Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo Revolution Under Wraps Past E3
The next-generation Nintendo console, codenamed Revolution, may not be shown at this year's E3. Eurogamer reports that the Japanese console maker is going to keep the console under wraps to keep the features of the new system out of the limelight a little while longer. From the article: "Nintendo boss Satoru Iwata is worried about rivals nicking all his best ideas at this early stage. That's how revolutionary the new console is, apparently... and also the exact same line Nintendo used to avoid showing Mario 128 at a previous E3."
Maybe it has.... 3 screens?
That's how revolutionary the new console is Lets just hope that doesn't mean something like "Lets dare to be different, and use annoying mini-disks instead of the standard DVDs. They provide lower quality, AND they don't meet up to modern-day standards. Its brilliant!"
...he is definitley the hardest one to beat. I remember that time I played all night long and I made it up to Boss SI (that's what it says above his life bar cause his name doesn't fit on the screen). I was kickin ass, but then my mom came and pulled the stupid plug.
Wow. It's a good thing they kept the GameCube secret, otherwise sony and microsoft might have outcompeted and outsold them.
Because of course Sony and Microsoft only hear about features at conferences like E3. While the rest of us get the inside track at Slashdot!
I haven't been keeping up on console games recently, so I dont know what evenets still exist. I *think* that there is some show in Japan in the Fall, but I don't know. I think Nntendo should atleast have some beta hardware to show off, not just DS and Gamecube games. This may hurt them. But maybe this is jsut a flase rumor.
Now let's wait for E3.
Nothing for you to see here, Please move along.
I tell you as a 13 year old I learned more about the economics and marketing tricks of consumer electronics by waiting and waiting for my Super Famicom - uhm I mean SNES (North American release), Just watching all the consoles that never were (err the Play Station was, though Nintendo bailed) showed me how committed to product schedules Nintendo was.
The rock, the vulture, and the chain
Or they have nothing. Whichever.
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised.
I'm so frustrated with Nintendo. It's like they haven't gotten it since the early 90s with the SNES. CDs? Who needs those? Whatever defines their self-made revolution had better be the end all to games for it to fly. PS3 and 360 are going to appeal to the masses and steal away more of Nintendo's turf. I myself am considering jumping ship as Nintendo has failed to inspire me this last generation as it did with the first two.
"I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, spare me the hype."
So I take it that you won't be paying attention to the XBOX 360 or Playstation 3, either?
"Derp de derp."
oh no! we can't show our super-duper freaking-innovative design at e3 because our competitors will change their designs at a heartbeat to accomodate our super innovative stuff. and remember, thats super innovative kids, super innovative!
no seriously, i think this just means that theyre not ready to show it.
I have owned every nintendo system since the NES (haven't picked up a DS yet though), and the video gaming experience from nintendo has never been matched for me by other systems (Genesis might have briefly come close). I grew up on Zelda, Mario and Metroid, and I have loved seeing how these genres and characters have evolved (I swear I have loved 100% of each of these game's evolutions over the last 20+ years - that track record simply can't be beat).
Nothing against PS2 and XBox, but I have absolutely no interest in following the adventures of "Master Chief," or Ico. I'm sure these games are good, but I won't be playing them.
The Open Source community has the most to gain if Nintendo releases a console based on Linux.
They ARE being unveiled at or before E3, while Nintendo has expiclitly said they won't have anything to show. That's a lot different than saying "we have nothing".
In case you hadn't noticed ... Nintendo already has captured some of the console market. Adding Linux as a "feature" would attract very little new capital, I would imagine ... and probably just make the thing run slower.
"Nintendo has the most to gain by releasing a console based on Linux. In this respect, they could capture some console market and then facilitate for the same apps to be released on Linux."
There are more people with GameCubes than using Linux today. Why would Linux make the next Nintendo system suddenly capture marketshare when nobody even cared that the PS2 had a Linux kit?
"Derp de derp."
They have pulled the exact same trick for the N64 (remember the Ultra64?), Virtual Boy, Game Cube and DS. Meanwhile the consoles that left a significant mark on their generation were the NES and Super NES. What did they have that made a difference? Certainly not the fancy gadgets. Remember that NES robot that was promptly set aside?
What made them special is that they offered the best games and were the most powerful at the time. Mario and Zelda made the NES. They also made the Super NES, along with Street Fighter II and Mario Kart. We would almost cry at the inovation of the gameplay, quality of the graphics and music, and amazing fun they provided.
Today it's all about superficially good looking graphics. Gameplay and fun went the way of the dodo. Meanwhile Nintendo thinks it's okay to have consoles with non standard earphone plugs...
I miss those days spent with the old NES/GB/SNES...
Thats odd, considering the DS has sold more than half a million more units the PSP in Japan, and were released only within a few weeks of each other.
I'll buy it, since I'm a huge Nintendo fan. The casual gamer won't be so accomodating. Nintendo needs to build some hype around the system if they want to actually change the video game industry. Right now, even some hardcore Nintendo fans are skeptical.
Nintendo - shooting ourselves in the foot since 1990...
The PSP is definitely an overpriced piece of shit, but the DS is a mediocre underperforming gimmick. Both sides did rather poorly in this battle, I think.
The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
Actually, they seem to be pretty neck-and-neck (in Japan at least). Check here for details.
Nintendo has this obsessive-compulsive desire to be original and I hope it doesn't dig them into an even larger hole this time. Time will tell, but it doesn't look to be on Nintendo's side a.t.m.
It's really hard to imagine what these secret features might be. M$ and Sony are about upping the graphics ante, not about incorporating voice recognition, three screens, body sensors or whatever new ideas Nintendo comes up with. Maybe if these features turn out to be a success in the marketplace -- unlikely if the DS is any indicator -- the other console makers would think about incorporating them. I figure Nintendo's secretness is just a way of building hype around the product.
Ludwig Wittgenstein
"They ARE being unveiled at or before E3, while Nintendo has expiclitly said they won't have anything to show."
Eh I'm so confused by this. Just 2 days ago I read that Nintendo was going to show clips of the games, but not the actual system. *Rolleyes* In any event, I wouldn't equate that with "we have nothing". Nintendo wouldn't make that bold of risk at the turn of a new generation.
As for Sony and Microsoft, they'll show their systems and make ridiculous claims about the capabilities of them. They're going to be suffering from hype-burn, too.
"Derp de derp."
Might they be holding out to unveil it at the Tokyo Game Show, so that they can completely steal the headlines for the entire show instead of sharing space with the other systems at E3?
The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
The N64, which was originally the Dolphin, then the Ultra 64 was delayed almost two years. The Gamecube was delayed as well. Now we're seeing the possibility of an Xbox release this year, a possible PS3 release in Japan end of this year/early next, and Nintendo hoping to get the console out by end of 2006. If it's not delayed again. Then they release the DS, and now the Gameboy Revolution planned. The DS was a quickly made half-assed portable to beat the PSP to market.
Don't get me wrong, I used to be a huge Nintendo fan. I always thought they were pioneers, but they're becoming that old dinosaur of the industry that's only still around because the brand name itself has some intrinsic value.
The PSP is one nice looking piece of hardware, but what are you going to play on it? The same kind of crap games you can get on the DS. Neither company is going to get my money until they release a decent game worth playing. Re-hashes of racing games and Tetris on steriods does not cut it folks. Neither does half-baked dating simulators and kiddie-poo games for the DS.
It has an anal "joy-buzzer" to give a more immersive force feedback experience. I know what you're thinking. Not only does it have 3 vibration settings, it can also deliver qute powerful electric shocks. I only tested a unit for the north american market. I would hope that the "unit" for the Japanese market will be smaller, because even at 6'5" and 300lbs I found the american version to be....uncomfortable.
Oh you bring a tear to my eye. Oh how you bring back the memories of Slashdot of years past. You know, Slashdot before the Legion of Jobs showed up and proclaimed that Apple had an answer to everything.
Yes. Bring me back my old Slashdot. Please, please bring back:
1. Make it with Linux
2. ??
3. Profit!
Bring back the good old days, when BSD was dead and Red Hat was king.
(and yes I AM serious)
Sometimes my arms bend back.
Great, now I'm bald.
Damn you, Nintendo. I have been a loyal servant of yours ever since I first played Super Mario Brothers 2 on the NES: I've fought for you time and again in the useless internet debates; I've spent my hard-earned college cash to pay for your no-internet system with lacking 3rd Party support; I even still lug around my N64 because it has games I enjoyed enough in the past that I might want to play them again in the future, but I'm not really sure if I ever will!
Doesn't that deserve something? If nothing else, show some footage. I don't need to see the actual system or controllers right now; but damned if I don't see any 'eye candy', and I'm not talking those sweet Ssian numbers you put on display... actually, that's more of a Sony thing.
In any case, I digress. While I can understand wanting to keep industry secrets secret, we're not asking you to reveal every spec of the system. If all you did was hint at what makes this console a 'revolution', and showed a picture of one of the buttons on the controller, that would be enough for many a fanboy.
So, Nintendo, I ask you this: Please, please, won't you show something? Have we not earned at least that?
Consoles have essentially one hardware configuration. A heavyweight OS like Linux would slow it down horribly. If you want a general-purpose machine instead of one only to play games, go buy a PC. In fact, you can play games on those, too.
English is easier said than done.
Nintendo can unveil it at E3, and go up against Microsoft and Sony's HUGE marketing budget and hype. Magazines would probably have a triple feature, with sections given to each system and the respective company booths.
Or, Nintendo can wait a couple of months until the media coverage dies down a little bit, unveil the console, and get the cover of every non-platform-specific major game magazine in the biz. This decision shows not a lack of preparation or a schedule issue, but a smart martketing choice.
but the DS is a mediocre underperforming gimmick. Both sides did rather poorly in this battle, I think.
