Nintendo's New Look

Forbes has an article talking with Nintendo of America's VP of Marketing Perrin Kaplan. She talks a little bit about Nintendo's upcoming plans, and the concept of the Blue Ocean. From the article: "For us, it's all about the experience, not if the technology allows you to play your game on the high-definition formats, which are now in such a small percentage of homes. Many independent sources tell us that experiencing current high-def games on a regular TV makes it near impossible to see everything clearly. That means the majority of homes are experiencing something lesser than what they bargained for. "

Comments

Misinformation abounds

[TaxiZaphod]

From TFA: Microsoft made the first move with the Xbox 360 three months ago, but with fewer than 700,000 units sold so far, gamers appear to be reserving judgment and waiting for Sony's PlayStation 3 and Nintendo's Revolution, both expected by the end of 2006. Raise your hand if you've seen unsold 360's lying around unsold at your local retailer. This kind of misinformation leads me to question the impartiality of the whole article.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[FidelCatsro]

Are MS not meeting demand , or is there no demand .
Perhaps the sales figures are skewed , but from the data that no shops have them , you can not conclude they have more than 700,00 units sold , only that all units shipped have been sold / are being hidden to create demand (or something else similar ) .

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Winckle]

I don't understand what your complaint is?
TFA states that the xbox 360 sales are weak, and you state that you have seen xbox 360s lying around unsold. Consoles lying around unsold would seem to be an effect of poor sales.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Cutriss]

Sensationalism aside, at least they're actually mentioning Nintendo. Usually these days, an article in Forbes about video games wouldn't even mention Nintendo, lest it take up valuable print space to be devoted to Microsoft and Sony.

I wouldn't complain too much.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Anonymous Coward]

*raises hand*

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Gr33nNight]

Here are a whole ton of unsold Xbox 360s. Boy those are sure flying off the shelf!

http://img304.imageshack.us/img304/1277/360nosello utscreen0016aa6os.jpg

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Anonymous Coward]

Raise your hand if you've seen unsold 360's lying around unsold at your local retailer.

What's the response you're expecting from this question? Those of us who don't have plans to buy any of these consoles have no clue whether or not they're available. So, which way is the article skewed?

I'm not being cheeky; this is a genuine question. You can't just assume that we know whether the console is selling or not; I sure don't.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[bigman2003]

Many independent sources tell us that experiencing current high-def games on a regular TV makes it near impossible to see everything clearly. That means the majority of homes are experiencing something lesser than what they bargained for.

Do these independent (crack addict) sources not understand that you CAN switch your resolution to 480i with the current consoles that support HD?

On the 360 the games look fine...good...even 'great' (excluding King Kong).

Having the option of going HD doesn't mean that 480i gets worse.

Unless you work in Nintendo marketing of course.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[XenoRyet]

Xbox 360 sales are not weak. They have sold very nearly 100% of the systems that have left the factory. They have only sold 700,000 systems because they have only produced 700,000 systems, not because "gamers are reserving judgement"

Re:Misinformation abounds

[LnxAddct]

They only produced 700,000 units to create artificial demand and press. And yes, I've seen Xbox 360s lying around. I could go buy 10 right now if I wanted, easily.
Regards,
Steve

Re:Misinformation abounds

[XenoRyet]

At this point I find the "artifical demand" theory to be highly unlikely. I think MS could have held back stock on the initial shipment to create such a demand. But the question is: When are they planning to cash in on this artificial demand?

It would be rediculous for MS to not take advantage of their hype durring christmas. Now that Xmas is past, we are into the window in which a potential customer might wait for PS3 or Rev. The fact that they are still apparently short stocked when the peak oppertunity for artifical demand has come and gone leads me to belive that they did in fact have a manufacturing problem.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Anonymous Coward]

You are a dirty stinking liar.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Saige]

Yeah, that makes awesome business sense.

Only in Slashdot land would someone think that selling FEWER of a product might be good for a company.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Just Some Guy]

Raise your hand if you've seen unsold 360's lying around unsold at your local retailer.

I admit that I don't have a "1337 Gam0rz B00t33k" in my town, but the local Wal-Mart has a stack of 360s available for sale. I personally don't care one way or another - I don't dislike MS any more than I dislike Sony - but your implication that the 360 is flying off shelves doesn't jibe with what I've personally seen.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Blakey Rat]

Where? Seriously? Do you mean buy 10 from eBay, paying $100 over retail?

I'm sorry, but claims like that require evidence, and I don't see that you got any. IF there were 10 Xbox 360s sitting around for sale somewhere, someone would already have bought them and put them on eBay for a healthy profit. Unless you're just sitting on them at some podunk gaming store to be a jerk or something.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Xzzy]

Man, $38,800 for a 360? I wouldn't buy one either with that kind of markup.

And what's with those weird graphics they use on their posters, the squiggly ones. Did their printer break?

