending on the "revolutionary" aspects of their device, but this doesn't change the fact that they're both rather screwed.
For Microsoft, it looks like it's already too late; the Xbox 360 specs declare that it has a "12x dual-layer DVD-ROM". There is still some hope left for Nintendo, though, as they've only announced support for "12cm optical disks", which could be nearly anything.

Here's to hoping that Nintendo chooses something better than DVD-9.

I'm alarmed by the prospect of the Revolution using DVD discs. Why this fear? I'm afraid that its limited storage space will limit game designers.
Right now you might be thinking, "Are you insane? DVD-9 discs can store 9 gigs of data! What do you mean, limited?" Well, here's what I mean.
As most people probably know, both the Xbox and the PS2 use DVD discs. They both support DVD-5 and DVD-9. The support for DVD-9 indicates something; some games are too big to fit on one DVD-5 disc. This can be conclusively proven by looking at some recent games, like Xenosaga Episode II (see the bottom of the page, "Lasting Appeal"), which use multiple discs. At smallest size, these games are unable to fit on a single DVD-5 disc. At largest, they're too big to fit on a single DVD-9.
That's a lot of data.

I recently read in an article (probably in Game Informer, though I can't find it at the moment) that many recent games, including Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater, only barely miss filling a DVD-9.
That this is on the PS2. A current-gen system.
I think that says something.

What I'm getting at here is that games are getting bigger and bigger. There's no way around it. As our technology improves and our systems become capable of bigger and better graphics, we must supply more and more data in order to make said graphics.
If a PS2, whose capabilities are far eclipsed by the next-gen systems, almost requires multiple discs, how will those next-gen systems fit all their data in the same space? Better graphics require more data: bigger textures, more polygons, more custom shaders, etc. So how will it all fit?
And bear in mind that this isn't even taking into account the data needed for the actual game. A lot of code and other data is needed for the actual game. Furthermore, the Revolution is supposed to be, as Nintendo says, "revolutionary". How much extra code will it take to do cool things with these "revolutionary" features? A lot, I imagine.

This poses a problem. Where will all that data go? It has to go somewhere. Sure, wonders can be worked with compression, and yes, Nintendo has somehow managed to shove DVD-5 games from other systems into the 1.8 gigs offered by its proprietary format, but there is a limit to how small things can get. Furthermore, too much compression will result in decreased performance, which is a bad thing.

This is definitely a big problem. Sony got around it by flinging enormous Blu-Ray discs into its next-gen system, aided somewhat by the fact that it partially owns that standard. For Nintendo or Microsoft to use Blu-Ray would require licensing the technology, and you can be sure Sony would charge them up the wazoo for both the drives and the discs.
That's a problem.

The way I see it, both Microsoft and Nintendo are in trouble if they use normal DVD drives on their next-gen systems. Nintendo possibly more so, depending on the "revolutionary" aspects of their device, but this doesn't change the fact that they're both rather screwed.
For Microsoft, it looks like it's already too late; the Xbox 360 specs declare that it has a "12x dual-layer DVD-ROM". There is still some hope left for Nintendo, though, as they've only announced support for "12cm optical disks", which could be nearly anything.

Here's to hoping that Nintendo chooses something better than DVD-9.

The Revolution won't be televised

Might be even more true now.

PS: I know it's fake.

Didn't Nintendo's president say in a press conference just a few months ago that the Revolution will actually have some feature that is "Revolutionary" that no one has seen before and will change console gaming forever? I remember a slashdot article about it but I cannot find a link to the specific "story" I'm thinking about.
Perhaps something about the controller?
Or perhaps some obscure feature that we'll hafta wait longer to see?

I was hoping to see something about that in this article but I guess I will hafta wait longer... If anyone has a link to what I think I'm talking about, I'd appreciate it. :)

Check out this fan made video. It's really well done.

mirror 1
mirror 2

Article about video

Check out this fan made video. It's really well done.

mirror 1
mirror 2

Article about video

For slightly more in-depth reviews, see, e.g.:

Comics in Context #66: A Christmas Potpourri (starts about halfway down the page)

Mild Mannered Reviews - Specials

blogcritics

and for a list of additional 'It sucked!'/'I liked it!' comments: Comic Book Resources

PC - greater than TV rezs
360 - nope

Um... Welcome to 2005. You do know what HDTV is right? All 360 games are HD. In case you don't know HDTV resolutions are HIGHER than most computers can push.

You're telling me that your Computer can push out Doom 3 at 1920x1080? Xbox 360 can.

You're telling me that your computer costs less than $400? XBox 360 does.

You think a $300-$400 PC can push these types of graphics at 1920x1080?

Oh, but I can get a RAID configuration on the PC... yay...

Go sit down and stop trolling.

PC - greater than TV rezs
360 - nope

Um... Welcome to 2005. You do know what HDTV is right? All 360 games are HD. In case you don't know HDTV resolutions are HIGHER than most computers can push.

You're telling me that your Computer can push out Doom 3 at 1920x1080? Xbox 360 can.

You're telling me that your computer costs less than $400? XBox 360 does.

You think a $300-$400 PC can push these types of graphics at 1920x1080?

Oh, but I can get a RAID configuration on the PC... yay...

Go sit down and stop trolling.