I agree. The PSP didn't have anything to catch my attention, but the DS has been dissapointing. I think Gabe/Tycho said it best at Penny Arcade when he said "The DS doesn't have any games, just some tech demos."
The DS could be good and new, but I've yet to see a game take advantage of the new features in a meaningful way.
I'm not sure gamers want something revolutionary. Just look at PS2 and Xbox. They've outsold Gamecube by a large margin in the US. They are considered cooler simply because of their titles (resulting from excellent third-party support). Xbox isn't revolutionary. However, that's not to say that it has not done anything in the industry. With their Xbox Live, killer titles such as Halo 2, and better graphics, it is easily surpassing the Gamecube. This will be their third attempt, after N64 and Gamecube where weren't as successful as anticipated. I strongly feel that if they fail to succeed overwhelmingly with the "Revolution", they will ultimately strike out in the console race.
And I just bought my Gamecube in January... guess you bastards are going to force me to upgrade my PackardBell to play doom 3, too?
GEeez... you buy something new and it gets outdated in just a few years.
Duke Nukem Forever to be bundled with the machine.
So what if Nintendo doesn't show their new system at E3? It's not like the system isn't going to be demonstrated months before it's release anyway. Sure internet nerds like us will be disapointed, but I'd wager that a good majority of video gamers don't really care about who does what at E3, but rather will have their interest piqued by what's advertised in the mainstream media. This could even work to Nintendo's advantage. People get saturated by all the stuff that's released at E3, thus diminishing the impact of the information released. By letting the other guys beat at each other for a while, Nintendo can see where the bar is being set and can have their own press release a month later. This gives the gamers a chance to cool down and get hungry for more information after E3, and Nintendo does have a knack for making interesting and engaging presentations.
When is the new Nintendo system coming out? Before the next E3? If not, then I'd say they don't want to become old-hat before it does come out. They'll let Microsoft and Sony demonstrate all of their new features that will be seen as "older" when E3 comes around next year when Nintendo announces their new features.
Nintendo can also concentrate on their Online component (which would be ignored even more if the new system was unveiled).
The "stealing our ideas" is just PR bullshit.
Having said that, if the systems are to be released before the next E3, I can see this as being a BIG mistake.
Nintendo's problem these days is they seem stuck in this mindset that they can tell gamers what we want and need, and what we dont want and need. According to Nintendo we dont need more powerfull hardware, which means we dont need better graphics, sound, AI or physics, which in turn means we dont want or need bigger better games. Sorry Nintendo but you dont seem to have any clue what I want or need for my gaming needs, you lost my interest back when SNES was retired and Mario 64 was played to death.
True some of their games are fun, but all there major brands are into their 30th sequal, lets think of something new huh?
It most likely wouldn't. If Nintendo designed it correctly, most people probably wouldn't even know it had Linux in it.
nobody even cared that the PS2 had a Linux kit?
That's probably because Sony created the PS2 Linux kit for game developers/hobbyists and not the normal consumer. It was available through Sony's website, but it was definitely designed to be an inexpensive T10K. It even comes with the developer documentation.
It did, however, sell out in both the U.S. and Japan, so somebody must have cared.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
its all bad word of mouth, and mis-intupretations. at GDC they said that the revolution would not be "showcased" at E3, meaning it wouldnt be center stage, not that it wouldnt make an appearance at all.
When's the last time Rare made a good game?
Why am I not rapping? I am rapping with you in a way.
My personal opinion is that Nintendo lost a ton of respect in the gaming market with the Gamecube. The gamecube is still a lot of fun, but to me it feels more like a little kids toy as opposed to PS2 or Xbox. Given the choice to buy one single console, I would certainly choose a PS2 or Xbox over a gamecube any day. The gamecube just doesn't cut it for my needs. Let's hope this "revolution" truly is a revolution for Nintendo.
Nintendo got it right with the GBA though. Based on current prices I'd still take that over a DS or PSP.
The only thing the DS has that got me to buy it was it's backwards compatibility with GBA games. I don't own a GBA, but a lot of games in that line I really enjoy playing.
So I'm keeping myself happy playing GBA games on my DS until something worthy comes out on DS cards.
The next Zelda game better be DS... or I'm going to go postal.
Speaking of vaporware has anyone heard anything about the phan tom gaming console?
500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
Nintendo doesn't need to show off their system to let developers get a feel for it. It is 100% backwards compatible with the Gamecube and uses the same development API.
Effectively they can run a more fine grained marketing strategy because of this. No need to shout "you should learn how to program like this." Once Nintendo 3rd parties have the devkits in hand they should already know how to program it.
Remember: This is a TRADE SHOW. You let developers and publishers know what's up. Nintendo has already told them enough to get started. Know your Gamecube and Nintendo DS APIs and you should be good to go for everything Revolution.
The thing people don't realize here is that Nintendo is a hugely profitable company. Even though it's console was a distant 3rd in the last race, it makes so much money off of games and eventually hardware (as it becomes cheaper to produce) that they don't really care about losing big time to sony & microsoft (in the US at least).
Nintendo can really do whatever it wants. No matter what it will make up more then enough in the pure software sales on it's next gen system alone. MS & Sony don't have this advantage. For 1, MS has to buy all second party support, which costs mega $$$, and they don't have many (any?) first party games. Sony has paltry first party games, and the bulk of sales on software is given to third parties (the bulk of software sales being the bulk of profit available from consoles).
That's the economics of Nintendo, and if you aren't used to it by now, you've been naive.
ANyone who shows off new hardware at E3 is a complete idiot when it comes to marketing. When we see a new console or big game it can usually get a good 4-5 page spread in magazines, 2-3 articles on big websites each and so on and so forth. Now if you release E3 week you get 1 mention per website thrown in with the 2 other consoles and general games which "look amazing and will rock the world!" type stuff. If Nintendo really want the hype they will wait 2-3 weeks after E3, let the other consoles hype die down and then show it off in an exclusive event. That way they don't have to compete with anything but "heres what we saw at E3 that you rad about 2-3 weeks ago on every website there is" type articles.
Plus they would get their own Penny Arcade strip rather than one based on the 3 consoles which may do them alot of favours.
I like muppets.
but it will be distributed via bittorrent and composed of porn with small linux and warez inclusions.
This is a very good thing. If all the consoles get released in mid-late 2006 (possibly this year in Japan with the PS3), this will have been one of the shortest console generations ever. They're still doing great things with all the consoles. I am not ready for another generation and I doubt that developers are either. Updateing to the next generation will cost at least another $200, and that's just for the N5. The PS3 will probably cost $300. That's a half a grand investment. I want to go more than just 4 or 5 years on it.
--The universe will not be altered by forum threads, even those which are very wry. --Tycho Brahe (Penny Arcade)
Heh. Well I have a theory. Rumor has it that Nintendo is choosing between two or three systems right now. Assuming that's true, maybe Nintendo's waiting to see what MS and Sony do before making any commitals.
This may seem a little out-there, but if Nintendo is doing something revolutionary like putting a touch screen into the controllers, it stands to reason that the money put into those will result in not as spiffy of graphical specs. If the difference is that noticable, perhaps they're deciding between a $200 system and a $300 system.
Anyway, maybe that's just my imagine working over-time. If I were a bettin man, though, I'd say that Nintendo's big revolution isn't in the system itself, but in the controller. It's probably too late for Sony or MS to mess with the system specs a lot, but tossing in a controller feature may not be out of the question yet.
"Derp de derp."
Look, the X-Box 360 and Playstation 3 are already designed and getting ready to debut at E3. It's not like they can radically change the design in time for their ship dates by stealing Nintendo's ideas at E3.
DS was featured at E3 in May of last year, and had several changes made to it before its launch on September 21st. 4 months sure can make a difference.
I think maybe they're just resting on their laurels.
I'm sure everyone has been afflicted at some stage with the dreaded "Nintendo Thumb" caused by mashing the joypad/controller keys for hours on end.
Nowadays I suppose it's time to name it "Playstation Thumb" or similer huh?
That just shows how the Nintendo brand name is failing......
I love RPGs. Super Nintendo was, and still is (in my opinion), the best console for RPGs. Final Fantasy 4-6, Secret of Mana 1 and 2, Tales of Phantasia, Star Ocean, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Evermore, Earthbound, and Super Mario RPG, among others, were some of the best video games I'd ever played.
When the N64 came out, I naturally expected the same quality and hurriedly bought it. And guess what? There is not, to my knowledge, a single traditional RPG for it. Quest 64? A joke. Paper Mario came close, but no cigar. Zelda? Good game, but still not an RPG in the traditional sense.
The Gamecube was a little better, but still not quite hitting it. Tales of Symphonia, Skies of Arcadia, and Phantasy Star Online were all pretty good; but Arcadia and PSO were just Dreamcast ports, and Symphonia is being ported to the PS2 with added features.
But my complaint isn't limited just to RPGs. My gaming has shifted heavily to the PC, because, owning only Nintendo console (foolishly), there's just not enough quality gaming coming out consistently. At best, it's a decently fun game every few months.
Oh, and let's not forget the DS now. Every game that has come out so far is--let's face it--pretty bland. The two most entertaining games are Mario 64 DS and Zoo Keeper, but both are ports of existing games (Mario 64 and Bejeweled, respectively). They've all just used the touch screen as a mere gimmick, too; where's the innovation?
Whereas the PSP not only has several great games (Lumines, anyone?), but also vast homebrew capability. Skimming Slashdot every day, I've seen probably half a dozen or so articles about neat homebrew PSP projects; the only one for the DS is DSLinux, which is barely even out of its infancy.
Will I choose the Revolution over the other next-gen consoles when it comes out? Maybe. Will it disappoint? I wouldn't doubt it. How I choose my next console doesn't alter my point, though: after the SNES, Nintendo has failed to impress me time and time again.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding the situation, but I thought that patents existed exactly for individuals and companies who created new and different (revolutionary) technology. If Nintendo invented a new technological innovation for incorporation into their next-generation system, I would have expected them to have filed for a patent on the invention long ago, thus preventing their competition from "stealing" the idea.. or is it not revolutionary enough to be original? Thoughts, explanations?