Re:Misinformation abounds

[ziggles]

A game optimized to look best at 480i will always look better at 480i than a game that was optimized for 720p and scaled down (assuming all other factors are equal).

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Anonymous Coward]

Man, $38,800 for a 360? I wouldn't buy one either with that kind of markup.

And what's with those weird graphics they use on their posters, the squiggly ones. Did their printer break?

That's yen, not dollars. And the "squiggly lines" are Japanese.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[hardburn]

If a company can sell fewer units for a greater cost, then it might be good. You sell at the point where the price and number of units sold maximize your profit, not where you can sell the most units.

Not that this is what is happening with the 360. The eBay numbers prove that the 360 is sold way below equilibrium price.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[RoadDoggFL]

And if you look about 3 feet above your head you'll see that joke.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[fwitness]

Seriously, and I've said this before, the XBox 360 is not unfindable. It's difficult, and apparently largely dependant upon where you are, but they are out there. I still see five or six boxes at my local Toy's R Us, and I saw some at wal-mart too. This may not be true in your area, but they are there.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[RoadDoggFL]

But you're not claiming it's not selling. He's saying that the claim was that the 360's low sales figures are due to gamers not buying them. That is a lie.

Also, you could know that it's not selling well by looking at the shelves of your local EB/Gamestop/Software Etc/err... etc when you go to buy a new PS2, GC, or PC game (or handheld, whatever). That would at least not provide you with proof that there's consoles just lying around in the US or Europe (the 360's failure in Japan is not news), which is all he was asking for.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Anonymous Coward]

"F there were 10 Xbox 360s sitting around for sale somewhere, someone would already have bought them and put them on eBay for a healthy profit."

Oh please!

http://search.ebay.com/Microsoft-Xbox-360-Game-con sole

People really need to see for themselves just how low the demand for the 360 is.

It seems Xbox fans have done a decent job of getting people to believe that 360s are going for incredible prices on eBay.

There are huge numbers of un-bid 360s just sitting on eBay. The majority of 360s are going for just barely above retail - most likely a net loss for the seller when you include tax and all the effort to buy the thing and put it up for auction and then ship it.

The only high prices for 360s on eBay are for people's buy it now numbers.

With how few 360s have sold worldwide and the tiny number of people bidding for and the almost retail prices they are paying on eBay, Microsoft has a full scale fiasco on their hands with the 360.

Outside of a fairly small group of diehard Xbox fans, demand or interest in the 360 looks to be about zero.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[MightyYar]

Okay, smarty pants, if the signs are in Japanese, then how come there's a Chinese guy behind the counter?

Re:Misinformation abounds

[RoadDoggFL]

At this point, I wouldn't bother ordering on eBay. I've still yet to see these "stacks" of 360s anywhere. Sure, the resale market isn't what it used to be but there's still a lot of people who would buy the premium pack if they saw it lying on store shelves.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[skreeech]

well the supply was effectively near zero when the ebay auctions got high.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[TaxiZaphod]

and you state that you have seen xbox 360s lying around unsold.

Nope, I didn't say that. Sorry for not spelling that out better. I was taking the exact opposite position.

Yes, 360s are becoming more available now, but this is a big change, even from two weeks ago, and certainly from whenever that 700,000 figure used in TFA came from.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[rsilvergun]

Games written with a long draw distance in mind can be a pain at low res, especially multiplayer FPSes. Back in the day I used to play Shadow Warrior in 640x480 and had a hugh edge over the guys at 320x240 because I could see them accros the map and nail 'em with a railgun. In Morrowind, I set the draw distance high so I could avoid monsters that were too powerful for me.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[MightyYar]

Nevermind, bad humor that didn't work. I should have said "Asian" - that might have been more obvious.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Echnin]

There are lots of 360s lying around in stores here in Norway. Both Core Systems and the, er, bigger packs. The first Xbox also did it better in the US than Europe (IIRC the GC sold better? At least they were very close), though.

As for the Revolution, I think it'll be great. I'm not rich, so I won't be getting a 360 or PS3 anyway. Not going to buy that many games either, so being able to choose between 500 different titles won't really matter. As long as Nintendo can deliver fun games that won't cost a fortune, that's all that matters as far as I'm concerned.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Directrix1]

I have been to my Target twice this month. Both times they had several 360's on the shelf.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Anonymous Coward]

Japan. On sale for $100 below retail.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[volkris]

*raises hand*

Not that this proves anything either way. Just because there may or may not be units sitting in my Walmart doesn't mean there have been fewer than one million sold.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[chrismcdirty]

Tonight I went to a Walmart that just opened this past week. Being the person I am, I just had to take a stroll through the game department, despite the fact I have not the money, nor the desire, for a new game. I did not see one Xbox 360 on the shelf. Neither did I see a PS2, GCN, or DS. The Xbox (original) section was nowhere to be found. Not even games. The only system on the shelf was 2 or 3 PSPs. What's that tell me? PS2, GCN, and DS are all selling out along with X360? Not likely. It could be that stores are keeping stock hidden from customers waiting for them to ask for them. It deters theft of an in-demand item. All that glass does is provide more to clean up when someone decides that they need to steal it.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[iocat]

links to in-stock 360s, please?

Re:Misinformation abounds

[ajd1474]

Well maybe you should set up an ebay store...there are about 250,000 folks in Australia who'd buy one rather than wait till March 23.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[NiceGuyVan]

A game optimized to look best at 480i will always look better at 480i than a game that was optimized for 720p and scaled down (assuming all other factors are equal).

No, in fact the opposite will occur. The 720p game will look better on 480 than the 480 native game will. Because the 720p game will be using higher res textures and models.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[apoc06]

today i was walking around looking for something else, and happened upon a few in a music store. thought about picking one up.

if youre looking in places outside of your major electronics or games stores you might find a few. they are in short demand though, ill admit that much.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[ziggles]

No, it doesn't turn out that way most of the time. If you're designing for 480i, then you can use a lot of tricks to give the illusion of detail. If you're designing for 720p, you're making things with "real" detail. When you view that on a lower resolution, most of the details will be lost/distorted.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[MilenCent]

Well the article's published in Forbes, hardly a hangout for Nintendo fanboys. I think it's much more likely that little problem is a result of poor research more than console partisanship.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[KDR_11k]

I haven't counted but I had the opportunities to buy roughly 30 Core and 7 Premium versions at retail by now. No bundles or eBay prices required. Of course I don't have evidence, how would I do that? Photograph the piles of XCircle boxes? I've got better things to do with my time. Either way, if I wanted an XCircle I'd just run out there and buy one now.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[KDR_11k]

Take, for example, the GUI (or HUD). That's a screen element with a 1:1 texel:pixel ratio. Suddently it has to be downscaled by a non-integral factor. What was previously sharp is now blurred because multiple texels are averaged to draw each pixel. Or it becomes larger and takes up more screen space than it should.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Shelrem]

For precisely that reason, it'll look worse. A 480i game will be using far less texture bandwidth to fill in all those extra pixels, so they can afford to do more processing on the pixels they have to have better effects.

Given that the hardware is all the same, in order to design a game to work well on 480i and 720p, the game will either have to cut down on graphics effects when running at 720p or simply scale down the 720p image to 480i, and waste lots of graphics work computing pixels that don't get seen, when you could be using them to create better effects.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[NiceGuyVan]

Actually it wouldn't have to be downscaled at all

Re:Misinformation abounds

[KDR_11k]

So you just make it larger to adjust for the smaller screen?

Re:Misinformation abounds

[NiceGuyVan]

Don't change the size at all.

Plus games are running at a higher framerate since hte system is rendering less pixels.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[steveo777]

I don't want a flame-war... but quit talking out of your ass. If you can't support your arguement, don't make one. The fact of the matter is "yes, it will have to be downscaled."

Here's an easy experiment to prove this fact. If you or someone you knows has a TV out on their/your computer hook it up to a standerd (IE non high-def) television. Now, the native resolution for a high-end TV is about 640x480 (often resolution is lost on the sides and top of the screen, many lower end TV's will cut off more than a few pixels, sometimes up to 40 on each side). Your computer should scale the output signal down to 640x480i. This isn't going to look that great because most standard (even the high-enders) don't handle this well. So 320x240p may be required. At any rate, the res will be lower than a low-end high-def TV.

Now, kick up the resolution to 800x480, or even higher. One of two things will happen. One, you will only see a corner of what would be displayed on your normal monitor, and moving the mouse will cause the viewable area to move when you reach the sides. Two, you're going to get an extremely blurred picture with unreadable text. You should be able to force the second mode in the display settings if you're running Windows, then you'll see what I mean. This is because the computer knows the TV would probably blow up if it sent it more info than it can handle (I've fried a few older monitors this way, it's an honorable death) and it pulls out a standard (like 1 in 6 or something like that) amout of pixels. That, or some algorythm figures out what pixels the picture needs the least and pulls those. I'd rather it took that time to make a lower res image look prettier with lighting effects or an extra few polygons.

If you want to know more, google "standard TV resolution" or something like that. There's plenty of information out there... and try not to sound like you know what you're talking about on /. when you don't. If you've been here for any amount of time, you will have realized that somebody always knows more. Even than this poster.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[KDR_11k]

Well, either it takes up more screen space or it becomes smaller, pixel-wise (which has to be compensated for).

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Anonymous Coward]

but quit talking out of your ass

I say the same to you. No downscaling would be neccesary.

I don't see game makers for PC downscaling HUDs for multiple resolutions

Here's an easy experiment to prove this fact.