The DS was a quickly made half-assed portable to beat the PSP to market.
I beg to differ. The DS is a much finer piece of engineering than the PSP could ever dream to be.
The DS sports two backlit screens, touchscreen, microphone, wireless, and up to 1 gbit rom carts. And get this, 8+ hours of battery life. And Nintendo doesn't lose money selling it.
Lets compare to the PSP. It has wireless, 1.x GB discs, wireless, the ability to transform into more than meets the eye. It also has notorious dead pixel problems, carts popping out, cheap flimsy case, 2 hour battery life for some applications (continuous disc read). Oh yeah, and if you want to play movies you probably should buy at least one 1 GB memory stick which costs as much as the portable itself. Plus reports that Sony takes a $100 LOSS on each machine? That's not including the number is has to replace or refurbish because of dead pixels.
Sounds to me like Nintendo did their design homework on this one. Sony's hardware might be "powerful," but it's also just plain impractical to manufacture and sell profitably. You can appreciate the PSP as a gadget dork, but I wouldn't be impressed if I owned Sony stock.
*cough*
The day I give up on Nintendo is the day my NES stops working after I've sacrificed a goat and a virgin to it. Fuck all else made the damn things run right.. but man was it worth it once you'd cleaned up all the blood and gore.
I think one thing to remember is that the DS is not nintendo's next generation hand held. That is still coming. The DS was something to throw at the psp to slow it down. I don't know if the Revolution will bring back some of niontendo's lost market share, in fact I doubt it will, but nintendo didn't end up with billions in the bank by being stupid.
That said, I think all of the next consoles are going to have an uphill fight for volume simply because their projected street price brings them awfully close to computers which have more utility and a larger body of games.
Because slashdot just absolutely has to print every single rumor without ever once actually saying the rumor is offered without basis...
Nintendo has said multiple times that they will be unveiling the Revolution at E3. They've given warnings along the lines that it may be at an early stage, or that it won't be playable, or that some of the demos may be behind-closed-doors, at E3. But they at least have said they'll be showing it. And this has been said by Nintendo representatives, speaking on the record.
So, what's the source for this article slashdot links, which is saying it won't be?
"Reports". From "Japan".
You'll excuse me if I take repeated statements by official persons speaking for Nintendo more seriously than "reports from Japan".
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
The problem with "we'll focus on online at E3" idea is that they are focusing on something that's been around for YEARS in the console market and eons in the computer market. No one is going to care if Nintendo holds up a big sign that says "OH GEEZ ONLIENS!" and acts like they invented the f*cking wheel. I mean, c'mon. How fully fleshed out and well maintained is XBL? Or, for that matter, something like Battlenet? MMORPGs? There's absolutely no point to showing off online capability unless it's something so...*cough* revolutionary that it's going to change the way online gaming works. We'd have to be talking about something never seen before - ideas that no other developer, hardware or software, has implemented. Showing me Animal Crossing online is a nice idea and all (something I'm very hyped for), but shoveling it onto me at the biggest game show in the world and calling it ice cream isn't going to cut it. Stop with this "copy us" mentality, please. The Xbox 360 is essentially done. The controller is set, the console is set. We have specs for god's sake. So even if Nintendo showed off something so outrageously awesome that other companies would froth at the mouth and quickly try to incorporate it, it would delay systems of their respective releases. I can imagine Microsoft going "OMGS ZERGLINGRUSH" when Nintendo shows off something new and then tries to put it into their system, and backlog their release another 6 months. Likewise, my guess is that the PS3 is further along in development than the Revolution. So even Sony would be crazy to scale back development because "we gotta get r dun from Nintendo." I mean, hell, the Nintendo controller wasn't, and isn't, all that different from a Dualshock, and people hate the button layout. The digital click was COMPELTELY underutilized. But Nintendo thought they were giving us ambrosia. The controller is nice, yes, but it wasn't something supremely evolved and Sony and Microsoft didn't even bother to copy it. They just added more buttons, and as a result, some multiplatform games have more functions than the Gamecube copy (Beyond Good and Evil immediately comes to mind). There's a good side to holding back, but from a pure console wars mentality, it's ridiculous. Nintendo can delay the system all they want, but at LEAST tell us what it can do. Or at LEAST show us something that it can do. We're all tired of waiting. C'mon Reggie. Go kick some ass in Japan. I'll pay for your ticket.
I'm not scared of anonymous cowards.
You'll be able to count the number of Gamecube torrents on your fingers.
Or it could have more to do with the fact that you can count the entire number of worthwhile titles for the GameCube on those same digits.
"To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today." -Isaac Asimov
You'll see it at E3.
The slashdot article is wrong.
ask and you shall recieve. Rare sucks has sucked for a while now. they were a one hit wonder, with battle toads.
http://counterculture.infinite-comics.com/index.ph p?comic=5
uh ohh, shut the factory to outsiders! get the oompa loompas in! there stealing all our ideas!
Nintendo used to have an annual show just for them: Spaceworld. That's where the GameCube (and the original realistic Zelda demo) was shown in 2000. It's been dead for a few years now, but new system makes the perfect excuse to revive it.
Nintendo could repackage the SNES and just write a new Mario for it... and I'd buy it. Weeeee!
The "stealing our ideas" is just PR bullshit.
Gee, I wonder why Nintendo would be so scared about theft?
Could it be that Sony and Microsoft have stolen their best ideas and used them against them? The better question you should be asking yourself is this: What exactly hasn't been stolen by Microsoft and Sony?
Sony and Microsoft are such innovators.
Ask JVC how their VHS sales were. And after that, ask Apple how their icon operating system turned out for them. There is such a high moral ground with them. They never steal someone's idea and run with it.
Nintendo is practically the R&D department for Sony and Microsoft. They should just cut them a check for a percentage of their great ideas. "Hey thanks for the great idea Shiggy!"
Ask yourself this, do you really think that this week's FPS is the best game of all time because it adds some new features, or are you too nearsighted to respect something like Pikmin, which creates a new genre? I don't care about the torque engine to make my blood splatters better. Where are the Xbox and Sony games that bend my mind? Where are they? Where is their strategic vision beyond marketing data that tells them that Madden is popular and people like FPS games? THEY HAVE NO VISION. They don't have a creator mentality. They have Project Snowblind. Whoop de crap. Another FPS? Yeeehaw! Everything, and I do mean everything, that Sony and Microsoft have learned in the video game industry they learned by watching Nintendo.
I bet you're the person that doesn't like to cook because of the hassle, right? Just not into this creativity thing, eh?
But let's not just ask you, let's ask MS and Sony. Just look at who MS and Sony talk smack about. Not each other. That should tell you right off who they respect the most. Certainly isn't each other. They aren't jealous of ricer racing and card battle games.
actually its not "THEIR" developers that are the problems. its the corporate whores like ea and thq, etc, that nintendo is losing
nintendo is fine. there is no problem. move along
I KUT J00 M4NG!!!
You don't believe Nintendo's ever coming out with another console?
Wow... that's, uh... interesting.
~ Aero
Where are the Xbox and Sony games that bend my mind?
Don't get me wrong, I agree with you mostly, but...
Katamari Damacy. It's a game I really, really wish was made for a Nintendo system. It's almost like a non-Nintendo Nintendo game.
They are diluting themselves in the market. If they launch systems this close, they need to drop support quicker. For example, they should only make only DS and GBA games in 2005.
???? Revolution
2004 DS
2003 Gameboy Advanced
2001 Gamecube
1999 Gameboycolor
1998 Gameboypocket
1996 N64
1995 Virtualboy
1991 SNES
1989 Gameboy
1985 NES
"Nintendo has the most to gain by releasing a console based on Linux."
WTF? If I wanted to play games on something with an operating system, I'd be playing on my PC.
What would be the point in putting Linux on the console? Increase overhead in order to lessen the performance of the games? Remember how many games used WinCE on the Dreamcast?
Whereas the PSP not only has several great games (Lumines, anyone?), but also vast homebrew capability. Skimming Slashdot every day, I've seen probably half a dozen or so articles about neat homebrew PSP projects; the only one for the DS is DSLinux, which is barely even out of its infancy.
I would just like to point out the bizzareness of these homebrew trends.
1. Gameboy Advance has the largest GAME homebrew community I know of. Lots homebrew games are written for the GBA all the time and it's used in college courses all over.
2. The DS homebrew front, as you pointed out, is chugging along at a relatively modest pace. I'll note that they have accomplished quite a bit for this early in the release compared to most other consoles. The DS (specific) hardware is a whole lot like the GBA hardware using an ARM series CPU.
3. PS2 homebrew is notoriously stagnant. Sony even released what is essentially the real dev kit to consumers in the form of the Linux Kit. Yet somehow nobody wanted to write mipsel ASM or do horrible vector processor programming.
4. PSP. The PSP is essentially a shrunken down PS2 on the inside. Yet... for some reason... the PSP is incredibly hot for homebrew out the door. Honestly, though, I'm not sure how much of this really counts as homebrew. I mean, the browser was plain given to you and you just needed to launch it. It's not like anyone programmed a browser used a buffer overflow to launch it from his memory stick. And all those other apps are just scripts that run PC video encoders that have been mature for YEARS. Granted, this is a whole lot more action than the PS2 saw even if it's not really homebrew. We'll see if homebrew hackers really get past the PSP's intimidating PS2 pedigree.
I guess I have two points to all this. First of all, GBA homebrew is completely ignored in your post and shouldn't be. If the GBA homebrew community is any indication, the DS one should be quite healthy. PSP homebrew hasn't accomplished anything compared to GBA yet so don't be overly impressed at this point.