Your expirement was BS and failed. I've run games on my TV at 640x480 just fine. A lower res would not be required at all, and it was stupid to suggest so. I even run my TV out at 800x600

Now, kick up the resolution to 800x480, or even higher. One of two things will happen. One, you will only see a corner of what would be displayed on your normal monitor, and moving the mouse will cause the viewable area to move when you reach the sides. Two, you're going to get an extremely blurred picture with unreadable text.

What the hell are you talking about? None of that happens. 1) On my TV out card, it automatically compensates for the overdraw, and simply draws the screen a bit smaller so no resolution is lost to the sides of the TV. 2) Text is perfectly readable.

and try not to sound like you know what you're talking about on /. when you don't

It's obvious you don't. None of what you said was true. Next time you try to correct someone, do the research first because none of what you said was accurate. None of it

Re:Misinformation abounds

[NiceGuyVan]

Um, speaking of talking out your ass, your comment was utter crap. Why would downscaling be needed at all? The system would just render at 640x480, it would not render at 720p then resize it down. For one, the aspect ratio would be destroyed or there would be black bars

Re:Misinformation abounds

[steveo777]

I said it was an experiment. I didn't say it made sense. I've done it before, merely to see what would happen (I also thought playing Thief on my dad's 32" TV would look cool, I was way wrong). I know the card automaticly sets it up, read the comment again, I said it would. What I said was to try to force a downscaling, if TV card doesn't let you, then it doesn't let you, and the experment can't be attempted. I used a Radeon VE when I tried it. That's what I got. I was using Window's display settings, not Radeon's utilities.

But, like I said, if the card or whatever you might try it with won't do it or allow it, that's fine and the experemtent cannot be done. I'm well aware that the downscaling is not neccessary. Don't be so quick to defend your pride.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Alistar]

As I have mentioned in some previous Xbox articles. In many places in Canada, especially the west (that is the extent of my personal experience), you can find the Xbox 360, both versions, piled on the shelves of Future Shop, Best Buy and EB Games, heck even many local trade in places have both new and a few traded in ones already.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[zei geis]

"Raise your hand if you've seen unsold 360's lying around unsold at your local retailer. This kind of misinformation leads me to question the impartiality of the whole article." Just because there aren't any unsold XBox's(*) around doesn't mean all gamers can't wait to buy them - it could just mean MS have been cunning in their distribution. * though I have seen some lying around Game, etc. in the UK

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhh yes moron. If they shipped 1 million units and only sold 200,000 it looks bad but if they ship 200,000 units and they sell out it looks good.

also selling less than demand creates more hype for the system.. everybody is looking for one.. nobody can find one.. all of a sudden demand looks HUGE and EVERYBODY starts wanting one..

It's called marketing. It's a common strat.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Crysalim]

Actually, I have a friend that works at a gaming/computer cafe, and he didn't buy his pre-ordered 360 when they called him to tell him it was available. This was 3 days ago.

Re:Misinformation abounds

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed, I go and buy used games regularly and have seen 360s and the merchandise taking up a whole row at some stores... only the product never moves. It seems like MS is trying to market the hell out of the thing, but the marketing arrives at a bad time because nobody's ready to pay attention yet, they're still busy with their older consoles or waiting for the new ones.

Anyone feel that

[FinestLittleSpace]

Nintendo of America feel so horribly faceless? The marketing is as false, impassionate and transparent as the crap Allard was throwing out a few months or so ago.

Just let Japan speak, please!

Re:Anyone feel that

[Zangief]

I also think that NOA has made a mediocre job of marketing their products.

But Perry Kaplan sounds like your generic Marketroid. NOA should replace her with a generic Metroid!

Thank you, thank you. I will be here all week.

Re:Anyone feel that

[dogbowl]

I'm right there with you. Have you seen the box art for the up coming Brain Training game?

One of the flagstaff 'blue ocean' titles, and they drop what I consider a great, descriptive name and then give it a bland photoshop job cover. The result fits in better with those 99cent self help books you see in the checkout aisle, rather than a hip adult mental excercise program.

I predict that the US market see's sales close to 1/4th that of Japan because of NOAs marketing.

Re:Anyone feel that

[FinestLittleSpace]

I live in the UK and Nintendo of Europe/UK is much much much better - it's incredibly ruthless and they absolutely pummel trains and TV programs with adverts, but they're usually pretty nice adverts and usually have that 'Ninty Charm'. I just feel that NOA just... aren't.... Nintendo.

Re:Anyone feel that

[Bacon Bits]

When did Nintendo become the red-headed stepchild of the console market?!

Oh, right. Sega died.

Re:Anyone feel that

[Thwomp]

I also think that NOA has made a mediocre job of marketing their products.

You think you've got it bad, Nintendo marketing is virtually non-existent in the UK. No wonder most shops don't have Gamecubes or Nintendo games anymore. The Gameboy and DS do fairly well, although most people probably wouldn't know about the Gameboy micro.

Come on Nintendo Europe, sort it out!

Re:Anyone feel that

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I think the spokesperson is actually pretty clear here about Nintendo's general strategy. While Sony and Microsoft are busy duking it out over whose version of FacePuncher 7 has more polygons, Nintendo will keep trying to draw in new gamers - as they have been for decades, with titles from Mario to Pokemon to Animal Crossing.

They're being tight-lipped, yes, but their reasoning sounds pretty honest: every time they reveal a major innovation, it's on the competiton's systems in under a year. (Dual Shock anyone?)

There are no big surprises or new revelations in this interview, but then again, it's not like Nintendo held a big press conference. They just let their rep talk to a reporter. If their marketing person uses some marketing lingo... well, isn't that to be expected?

Re:Anyone feel that

[Zangief]

I've always wondered about that.

Supposedly, Gamecube was the fastest selling console in its time on the UK.

On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[Winckle]

"but with fewer than 700,000 units sold so far, gamers appear to be reserving judgment and waiting for Sony's PlayStation 3 and Nintendo's Revolution, both expected by the end of 2006. " Perhaps that has more to do with stocking issues than to do with lack of interest. Though I would like to believe that it is because of interest in the Revolution, I hope Nintendo do well this generation, as they continue to innovate, and produce excellent first party titles.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[seinman]

"Stocking issues" is a myth. Every store i've been to in the last few months has had multiple xbox 360 units in stock. Just three days ago at Best Buy, they had a stack of 20 of them right on the sales floor.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[Saige]

Yeah, whatever.

I know plenty of people who want Xbox 360s, but can't find them to buy them. Someone I know got one last week - buy waiting outside a Costco for it to open. He got one, but the line outside the store was larger than the number of consoles they had available.

Perhaps there are scattered places where they have some sitting around, but they're in the minority.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[AuMatar]

The full version or the core system (without hard drive)? I wonder if thats causing the confusion- the full system being sold out, and noone being stupid enough to want the core system.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[Anonymous Coward]

Where are you from? I live in Chicago, and they're everywhere. Maybe Microsoft just isn't shipping them to some areas. All I know is, here, they're very easy to find.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[Anonymous Coward]

BULLSHIT! Where do you live?

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[Fridgey]

One way or the other, it looks like Nintendo's going to be fine. They're well on their way to posting profits of over $1 Billion this fiscal year, up from $652 Mil last year. Considering they're just about the only company left that actually makes money from selling consoles, the release of the Revolution should be just one more boost to the company, in addition to their continued advantage over sony in the portable world.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[gabebear]

Plenty in Johnson City, TN.

The last several times I've been to EB they've had a bunch. You may have a problem finding the premium edition though... It was pretty retarded of MS to release a crippled version. You could always just pay an extra $30+ and get everything that's in the premium.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[ZedmanAuk]

I don't think there are many stocking issues anymore. There were quite a few $400 360s at Target last night. I bought a Gameboy Advance however, because I made the mistake of introducing my wife to Animal Crossing and now I can no longer get any Gamecube time. ;-)

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[cplusplus]

Right now the only store that has a single XBox 360 within 10 miles of where I live is a Target, and it's the Core system, so no hard drive and component video cables. I know this because I called about 15 stores this afternoon. I've been waiting to find the Premium bundle, but they sell out within hours at every store they arrive at, and then are out of stock for at least a week or two. The core systems are usually gone in a day or two. It's been that way for weeks now. So, yeah, I'd say there are "stocking issues".

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft is paying a marketing firm to have people sit around in message boards posting about their "desperate and futile search for a precious Xbox 360 that seems to be SOLD OUT EVERYWHERE due to INCREDIBLE DEMAND!!!"

Not that it really matters, but for fun you should make sure to try to get these people working for the marketing company to tell you where exactly they can't find 360s. Chances are someone reading and living in that town the person will claim to come from will pipe in about the stack of 360s the just saw a various stores in the city.

The lack of demand for the 360 is astonishing. It was clear that it was going to do poorly, but I don't think anyone could have forseen just how completely uninterested the gaming public is for the machine.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[RoadDoggFL]

Still haven't seen a single picture proving unsold Premium Xbox 360s in the US or even Europe...

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[SetupWeasel]

I haven't seen a single picture proving that all premium XBOX 360s have been sold.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[Manmademan]

I'm not sure how this old chestnut gets tossed out in every console discussion- it's way off. Sony's Television and consumer electronics unit has been taking a hit, but the playstation division consistently posts strong profit every year. Sony has been known to take an INITIAL loss on consoles at launch, but this is easily made up within a year or less on with game sales and reduction in production costs.

for the quarter the Playstation division posted a 52% increase in profits over the same period last year, bringing in ~$580 million on healthy sales of both Playstation 2 and Playstation Portable hardware and software.