Second, I think this all says very little about the Nintendo Revolution. I actually hope it is impossible to have Revolution homebrew. It is embarrassing when the biggest technology companies in the world go about implementing security only to fail to a bunch of cheap kids and DIY Chinese bootleggers. I think it's a testament to Nintendo's good common sense that the Gamecube hasn't been pirated while the PS2 and Xbox are hacked and pirated wholly and completely.
More unsubstantiated Nintendo rumors reported as fact. I see nothing in the eurogamer article that is an official announcement from Nintendo. The last thing a Nintendo exec actually said is that the Revolution would be at E3 in some form, but would not be its "coming out party."
Now I will get to read the onslaught of comments on every forum about how stupid Nintendo is for announcing this. It's just like the new Game Boy rumor all over again.
Please tell me why you are grouping all the developers under the brand of Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo developers first party games or hires someone to develop second party games. Microsoft does the same; as does Sony, but the majority of the hits on both consoles do not come from first/second party games unlike Nintendo. So please get your shit straight.
And before you go on and say, Halo this, Halo that; I said majority of the games not two games. If you have something to talk about legitimately theft, i.e. something dealing with graphic procedures, etc, then you might have an argument. But to talk about them stealing game innovation ideas is crazy; especially since both don't develop nearly as many first party games as Nintendo does.
Now the developers for both systems is something different; but you can't blame Sony and Microsoft for what third party developers jack from another developer (or Nintendo); even though you clearly want to.
I'm f#$king magic!
Weren't Sony the ones hyping their system beyond any reasonable expectations of its capabilities? It seems (to me, at least, a compulsieve between-the-lines reader, that) Nintendo is just trying to be wary of not doing the same thing and then getting hosed when the final product fails to meet expectations.
It's being launched at E3 this year!!!
They even got Duke Nukem Forever as the exclusive launch title! Talk about a killer app!
and cold beer.
Not to mention the competition they'll have against the Ocama Gamesphere.
So calling your console "Revolution" does not equal hype?
One of three things are happening here: ~ Number 1 (and the most likely one), the Revolution has a new, intersting idea that's generally good and will make for a good console. However, it's nothing Sony and Microsoft is going to go out on a limb to steal. So in summary, Iwata is completely paranoid. ~ Number 2 (the one everyone prays for), the 'Revolutionary' concept, really is that big. Like, "redefine all of gaming" big. Or at least, "Dude! This is the rox0rs!" big. ~ Finally, Nintendo is simply playing a hype game. Regardless of how good the system is, the speculation is going to be bigger. Thus, it's a marketing ploy. This seems highly unlikely, as it would work against them as of E3. ----- http://www.nwizard.com/
I've seen many statements in this and other discussions that outright declare or at least imply that the GC is solidly in 'third place' in the three man race between GC, PS2, and Xbox. Now clearly the PS2 is in first place, but the last 'real' figures I recall seeing (a very long time ago) seemed to indicate that the race for 2nd between GC and Xbox was about even. Can anyone cite a reputable reference that can give an accurate picture of how things stand today? Preferably any such citation would be for worldwide sales figures (as opposed to US only figures). It's not that sales figures have anything to do with game/system quality and value, but I'm curious as to whether those who make such claims have a factual basis upon which to make them (or not). Such claims seem to be made frequently, but I don't recall seeing any recent authoritative citation.
Don't you have someone you'd die for?
Katamari Damacy is coming to the DS, so now, let's all try to think of something original from Microsoft and Sony.
*crickets*
Look at me. I'm bashing my head on the keyboard.
sfdgferbewfrerszt trewrd fgdswerdesbf
Do you really think that showing it to the public is the same as showing it to developers?
Hasn't Nintendo learned yet? Developers, Developers, Developers!
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
The Nintendo DS is the pack-in wireless controller for Nintendo Revolution. Boring. Move along, nothing to see here.
Nintendo made Katamari? Lumines? So Nintendo has a single game that bends your mind?
....
And just how did Xbox and PS2 steal everything from Nintendo? Looking at me I mainly play online games, could I say Nintendo is going to steal from Xbox and PS2 by going online?
Who really cares who stole from who? You like your Gamecube, good for you, keep playing it. Tell me, these innovative games that Nintendo always releases, am I able to play them against my family a few thousand miles away? Can I play my own music tracks on the game?(Did Xbox copy this from Nintendo too?)
Maybe I'm just ignorant but the XBox 360 and Playstation 3 are not going on sale at E3 only on display. There is still plenty of time for both companies to modify their systems.
Maybe not to the extent that they can take all ideas from Nintendo but enough to cause some harm to Nintendo's market.
Let's look at the N64's innovations.
Analogue stick: copied by Sony within a short period of time.
Rumble Pack: copied by Sony within a short period of time.
Four controller slots built into the system: Featured in all big systems that came afterwards (except Sony for god knows what reason).
i don't buy it either. i am (or was) a huge nintendo fan (look at my user name), but this is the same line they used 5 years ago before unveiling gamecube and the controller and mario sunshine and whatnot...and what were the great innovations? anaog shouderbutons with a "clik" at the end? i can count the number of games that utilized this effectively on one hand. what was innovative about the launch games for the gamecube? nothing. i'm glad i bought a gamecube for Metroid Prime, Zelda: Wind Waker, Smash Brothers Melee, and Resident Evil Four. There's probably 3 times as many games on Xbox that I'm glad I played through, and Xbox LIVE alone is the reason why i play Xbox (which is sitting to my left in my room) so much more than my Gamecube (which I've cast off into my little brother's room) Of course, Nintendo doesn't care. They get enough money from the idiots like me that they can sucker into buying another console just for the next four awesome Nintendo-exclusive games. For gamers, marketshare matters because that leads to more third party support, and more friends with which you can play....but to Nintendo, as long as they're profitable, they don't care (example: online play).
Anyone else remember in ancient times (circa 1994 or 5) when Nintendo showed off the AWESOME GRIPPING 3D GRAPHICAL PROWESS of the upcoming Ultra 64 at E3? They were all smiles as the attendees' jaws dropped watching a 3D Mario walking around in a photo-realistic "virtual reality" and other extremely impressive 3D demos (for the time).
Of course, the smiles faded and Nintendo became the laughing stock of the convention when someone pulled up the table skirt to reveal a high-end SGI Onyx running the demos.
Perhaps Nintendo does learn from some mistakes...
Nintendo and Sony are the only ones making money on consoles. If MS didn't have its Windows/Office $$ bankrolling xbox where would they be?
Really, what is there left to copy? MS is more than likely (according to the GDC) tied into development contracts, and a change at this point would ruin their hoped-for Q4 pre-christmas ship date.
Physics is nothing like religion. If it was, we'd have an easier time trying to raise money!
"Costs less than $5 per month" and "Requires broadband" are mutually exclusive, especially when it would involve an upgrade from $10/mo NetZero to $40/mo DSL. And for some customers, there's even a setup fee in excess of $10,000 to cover the cost of moving house, as there's no affordable high-speed, low-latency Internet access available to residential customers in many geographic areas, areas where the next step up from ISDN is a T1.
As for Live! only being a success thanks to Halo 2
What's that about a late-1980s Nine Inch Nails album?
Would you rather pay $20 for an add-on disk or expansion (typical PC tactic) to get a few new maps/cars/weapons/wathever, or $5 to download a new set of maps/cars/weapons/whatever?
"Download"? Don't you mean "rent until my Xbox breaks"? In addition, with an expansion disc, I can play the expansion at another home with an Xbox without having to lug my own Xbox.
Four controller slots built into the system: Featured in all big systems that came afterwards (except Sony for god knows what reason).
Technically Nintendo didn't do that one first.
fortunately for apple, they've consistantly made innovative products and have slowly been *gaining* on the market. nintendo has done neither.
It is 100% backwards compatible with the Gamecube and uses the same development API.
So all this Revolution is is just 1. a GameCube 2 with better graphics and a built-in Wi-Fi chip, and 2. a new controller? This new controller had better be pretty darn revolutionary, or the gaming press will slam Nintendo for underdelivering.
And Playstation's features that Nintendo later copied? Optical disk format.
Who copied it from 3DO, who copied it from Sega (Sega CD) and NEC (PC Engine CD).
Considering they have done neither, there's a real problem. IGN even had an article a while back on this very issue. Nobody knows very much about Revolution at all. They don't even know what the input device will be considering Nintendo said they won't be using the four-directional analog pad and button configuration anymore.
US videogame sales account for more than those in japan.
But Nintendo just might make more margin per unit in Japan. Japan's copyright laws with regard to audiovisual works (motion pictures and video games) are stricter than those of the United States, and resale or rental of genuine copies of video games requires the authorization of the copyright owner. Therefore, sellers of used games probably don't exert so much of the pricing pressure on the Japanese market that forces publishers to price older U.S. games at budget levels (see Player's Choice).
I didn't say Sony had that first. I said it was a Playstation feature that Nintendo later used itself, to illustrate the mistake that it was to use cartridges.
and, if Kingdom Hearts 2 lives up to the first, I might not be able to live without that series either, though they can't do as much with it since it has to reuse the same Disney characters
There are a load of Disney-owned properties that weren't covered in KH. For instance, Square could set the second game in Miramaxland, one of the objectives being to kill Bill.
Nintendo has said that they're showing it at E3. They EXPLICITLY said they will have it at E3, but are deciding whether to have it playable or not.
Every big rumor site disagrees about Nintendo not showing at E3 (see Spong). It's only rumors running around that Nintendo won't be there; and there is absolutely NO official sources involved.
I don't believe it.
Well, Conker is not exactly for kids but has a childish, cartoony feel. It really seems to have an identity crisis.
Two words: Adult Swim. This block of programming on Cartoon Network is #1 for its time slot among men age 18-34. This bodes well for the next Conker game.