580 million in profit for the QUARTER is nothing to sneeze at- and this is considering the money that's been sunk into PSP and Ps3 development and marketing.

THE ONLY CONSOLE COMPANY TO CONSISTENTLY LOSE MONEY IS MICROSOFT, and even they are turning this around with the 360, since they're no longer taking a hit by using off the shelf components.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[RoadDoggFL]

Aside from the obvious fact that my post only requests a single store showing that nobody cares about the 360, as has been said, and yours requests proof that every premium 360 is sold, I'll go down to a few local game stores and take pictures of where the 360s would be. If you'd do the same and show where they are, you can talk.

Re:On the subject of Xbox 360s sold...

[Anonymous Coward]

"THE ONLY CONSOLE COMPANY TO CONSISTENTLY LOSE MONEY IS MICROSOFT, and even they are turning this around with the 360, since they're no longer taking a hit by using off the shelf components."

You don't seriously believe that MS isn't losing money heavily on the Xbox 360 hardware, do you? Off the shelf parts helped them save costs early on in the Xbox 1.0 lifecycle, and hurt them badly later on (where they became the only mass buyer of these old parts, keeping those parts in production at factories that would have dumped them years ago). As of right now, the Xbox 360 is relatively very exensive to produce, _because_ of its custom parts, and _because_ MS has assumed more of the parts manufacture for themselves. What do _you_ think is hampering MS' ability to ship new hardware, assuming they are having any shipment problems other than an intentionally-obscured low demand right now?

Clever strategy?

[MMaestro]

Inside Nintendo, we call our strategy "Blue Ocean." This is in contrast to a "Red Ocean." Seeing a Blue Ocean is the notion of creating a market where there initially was none--going out where nobody has yet gone. Red Ocean is what our competitors do--heated competition where sales are finite and the product is fairly predictable.

I think its safe to say that this strategy is going to be hit-or-miss. If Nintendo fails with "Blue Ocean" the Revolution (or whatever they end up calling it) will flop, simply because the market isn't there. If it does work though, Sony and Microsoft's "Red Ocean" will find themselves overfishing for a depleting market.

Re:Clever strategy?

[ADRA]

Blue ocean implies bringing gamers out of people who aren't currently gamers; Hence, a sucessful Nintendo market expansion doesn't need to cut into Sony/MS sales. FPS players will still play FPS's. The only 'bleeding' would be 'red ocean' gamers tired of the same old crap being shilled to them and they decide to spend their dollars on something new.

Personally, I haven't owned a console since SNES/Genesis days. Anything thats been worth playing has been on PC and I've loved it. Now, I have an expanding interest in party games so that I can play games with friends that ARE NOT GAMERS. So, I picked up a GCube and it seems to be livign up to what I want it for. That's just one genre that is drastically the other contenders. All they need are a few 'hit' genre ideas to make a real splash in sales.

Re:Clever strategy?

[demeteloaf]

If it does work though, Sony and Microsoft's "Red Ocean" will find themselves overfishing for a depleting market.

For some reason, i really can't see this happening. As long as there are going to be multiple platforms to release games on, there will be games like Madden, NCAA football, prince of persia (etc.) That have huge audiences, and developers will decide to release multi-console.

In my mind at least, multi-console releases hurt the revolution. In the current generation, all the consoles have reasonably similar hardware specs, and so while a game may look slightly better on the Xbox, playing the port of the game on PS2 doesn't change that much. However, with the revolution not supporting HD, and having noticibly worse hardware specs than Xbox 360 and PS3, multi-console games are going to look much better on the other consoles. I know if i had the choice of two identical games, one playng in HD with much better graphics, i'm going to pick that one every time.

What I see happening is if a devolper wants to be unique and fiddle with the new control system, they'll make a game for the revolution and see how it does, more mainstream games will just end up as PS3 and 360 titles.

Re:Clever strategy?

[tengennewseditor]

Blue Ocean isn't a new strategy, and it has already been successful. Blue Ocean doesn't mean they have to open up a new market with every game -- they can build on the successful Blue Ocean franchises like Animal Crossing with very little risk.

Re:Clever strategy?

[Cecil]

In my mind at least, multi-console releases hurt the revolution. In the current generation, all the consoles have reasonably similar hardware specs, and so while a game may look slightly better on the Xbox, playing the port of the game on PS2 doesn't change that much. However, with the revolution not supporting HD, and having noticibly worse hardware specs than Xbox 360 and PS3, multi-console games are going to look much better on the other consoles. I know if i had the choice of two identical games, one playng in HD with much better graphics, i'm going to pick that one every time.

Yes, but given the choice of one console, (which is a lot of people already, and it's going to be a lot more people now given the cost of the next-gen consoles) do I buy the one that plays Madden and Animal Crossing and Nintendogs and whatever other goofy but fun crap Nintendo comes up with, or do I buy the one that plays Madden and Halo 3 in HD?