The new Zelda looks good, but it should have been what we saw originally
"What we saw originally" was Super Smash Bros. Melee. Compare the earliest dolphin footage from SSBM's opening sequence.
I want a Real Mario game.
Sunshine is the spiritual successor to SM64.
1) You're engaging in rampant speculation about something you know nothing about and are not in a position to know anything about.
2) You are basing said speculation, in part, on "data" from IGN.
God help you.
I love how I can play games on my PS2 with Toy Story quality graphics....oh wait.
Oh wait, Toy Story for Super NES had (pre-rendered) Toy Story quality graphics.
Nintendo made Katamari?
Katamari DamaSy has been announced.
Lumines?
Premiered on PSP, but it's coming to GBA, from gbadev.org.
Looking at me I mainly play online games
Looking at you you're in the minority. Not even 10 percent of Xbox consoles are Live.
Can I play my own music tracks on the game?
Why can't I play Pretty Hate Machine as background music for the sequel to MS Bungie's Halo?
So, is PS3 going to be illegal to export to china just like PS2 was? Or is it just going to get classified as a "super computer"?
The Farewell Tour II
Nintendo is practically the R&D department for Sony and Microsoft. They should just cut them a check for a percentage of their great ideas.
And that's why Nintendo is more aggressively seeking U.S. patents, so that it can get such a royalty check.
are you too nearsighted to respect something like Pikmin, which creates a new genre?
Are you confusing Pikmin with Dune 2, which created the RTS genre? Pikmin was a good RTS, a different RTS, but not the first RTS.
Maybe it's got a built in lazy susan, the obvious next step in the evolution of the paddle controller.
The Farewell Tour II
PSP doesn't have "several" great games, Lumines is the only unqualified success.
Damn right. Rumor has it that it's being ported to the GBA though.
Nintendo is extreme causious with this. I them reading a post mordem on Rogue Leader where the developers were given the system specs from Nintendo and they started designing them them. The developers were extremely suprised to discover that the system actually handled more polygons than Nintendo original said it would. Unlike Sony's huge number of no textured polygons they were hyping.
And by that same rationale, Sony and Nintendo offerings are not free when they require a $10/mo Netzero account or a $40/mo DSL line. The price of access is considered a given here, as if you don't have broadband because you can't or won't pay for it, the $5 doesn't matter (and if you do have broadband but can't afford the extra $5/mo, one wonders how you can afford broadband at all?).
And the part you conveniently didn't quote from my post acknowledged the fact that requiring a broadband connection limits the market. At the same time, PS2 has many broadband-only games even though a dialup modem is available for that console, and I highly doubt Nintendo's Revolution will provide dialup support (I don't know, I haven't seen any anouncements so I could be wrong, but it seems like a bad idea to me; maybe that's just me being an elitist broandband-subscriber. I'm evil!). I played Quake 1 and such back in the day on a dialup connection, and I wouldn't go back. The frustration factor is high enough that I wouldn't bother. Were I stuck on dialup, I wouldn't play any online games. But then, I'm not into self-flagellation, either.
Huh? I don't listen to NIN, so whatever point you were trying to make was lost. I'll just assume you were trying to say I have a hole in my head, or something. Of course, you also conveniently glossed over my points, such as the growth of Live! subscriptions in a pre-Halo 2 market.
"Buy a DVD"? Don't you mean "rent until my DVD is scratched to hell or breaks"? Two can play at that game. Oh yeah, downloadable content is transferable in some cases. If your Xbox breaks and it's replaced rather than repaired, you do not have to pay again for the content download (may require a support call, but it's possible to do). I have no idea what happens if you don't go through official channels when your Xbox breaks (for example, rather than calling the Xbox support number and sending it in for repair or replacement, you just go to the store and replace it yourself). I assume that you can still transfer the data (again, perhaps with a phone call to support), but I don't know because I haven't had to do that. By that same token, you're not allowed to install disc-based expansion packs on multiple computers (read your EULA some time). Whether you agree with that or not, the Xbox Live! method of content delivery just enforces that already existing restriction a bit more strictly.
Maybe I'm living in a different world, but I've never really felt the need to go to someone else's house to play a game I already own. Now, I have lugged my Xbox and spare TV to other places for Halo LAN parties, but that's not really the same thing, is it?
nintendo was working on a controller with gyros in it that could sense when you tilt the controller and use that action for game input.
If a tilt controller were the big "revolution", then why didn't Sony and Microsoft copy it sometime after the release of frickin' Kirby Tilt n Tumble?
Ten fingers can count much higher than 10. I can count to 1,023 on ten fingers, but once I get to 4 it can look a bit indecent.
The irony is that Sony had partnered with Nintendo to develop an optical drive for the Super Nintendo, and when Nintendo got cold feet, Sony took what they'd learned and created the Playstation. Microsoft did the same thing, partnering with Nintendo to learn about game system development, but pulled out of the agreement to create their own game system. The main difference is who broke up with whom: Nintendo dumped Sony, causing Sony to create the PS; Microsoft dumped Nintendo, suggesting they went into the relationship with less-than-honest intentions.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi
The only thing the DS has that got me to buy it was it's backwards compatibility with GBA games.
Not only that, but with the EFA-Linker (under $100 incl. shipping), you can play a boatload of NES games and many Game Boy games as well. So now the Nintendo DS is compatible with GBA games and unofficially compatible with many NES and GB games, but Sony couldn't be bothered to include a PS1 emulator with the PSP and uses code signing to prevent the free software community from stepping up.
Imagine if the PSP was big enough to accomodate the PS2 discs. Ugh.
It is. Ooga booga.
The XBOX has one profitable quarter after eleven straight losses, and everyone calls them a success.
but they're making up for it in volume!
Nintendo owns the handheld market. No questions about that. Sony has made the first dent, but the PSP as it is today is too expensive for most people. In anycase, did you actually look at Nintendo's financial results? http://www.nintendo.co.jp/n10/news/050126e.pdf The overwhelming majority of their sales and profits is from Gameboy, not Gamecube. I own a PS2, Gamecube, and XBox and by far I've bought more games on the PS2 and XBox and recently, more games on the Xbox. After awhile, I just got bored playing the next version of Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc... As for next gen systems, I'll probably get the PS3 and XBox2 and skip on Nintendo. Given their game selection, it doesn't appear that I'm their target audience anyways (30 years old).
Why stop there? Why not bring us all the way back to the good ol' days, when big iron was kept in the cold room, and nobody could get access to it except for the chosen ones?
The world changes. You can either adapt or die. Whining about it does nothing except prove that your testicles have gone missing.
"Eh I'm so confused by this. Just 2 days ago I read that Nintendo was going to show clips of the games, but not the actual system. *Rolleyes* In any event, I wouldn't equate that with "we have nothing". Nintendo wouldn't make that bold of risk at the turn of a new generation."
Better yet, who cares at all? You're not going to buy the console either way until it launches anyway. Yes, I know the situation is more complicated than that, with shareholders and such, but as far as actual sales go, they aren't getting any until launch, and if they don't release the specs by launch, something has gone horribly wrong!
"When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
Correct me if I'm wrong, but alot of what I've read on "Revolution" has Nintendo trying to cater to those people that don't play games. I vaguely remember some interview with an exec say something like "Mom will walk by and want to play." Or something.
Point being, I'm thinking talking about Nintendo catering old school, or not catering to the masses, etc. is missing the point of "Revolution." It doesn't sound like it's going to be simply a natural progression of graphics, a different (but very much standard) controller and added internet support like Microsoft and Sony are planning... it's going to be their best effort to get the people that don't play games and never have to play games.
This will probably entail two things that they don't want to show off yet... a weird controller (touchpad, tilt controlled, etc.) that has been rumored and games that will disappoint us the old guard of gaming. In fact, if my predictions are true, they'd be better off unveiling on Oprah than at E3.
Your points are well made. Some issues that remain:
It can be assumed that a family has at least dial-up, but not broadband. You point out that the broadband requirement limits the market. I contend that the broadband requirement limits the market to an unnecessary extent. Some of the Live-only features, such as some games' expansions, don't especially need high speed or low latency. For instance, given what I know of Bemanistyle's simfiles database, a song file in Dance Dance Revolution Ultramix can't be bigger than 10 MB, which is a 40 minute download on dial-up. In addition, some games such as Tetris and Yu-Gi-Oh! are largely turn-based and small-universe and wouldn't benefit much from low latency.
In addition, consider a touch of service tying. The Xbox division and the MSN division are close to each other on Microsoft's income statement, and I can assume that the Xbox Live setup kit advertises MSN broadband. Requiring broadband for Live, even on games that otherwise wouldn't really need broadband, generates more broadband subscriptions in areas where MSN has a contract with the telco or cable company that has a geographic monopoly or duopoly. In those areas, you need MSN in order to get on Live.
I played Quake 1 and such back in the day on a dialup connection, and I wouldn't go back. The frustration factor is high enough that I wouldn't bother.
Again, not all game genres benefit from broadband as much as first-person shooters do.
I don't listen to NIN, so whatever point you were trying to make was lost
Every official NIN album is assigned a sequential "halo" number. Pretty Hate Machine was Halo 2, Broken was Halo 5, The Downward Spiral was Halo 8, The Fragile was Halo 14, and the numbers in between were largely singles and remix albums. The point here, possibly made better in another one of my comments to this article, was that such a high-profile title as Bungie's Halo 2 for Xbox left out support for custom soundtracks. Whoever decided to ship without that feature deserves a head like a hole.
I've never really felt the need to go to someone else's house to play a game I already own.
It's called having to attend a family gathering and having no ability and/or no right to leave once you get bored. It's also called visiting friends or relatives who aren't allowed (old enough?) to leave the house on their own. Thus it becomes likely that you'll need to bring some game discs with you.
You're probably not too far off.
My offhand guess would be something like a power glove with touch feedback.
They seem to be on this big touch thing with the DS and reaching out with WI-FI.