"I" probably don't even have a HD TV anyway.

Re:Clever strategy?

[Anonymous Coward]

What are the revolution's stats?

If you are going to say that it's only 2 to 3 times better, well then show me an xbox360 game that looks more than 2 to 3 times better than any new xbox game. Numbers don't exactly translate into performance.

Re:Clever strategy?

[cornface]

Yes, but given the choice of one console, (which is a lot of people already, and it's going to be a lot more people now given the cost of the next-gen consoles) do I buy the one that plays Madden and Animal Crossing and Nintendogs and whatever other goofy but fun crap Nintendo comes up with, or do I buy the one that plays Madden and Halo 3 in HD?

This is a disingenuous statement. If the Gamecube's current state is any indicator, you can play the fun crap that Nintendo comes up with (ignoring the fact that they put out a lot of turds, as well) and pretty much nothing else. OR, you can play the huge library of titles for the PS2, which includes a vast number of excellent third party and PS2 exclusive games that blow much of Nintendo's increasingly meager lineup out of the water.

I like Nintendo and I hope the Revolution can get them back in the game, but there's no reason to ignore reality.

Re:Clever strategy?

[nowayout99]

The only 'bleeding' would be 'red ocean' gamers tired of the same old crap being shilled to them and they decide to spend their dollars on something new. Non-gamers that get converted to buying a console eventually become gamers. They graduate to the more complex titles. The problem is, Nintendo has "bled" gamers for 3 generations straight now, because the customers grow out of Nintendo's product/style. It's sad that in 15 years they have not come up with an answer to that problem. As Kaplan did in the article, to shun off FPS's just shows that Nintendo is a stubborn company that really is fixed in their ways... making "their" types of games and not stepping out of their comfort zone.

Re:Clever strategy?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, is this why the most acclaimed console FPS's were mostly on Nintendo consoles?
Ever heard of goldeneye? Timesplitters?

Oh, but don't mind me, the next HALO/Yet another generic WWII FPS/Killzone(LOOOOL) commercial is gonna start any minute now.

Re:Clever strategy?

[steveo777]

because the customers grow out of Nintendo's product/style.

Not quite true. I enjoy playing Halo and any other FPS with my friends, but we also enjoy playing Mario Kart and Smash Bros. more. Every time we get together to play Halo (2) we're less and less enthusiastic, but when we're throwing turtle shells at each other in ANY of the Mario Kart series (SNES, N64, Gamecube, GBA, DS) we always have a ton of fun.

Gamers don't graduate out of Nintendo, the just have different tastes. Nintendo wants to cater to every taste as best they can. Meanwhile you've PC's, XBox's, 360's, and PS whatever's giving out the same thing over and over with more polish. Not that I mind it, I love the way the games are looking. I have every intention of being the first in line for the PS3, but also for the rev.

Oh, and I'd like to quote an old friend (perhaps some one may know who said it first, or if anybody said it).

"Playing Halo doesn't make you a gamer any more than eating a taco makes you a Mexican."

In other words, if you aren't prepared to sample more than just a bit, you haven't even started to walk properly in the ways (gamer, or Mexico...).

Impartial, or lazy?

[michaeltoe]

Wikipedia is good for one thing; illustrating how half-ass some people can be. Honestly I think a lot of bad reporting can be attributed to laziness rather than malice. Just because it has to sound interesting doesn't mean it really is... blah blah blah experts agree.

Prodding the market

[Dr. Eggman]

We think there is an untapped nostalgia market: Gamers who grew up and cut their teeth on these older games could come back.


While I am very excited about greater support for this market, what exactly has Nintendo been doing with ports going as far back as Super Mario All-Stars, if not tapping this market? Exploratory Surveying?

Re:Prodding the market

[cowscows]

Super Mario All-stars and the like are nice, but what they're planning with the Revolution is really a few good leaps beyond that. Re-releasing a couple of games from the most popular franchise in all of video games history is very different from making huge swaths of back catalog from multiple consoles available for download. Digital distribution truly is a whole new step in economics, because it avoids all the expensive things inherent in physical goods, like materials, shipping, shelf-space, etc.. The cost to add another game to this service will be almost negligable, and the amount of space available to store merchandise is a non-issue, so there's no reason not to make available everything Nintendo can get their hands on. That's great for consumers, who can be as picky or as spendy as they want, and it's great for Nintendo, because they've got lots of potential for profit without risking much up front.

Over time, this will happen with most forms of entertainment (music's well on its way), and the world will be a cooler place. Yay. This is a way bigger deal than a Dr. Mario cartridge coming out for the GBA.

Re:Prodding the market

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, they have a good reason not to release everything in the back catalog - a lot of it is crap. And I mean crap by 1994 standards, at least modern crap is pretty.
It would spoil everyone's warm glow of nostalgia. They will likely stick to games that actually stand up to being replayed.