It wouldn't be a big stretch to think they would revamp the power glove.
It would definitely be revolutionary even though as mentioned before, the technology does exist already.
Microsoft and Nintendo never had any type of agreement. Microsoft approached Nintendo about buying them, and Nintendo pretty much laughed at them. Reasons being a) Nintendo is highly profitable, and has been for a long time, so they have no reason to sell the company and b) Microsoft's proposal would've involved killing off the GameCube, which was already far into development.
MS will sell on huge advertising budgets and no-compromise graphics.
Won't releasing almost a year ahead of the other two consoles imply that they had at least some degree to compromise on the graphics?
I don't think microsoft would take that path of copying or modifying their plans based on nintendo but I'm sure sony would.
I find a few statements made by some Slashdot members to be incorrect or misleading. Facts: - Nintendo has USD$10 billion in the bank. In cash. They have more than enough scratch to put on a show at E3. - Nintendo is one of the most innovative (and profitable) companies in existence. During the 1980s, they controlled over 90% of the US market for a time with the NES. The image of Mario is as recognizable worldwide as Mickey Mouse. A few years ago, the company posted their first quarterly loss in history. I would say that if Nintendo doesn't get it right this time and re-assert their previous dominance, they're pretty much done as far as the hardware game is concerned. I'm a long-time Nintendo loyalist; like another posted before me, I also grew up with the Zeldas, Marios, and Donkey Kongs. It's sad to see a company that the industry owes so dearly in this kind of shape. I will always respect Nintendo for sticking to their guns (albeit stubbornly at times) and making great games for kids. My biggest beef with the industry now is how the games are a) boring and b) less risky and finally, c) "interactive DVDs". Nintendo's new CEO mentions these points in the 2005 GDK keynote speech. Perhaps a game that is indicative of this trend is the latest Final Fantasy. What happened to good ole fashioned button-mashing gameplay?
What? Released a unix based OS? Contributed to the Open Source movement? Contributed to standards rather than using proprietry formats?
The Atari 2600 had an analog trackball controller for games like Missile Command and Centipede in addition to the paddle controller you're referring to.
The default Atari 5200 controller was an analog controller as well as any joystick for the Apple II or PC made at that time.
You're probably right. Based on Occam's Law and healthy skepticism it's most likely that Nintendo is simply going to coast on the success of the DS and the GameCube. I doubt they have anything in the pipeline.
First of all, I'm primarily a Mac user, I currently own a GameCube, N64, Nintendo DS, and have owned a PS1; I bought it the day it was released. So let me begin; :)
:) )
:)
Define Poor? Apple has a 92% market share in the digital music arena, how is that poor? Their desktop share, although not on top, is greater than Sonys, even "world wide." Now even with a lower market share Apple rakes in billions and has made profit for years, now how is that poor? I guess when compared to Dell's shares it could be considered poor, but on the other hand when comparing innovation and qualiy to Apple, Dell can easily be construed as poor. So if Apple's share is poor, what does that make Sony who's share is even lower and is getting cremed at their own game? ( You know music playback devices.
Now to ramble on; I don't know where you've been, but Nintendo still has the number one selling portable. Even the DS has "sold more" units then the PSP. Their GC although not on top is still doing well. And what's with this "Mario Paint" comment? Your whole comparison of Apple's lower desktop share with Nintendo and marketing doesn't seem to add up. Are you saying that marketing is not good for computer sells? If so, then look at Dell and than take a look at Intel, two marketing machines that sell very well. Sony also fits this category, as does any business that wants to, well stay in "business." I'm still a bit confused as to what you're trying to convey though with this Nintendo/Marketing/Apple jumbo mix???
And about this design comment, are you saying Sony's doing well because of their design? If so I agree, but unfortunately it is all they merrit now days. Besides their pro-equipment most of their consumer quality is crap. There's only so many times you can wrap shite in candy and still expect return customers, who would rather not deal with the hidden shite that plagues so many Sony's products now days. Fortunately Apple has nice design, but also has a great software package to back it up. Sony's products lack big time in that area.
The Playstation was a joke!!! Are you kidding, it sold like crazy when it was first released. I worked for an unamed game company at that time and practially everyone that worked there bought one. I honestlly don't know anyone that considerd it a joke, nor did not own one from the beginning. But on the other hand, I'm probably the only one that does not own a PS2. I'm personally sick of all monotonous re-hashed 3D games that plague so many systems now days.
I look forward to Nintendo'as next offering. In some ways they're the same Nintendo that we grew up with, but in others they are trying to break the mold that has confined so many other game systems. As an example, I really respect the potential that the DS can offer. But anyways, kudos to Sony for its nice------ "design" on the PSP.
And this is why I respect Nintendo. In today's world of companies making promises that they can't keep, Nintendo continues to remain honest. For example, when they released the information on the GameCube's max number of polygons per second, they gave a number that reflected what you would see in a real-world application, while the specs for the PS2 and the Xbox were pretty much the highest number they could get under extremely specific circumstances.
If anything, Nintendo underhypes their consoles. While this ensures that people will not be disappointed when they compare what they hear with what they get, people will see the higher (probably lab setting) specs of the other systems and go for them. What really bothers me is that people seem to be choosing games and gaming systems based on graphics alone. Sure the PS2 has a lot more games than the gamecube. Unfortunately, a large percentage of them are (for lack of a better word) crap.
That must mean that Nintendo blatantly copied the rumble function from my old Logitech PC controller.
You have to load the data into flash RAM from a PC. That means you can't just sell Gamecube discs on the streets of Hong Kong, which means almost no piracy.
Nobody is *that* worried about hobbyists using thousands of dollars worth of computer equipment to load ISOs traded online, except insofar as the ability to do so might lead to an easy way to produce copied discs. The equipment costs and effort involved dwarf simply buying the original game, unlike a $5 PS2 bootleg.
The big problem is asian blackmarket piracy. That isn't a problem with the cube.
Also, I'm not sure that calling the Viper a modchip is entirely reasonable. It's more of an add-on flash drive. Having to replace the disk drive is as close as you're ever going to get to successfully preventing copying.
See, if your favourite genre happens to fall squarely into the Mario/Zelda/whatever-cheap-hack-on-the-same-engine category, then I can see how you'd be happy. But please don't assume that _everyone_ has the exact same tastes you do.
My favourite genre however are CRPGs and I fucking _hate_ 3D jump-and-runs. (And no, the Zeldas are _not_ RPGs.) So Mario and Zelda never did anything for me.
I liked the SNES, because that's where the RPGs were at. The N64 on the other hand was the start of my contempt for Nintendo. Over its awfully long life span it had exactly _one_ (debatably) RPG, and even that one was not published in Europe. The Gamecube falls in the same category too: looking at its lineup of games really doesn't do anything for me.
And Nintendo's arrogant "we have all the games we need, it's Sony who'll go bankrupt for publishing lots of games" attitude also didn't help. Here I had an N64 catching dust, with one game published every 2-3 months and even that one some jump-and-run I didn't want. And Nintendo is telling me that that's all the games they need.
I started just hating Nintendo at that point.
"I think people take cheap shots at them because they don't want to admit that "kiddy games" such as Zelda: Wind Waker and Mario Sunshine are a lot more fun to play than those hack and slash "grownup" games."
Ah, a conspiracy theory. Some world-wide conspiracy made everyone say they dislike Nintendo's games, even though they really like it. Think about it for a little, and I think you'll realize how silly that theory is.
No, some of us just honestly have other tastes in games, and don't find Nintendo's games to be any fun. At all. It's not about being "kiddy games", it's simply about everyone liking a different kind of a game:
Nintendo catters to a niche, at the expense of ignoring everyone else. By the sound of it, you are in that niche market. Good for you. I can see how you'd be happy with Nintendo's games then. Most people however fall outside that niche, which is why it's a niche.
"My buddies tease me about it, but who isn't having fun playing Mario Kart or Mario Party?"
I don't. I very much prefer a real racing _simulation_, like Gran Turismo.
It's not about it being Mario or Nintendo or "kiddie". The whole pseudo-racing-while-throwing-crap-at-each-other genre just doesn't do anything for me. That includes the PSX/PS2/whatever games in that category. And includes the SF/cartoon-license/whatever games, not just the "kiddie" ones.
"Who doesn't like to drop a bomb bug on their enemies pikmin and blow 'em to bits?"
I don't. Honestly. If I want to blow things to bits, I load a proper strategy game. E.g., "Rome: Total War".
"Who doesn't think the storyline to Windwaker is interesting?"
Even if I didn't mind the story as such, the implementation does nothing for me. I mean, Daikatana's story wasn't the bad part about it either. Stil, that didn't make it game of the year or anything.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Fanboys for the competition hate to hear it, but for a long time (several years), the game with the highest poly count on a console was a GameCube launch title: Star Wars Rogue Squadron III: Rogue Leader.
This game is capable of maintaining smooth animation in progressive scan, as well. In fact, it was due to this game that other developers realized that the GameCube was capable of far, far more than Nintendo had originally claimed. But the fanboys? No, you'll still find some fool out there with a comparison chart that reads, "GameCube - 12 million polys/sec, PS2 - 66 million polys/sec, OMG!!!" And they will be as satisfied as pigs in shit to play their jaggy, stuttering PS2 games in lower framerate on their friends' PS2s, because their own PS2s are at SCEA being fixed for DREs. But that's another story.
Tell me. What does "purple" smell like in _your_ world?
In this day and age, is the hardware platform any relevant to a game being successful? if Nintendo made outstanding games, then they would have sold by the bucketloads on any console. Why does Nintendo have to have their own dedicated hardware? it does not make sense anymore.
I got a DS for my birthday, and I love it. The thing is, I'm not normally a console gamer, but a PC gamer (barely even that lately, I've been really disenchanted with the mainstream gaming industry). I think the DS is much more accessible and interesting to people like me.
My girlfriend *hates* games. Hates them with a passion. Thinks they are boring and pointless.
She has played my DS more than I have.
The DS is really accessible, even to non traditional gamers. The touch screen interface for a handheld gaming unit is great. Playing games with it is so simple. It also acts as a great mouse device for games like Metroid (i've never been able to play a FPS on a console with such ease).
Yeah the graphics aren't up to scratch compared with the PSP. But the bottom line is, the DS is *fun*. And not just to traditional gamers. I think it opens up new possibilities.
And unlike some others posting here, I don't think that every game has to make use of the touch screen to feel "complete". Not every style of game is suitable to a touch screen interface, e.g. mario kart (although it could use the bottom screen as an analog control (optional), like ridge racer) or fighting games.
I think people should cut Nintendo some slack. If they keep going in this direction, I will be buying my first (non-handheld) console ever, with the revolution.
-- The doctor said I wouldn't get so many nose bleeds if I just kept my finger out of there!
### they could capture some console market and then facilitate for the same apps to be released on Linux
Just because something has written 'Linux' on it doesn't mean it will be compatible with something else that has 'Linux' written on it too. If any console developer ever creates a Linux based console, I am pretty sure that it will be rather incompatile to any Linux you can run on the PC. Sure you might find Emacs and Firefox ported to the console-linux, but console-games will never run on your PC linux, custom drivers, custom hardware, different CPU architecture, copy protected disc format and the like will make sure that a PC won't make much use of the games.
Just look at Linux for the PS2, first of it didn't had any games being based on it, ok it wasn't build for it, and secondly it was so tight locked that you couldn't even access the memory cards of your PS2. With WindowsCE on the Dreamcast its the same, its kind of there, but many games bypass it and no Dreamcast game ever was playable on your PC Windows.
> except Sony for god knows what reason
Most people are happy with one or two ports. Two ports cheaper than four. People who want to use 4 ports are prepared to pay the small extra cost for an adaptor.
If you think you can live off selling games for a console whose market share is shrinking fast, tell that to Sega. They were at that point once too: all Dreamcast owners were happily buying Sega's games, but not many people were actually buying a new Dreamcast unless Sega gave it away almost for free. (Partially _because_ of lack of 3rd party support and whole genres being completely absent until the last few months.)
Ask them how well their Dreamcast did in that situation. Oh, wait, it didn't. Sega dropped the Dreamcast and exitted the console market completely.
Nintendo isn't as profitable as you think in the non-portable console market. Most of their money comes from the lucrative gameboy market, where, surprise, they do have 3rd party support. So if your big hopes for Nintendo include screwing up in that market too, by driving away the developpers, you might just see Nintendo go the way of Sega.
See, 3rd party support isn't that bad a thing as you assume. Those 3rd party developpers for Sony and MS actually have a positive effect on Sony's or MS's income:
1. Sony _does_ make some money (and in fact good money) out of each game sold for their system, even if it's from a third party developper. In case you wondered why a new PS2 game costs more than a new PC game, that's why: that difference goes directly into Sony's bank account. And
2. More titles means more people buying their consoles, which means more people buying the games, _and_ more games they can sell to each PS2 owner. Which drives up the income from the previous paragraph pretty much quadratically.
The reason Nintendo did well was basically that they sell cheap stuff, _not_ that it's so profitable to lack 3rd party support. Their consoles have the cheapest hardware of all contenders, and their games have two digit polygon counts. That's cheap to make, so you need to sell less of them to make a profit.
But if their market share shrinks far enough, even that may well become non-profitable.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Clever signature text goes here.
No, they didn't. Media speculation.
What they did say at GDC 2005 is that Revo will be backwards-compat with Cube. How, precisely, would they do that without a D-pad and buttons, do you think?
perosnaly i have last my faith in nintendo, i mean after looking at the game boy advanced,SP, and the DS has anyone else noticed THAT THEY ARE THE SAME THING IN A DIFFERENT SHAPE?!? well i have, personaly i think the revolution is going to suck...I'll probably play it anyways at my boyfriends house sicne he seems to have faith in nintendo still...i think
You know, if you were REALLY bashing your head on the keyboard, you would get a lot more spaces.
Oh they will. Or have you all forgot how insidiously devious their marketing department is? Remember Zelda last year?
Nintendo knows it's either this year's E3 or they start preparing to go 3rd party within a few years. And they haven't forgotten the humiliating showing two years ago, when they featured Pac-man of all things.
I think they're milking this media underdog thing for all it's worth.
random underscore blankspace at ya know hoo dot comedy.
h bv b v bb v bhb
Regards,
Mike
Me lost me cookie at the disco.
The revolution will be at E3, showing one of it's unique features:
The ability to turn invisible.
Which is why Nintendo is working on shedding the "kiddy" image. I don't know who even uses the argument anymore and really believes it, but Nintendo realized a while back that blood in a game isn't going to hurt console sales.
And the point of defending "kiddy" games is the fact that a lot of us prefer the attention put into gameplay detail, instead of blood spray pattern detail or the boob jiggle detail.
The thing about adult games is, there are good ones and there are bad ones. Playing the open-ended field for someone like me (a la Grand Theft Auto) just gets boring. After shooting a street full of mobsters and stealing that mustang ripoff for the twentieth time, it just isn't fun anymore. On the flipside, you have your espionage games (Splinter Cell and Metal Gear) that are intensely fun, and your shooters (which go either way).
See, those of us who defend "kiddy games" against those who proclaim "bloody games" to be the best notice that a lot of those who defend "bloody games" defend even the bad ones. I'll admit that I like games from both camps, but if someone flat out says that they prefer a bad GTA ripoff with no thought put into any of it over something crazy fun like Smash Brothers, I'm going to laugh in their face and assume they are a fanboy. Simple as that.
Having been a long time member of the gaming media, and beginning at the Atari 2600 I generally have a finger on the pulse of the industry and I think things are about to change. This is a bit counter to the common opinion and even though the DS seems a bit flat I personally am starting to become bored with the current state of Sony and MS.
Videogames were never about wowing hardware specs. and that is all that is pushing Sony and MS into the "Next Gen" consoles. Nintendo is the only company staying out of this arms race and concentrating on innovation. I don't want to be playing Gran Turismo 8 on the PS3 and GTA 7 I want innovation and fresh new ideas. Katamari Damacy proved the success of innovation on PS2, and while it does exist on these two platforms, Nintendo has the track record of fresh new ideas in games and interfaces (even though there are the same parallels to be drawn with Zelda, Mario, etc. they all tend to be new and fresh each time out of the gate)
Coming from someone who never purchased anything past the SNES and GBA from Nintendo, my feelings are changing quite rapidly toward the Revolution. I think it is finally going to reach a point where gamers are ready for a change, and I think that time is closer than most think. I want Nintendo to succeed, I want gameplay and attention to detail to reign supreme, and it isn't going to happen with the PS3 or Xbox 360 they are just beefed up editions of what is available now playing the same games and the same franchises with little to no advances aside from graphics.
I'm ready for a revolution after covering Sony for 10+ years.
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
I sort of rubbed my forhead around too. ^_^
Outside of arcades, I believe the first 4-player setup was on the NES.
Not since Marie-Antoinette played milkmaid has looking simple and honest been so fake and complicated.
for DVD playing! I can't f'ing believe that they would throw out hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue by keeping the console from being used as a dvd player for a second/kids bedroom . They're idiots! and for preventing game copying, I know so many people who got a ps1/ps2/xbox with the intention of copying games, and then realized that it was actually work! and just bought the games anyway. It's the CONCEPT that you can pirate games that sells consoles! First the N64 debacle, now a stupid console that can't play DVD's, making a parent's choice easy to get a PS2, thereby saving money on the kids entertainment center. Idiots!!!!!
"But the dreams came on in the Japanese night like livewire voodoo..." - William Gibson I'm a signature virus. Please c
they'll look better if they get game studios to "commit" to thier console and thus we may never see what some developers really had to offer the pc.
Nintendo hasn't really done this, and they've been pegged for making a lot of "first-party" games and lacking good third-party games.
Some people believe 1-1=3 and for the sake of being politically correct, we should respect their differences
Even worse will be the onslaught of comments from fanboys complaining about all of the "haters".
Nintendo has done a lot of things to revolutionize the gaming industry. It's easier to remember its failures than its triumphs. Case in point, everyone remembers the virtual boy, the lack of CD rom in n64, the no internet access on the current system. I'm sure in a biz standpoint, they recognize the potential, but didn't believe the hype... not yet.
As for their triumphs, did you know they introduced the modern day digital controls, the portable gaming unit, the basic layout that sony uses for their controls, the vibration controllers, the wireless controller, etc.
They're looking for the next level of interaction. They wanted what drew in the 80s market, gaming for everyone. For example, ever see folks say, "wow, that looks like fun", they then assume control and it's just utter confusion, smashing random buttons, etc. Gaming has gone complicated where we're isolating hardcore gamers and ignoring others.
I'm sure nintendo's thinking of a way to bring it all back and allowing all levels to play video games. There's no real need to have a dozen buttons and pressure sensitive this and that. It's all about gameplay. If they can capture gameplay in fewer buttons, what does it matter?
"When I was a kid. I never understood why grownups stopped watching cartoons."
Well, I never did stop.
"Who wants to sneak around with a square head with a "Realistic" face painted on?"
I don't. I pick games where that doesn't happen.
"Who wants to fall asleep while playing a game with a depressing and slow storyline?"
I don't. I look for games with an interesting story that keeps me interested until the end. Any other questions?
"Kiddy or not, I have fun."
Bingo. So do I. Just not with the same games.
"I never wanted to grow up to be some boring fella who could only find enjoyment in boringness."
Well, here's the thing you can't seem to get into your head: some of us don't find those other genres boring at all. Some of those games I've used as examples count on _my_ scale, around the point of "most fun one can have with the clothes on." And conversely, we too find _your_ favourites to be the epitome of boring brain-damage.
(Which is actually the whole point of why Nintendo loses market share: you can't just tell people to stop liking something and start liking something else. They keep giving me only stuff I find boring, I won't buy it.)
E.g., as I've said before, I actually went and bought both N64 Zeldas. I was bored out of my skull in 10 minutes flat. I still remember how idiotic, pointless and boring I found it in Ocarina Of Time to jump around on stuff, using flowers as propellers. Or take Mario 64 or Donkey Kong 64. WTF is supposed to be fun about pointlessly jumping on stuff like a retard? I got bored stiff in minutes. Etc.
The difference is that I can understand that different people have different tastes: what's fun for me might be boring for you, and viceversa. It's just normal. I'm not telling you that your tastes are boring and wrong because they don't match mine. While you seem stuck in the notion that only your tastes are right, and you can just proclaim everyone else's tastes wrong.
Which is like if I came saying that everyone should like the taste of milk (because I do) and hate apples (because I do). I mean, hey, everyone must have the same tastes I have right? Nobody can possibly actually like apples, or be lactose intollerant, right? I like to think you can see what's wrong with that kind of a notion.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Company president Satoru Iwata likes to say that Nintendo hopes Revolution will deliver new titles that gamers may not even know they want. I think that's bold and admirable, but also naïve and fiscally malfunctioned. Why not simply give gamers what they want? Why not stick with what works, especially if consumers don't believe the model is broken?
According to Nintendo, players are declining, or will decline in the future. However, this only seems to be true of Nintendo players. I look at sales of PlayStation 2 and Xbox games and they are on the rise. Sales of Halo 2 did not decline compared to the original. Sales of San Andreas did not see a dramatic reduction compared to its predecessor. The market is healthy. There are millions of gamers out there buying these titles. Why ignore that? For a company that always reverts to the bottom line, which is profitability, going against the grain of the industry and its consumer base doesn't seem the most logical move.
To me, the most scary prospect about all of this business is the possibility that all of this talk from Nintendo has very little to do with the betterment of games and more to do with lowering development costs while speeding up production schedules. This all goes a long way back. Former Nintendo president Hiroshi Yamauchi has bitched and moaned for years that games have become too big and too expensive and even though he has retired to his underground cryo-chamber where he awaits the blood of a green-eyed girl, his ideals remain with the company's executives.
I look at the Nintendo DS lineup and I see a handful of intriguing games that are in many cases designed to be small, to forego story, to forgo presentation and to focus strictly on the basics. These games are of course still fun. Nintendogs and Kirby in particular are great. Electroplankton is neat. But is this the future? Yoshi is so pick-up-and-play shallow that levels are randomly generated. Can fun only be had at the cost of production values, story and depth?
That scares me because I simply don't subscribe to this design philosophy. I am more in tune with Silicon Knights' opinion that games are an artistic medium, just like movies or music. Silicon Knights also believes that games are rapidly emerging as the ultimate medium, destined to one day replace movies as the highest form of entertainment. I happen to agree with that, too. Games are interactive. You get sucked in. You believe. But production values have a significant role in that experience. Would Resident Evil 4 have been as scary or as enticing were it constructed with primitive graphics and audio? I don't think so.
Coming back to the Revolution side of things, you're right in that there's not much interest in the console right now. Developers just don't seem to care. It's kind of depressing. I call up some publishers and I have to explain to them that Nintendo has a next-generation console in development because they have never heard of it. Meanwhile, they can tell you all about Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. As someone who was here for the launch of Nintendo 64 and GameCube, I can tell you that comparatively speaking, the industry at large was much more hyped for these machines than it appears to be for Nintendo's next console. That, any way you slice it, is bad news.
How can Nintendo change that? Prove to the industry that the console is viable. Spend some money. Make some partnerships. Secure some exclusive games that will garner more interest from consumers. It's a snowball
Power Glove MkII!
Where are the Xbox and Sony games that bend my mind?
Lifeline for PS2
Katamari Damacy (as has been pointed out. Yes, I know it's slated for the DS, but it's on PS2 NOW.)
Parapa the Rapper was a bit of fun for me (I only played the demo).
Microsoft has some excelent games studios, fortunatly, most of their best stuff is for the PC, not the X-Box (Close Combat, anyone?)
That's also not to say that there aren't excelent games on the X-Box too such as Crimson Skies (I love flight sims, even the more casual, non-realistic ones. Where's Pilotwings GC, Nintendo?)
But your point is correct. Most of the experimental, quirky, "mind bending" games are more likley to land on Nintendo, or just be developed by Nintendo, than any of the others out there.. It's just not that the other platforms are completly VOID of innovation.
Touch everywhere, even when inappropriate.
There are more than a few software companies that would love to be bought out for a retirement price (ie, the owners get to retire), but that is just one of the things that happens in reality. I'd do it if I could. It doesn't mean they don't care about their product, just that really, how many of us would work if we didn't have to so that we could eat etc.
I don't think game development on the PC is going to dry up. It's is probably the simplest platform on which to develop. Originality on the other hand, will suffer. It is the same really across all industries. Look at how many FPS games there are, how many movies are the same, what really is the difference between a Denny's and a Perkins? Once companies develop what the public buys, they milk it to death and don't like to take chances. Sadly, usually they are proven right.
Development of originality is generally left to the smaller companies, if they make a splash, they will be assimilated - for a price. It has ever been thus. I will say this for nintendo though, generally, their games are more fun.
You know, they have enough of a sense of humor that this could be exactly what revolution means. I never even thought of that.
People who think they know everything really piss off those of us that actually do.
Sure I would gladly welcome a post suggesting that Nintendo should use Eniac as its platform.
All I am saying is that I am tired of the invasion of the Mac fanboys here. It doesn't matter whether its Linux, BSD, Apple, Windows or whatever. Any post saying "they should just use this and everything would work properly" is stupid. If I have to hear another "why would you do this? all you need is a Mac mini" I'm going to vomit. And then to see posts like that modded +5 insightful just illustrates the high volume of dweebism that persists in the Slashdot community.
"Whining about it does nothing except prove that your testicles have gone missing."
And I guess posting as Anonymous Coward is the proper way of displaying how big your balls are?
Sometimes my arms bend back.
Consoles have essentially one hardware configuration. A heavyweight OS like Linux would slow it down horribly. If you want a general-purpose machine instead of one only to play games, go buy a PC. In fact, you can play games on those, too.
:)
Not with Linux on it, you can't...
Atari: Warlords, and I think Combat.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
That's 'sdrawkcab.'
The Atari 2600 featured quite a few 4-player paddle games (a pair of paddles plugs into one controller slot). There may be earlier examples, but that's the earliest one I know about.
What exactly has Nintendo innovated since the Gameboy? How many marios are we on now? Look, I am not saying that thats a bad thing, but they arent exactly doing much new.
And yes, the DS is "kind of" cool. But until we really see it being used by developers, it gets virtual boy status in my book.
How is the parent a troll? It's the fucking truth.
God damned Nintendo dick sucking fanboys can't stand reality? Go back to fucking Hyrule you fags.
And how about people not measure their e-penis about what kinds of games they play. I play everything from Halo 2 and Grand Theft Auto to Wind Waker and Katamari Damancy, and I'm sick of people on one side of the spectrum taking pot shots at the other. Seriously, shut the hell up, we don't care that the Gamecube is kiddy or the Xbox is for MATURE GAMERS LOL or that the PS2 is THE GAING PLATFORM OF CHOICE or that PC's are for SOPHISTICATED gamers, just shut up, shut up, SHUT UP!!!!
I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
They have nothing ready to show, so they cop out. This is the standard strategy of Nintendo and in fact all corporations.
The AC parent nailed it dead on. I've been in the industry for nearly seven years now, and I have some very close friends who work at Nintendo HQ. They have flat out told me that many of the game publishing companies expect Nintendo to come along with a dumptruck of money, and basically pay them in order to make GC games. Why? Because that's what Microsoft does in order to get XBox support. MS has had to bribe everyone in the industry in order to get the amount of third party games onto the shelves that they have. (And, well, it seems to have worked!) But as a result, the XBox division has posted alot of losses since it was started. Yeah, a good portion of it is hardware costs, but don't underestimate the bribery factor. Microsoft is the only company in the world with enough money to buy their way into anything... and they sure bought their way into the video game biz. Sony apparently does some incentives for the big players, but because PS2 games sell tons of units due to the installed base, there's already quite a compelling business case for develpoing PS2 games.
Anyways, back to Nintendo. Rumor has it that the 'cube was making $$$ the first day it was on sale. No one can say that about PS2 or XBox. I was rather impressed. I wouldn't be suprised if the DS and Revolution follow the same path. Nintendo plays by a different set of rules than their competitors, and it looks to me like they will keep the money coming in.. with or without the support of the rest of the industry. Guess we'll see.
me owning and preferring an xbox just bcuz of game genre agree that ps2 and xbox dont have ne rank with nintendo but they do put out quality hardware that hands down does not compete with any other console. xbox and ps2 were very sloppy in the engineering, mainly XBOX. they put out systems that had faulty laser units power supplys and to many overall glitches on the sys. Why, bcuz of rushed engineering. look how many customer complaints for laser units and power failures for those consoles. as far as nintendo complaints and hardware malfunctions there really isnt any. and for those that say that nintendo is BSing and that there not ready to show demo for "Nintendo Revolution" bcuz they want many things kept secret. Well, its true. reverse engineers could rip and reman. any product in a 4 month period. it just shows how much technology is at this point. the only downside to rushed engineering is reliability and durability.......
The upside to it is game production and major game labels backing the console.
When everything becomes incompatable?
--
Random Signature #2
Generated by SlashdotRndSig via GreaseMonkey
maybe it manipulates brainwaves...