Re:Prodding the market

[Anonymous Coward]

Filters, fellow Coward. In Chris Anderson terms, post-filters. But under the right system, even the crap is worth putting up there.

Re:Prodding the market

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for the reply. A good point, but JESUS CHRIST that was a rambling bullshit explanation for a concept that requires 3 sentences.

Bloggers, phhht.

Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

Nintendo is in deep, deep trouble with the Revolution. They're like a car company saying to their customers, "You don't want a big SUV - you want our compact car with good fuel economy". While it may be true that most gamers don't have HD sets today, that's going to change in a big way in the next few years as digital TV becomes prevalent. Even the first-revision Gamecube offered 480p, and now Nintendo has abandoned that as well.

Nintendo made a number of bad decisions with the Gamecube, and it seems that they haven't learned. It's not about the "experience", it's not really even about the hardware - it's about the software. And while Nintendo is one of the best software development houses out there, they can't hold a platform alone. Why should I buy a Revolution when the 360 or PS3 has a better selection of games and is HD compatible? What's the "edge" on the Revolution? Being cheaper can't be it - Nintendo should have learned that with the Gamecube (which was $100 cheaper than the PS2 or XBOX on launch and continually stayed $50 to $100 ahead).

The 360 is an impressive hardware platform combined with an impressive software platform. Being able to plug in an iPod and play my tunes through the 5.1 system - while playing games in HD. Powering on (and turning off) the console from the controlers. Accessing music, recorded TV, and photos from my PC. Downloading indie titles for $5. The 360 brings a lot of new functionality to the table. What will the Revolution bring us? Only Nintendo knows. And that doesn't look good for the big-N.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Anonymous Coward]

The DS has shown it can be about the experience. The PSP has multimedia functions and better technology and has more traditionally successful console style games. Yet the DS is in the lead, I can only assume because it offers an experience that can't be found anywhere else.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[The-Bus]

Your comment is interesting. You mention how awesome the interconnectivity of the 360 is (and you're right). But then you mention enjoying playing "indie" games for $5. With the exception of maybe Mutant Storm Reloaded and maybe Marble Blast Ultra, all the others games are about as non-HD as you can get. You don't need HD to play backgammon, or Bejeweled, or a billiards game, or any of the 1980s Midway arcade ports. You don't need an HDTV to enjoy Geometry Wars. Yet these are the games that are flourishing. Sure, they have some bells and whistles that take advantage of the hardware, but that's just that: bells and whistles. It shows there's a market for fun.

Now imagine something similar to Xbox Live Arcade, only the hardware is 1/3 the price. That could be very good.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[C0rinthian]

An amazing hardware and software platform get you nothing if you don't have the software to back it up. I've played most of the Xbox 360 titles that have been released so far, and nothing has really made me want to drop the $400 on the console. Honestly, the multimedia features are the biggest draw, but that's not saying much for a game console.

The PSP vs the DS is another excellent comparison. There is no question that the PSP is the superior piece of hardware. What does it have to offer? PS2 ports and clones, games that really aren't made to be portable. The offerings on the DS are MUCH more suited to the system and it's intended use. Hence, it is quite successful.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[stringycheese]

They're like a car company saying to their customers, "You don't want a big SUV - you want our compact car with good fuel economy".

Your analogy to the car market is a bit funny because it is right on and yet contradicts your point. I will admit that the SUV is a big market. Yet, not everybody wants a big SUV. A lot of people actually do want an economy car. Other people want sports cars. Other people want motorcycles. Have you been reading any news on General Motors? They posted record losses last year in the billion dollar range. Sales of SUVs were dismal in the second half of 2005. During the same time period, companies like Toyota and Nissan reported record sales of their mid-size cars. The demand in the market is changing.

In the same way, Nintendo is trying to target a totally different market and I think if this new controller works and they can produce fun games, they will see great success. Also, I would point out that unlike some companies, Nintendo has proven they actually can make a profit in the video game industry.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should I buy a Revolution when the 360 or PS3 has a better selection of games and is HD compatible?

What do you mean by a better selection? More, yeah sure they will have more, but better? I think you're assuming a lot there.

I think you should consider buying a Revolution when, like me, you've gotten a little bored of endless fps, third person shooters, sports games, and driving sims. You should buy it because, if they make a fishing game, you will cast by casting not by pressing "A." You'll swing a sword by swinging, not by pressing A. To shoot you would point and shoot, not by moving a stick and pressing A.I

Your clearly attracted to HD gaming, you mention it a lot, and I bet you're excited by it because it can make games more (photo)realistic, but understand that they way you can play a game can make it far more realistic than more pixels.

If you can't see why that, at the very least, you should consider the Rev over the PS3 & XBox, then you should re-think why you started playing games in the first place. I don't think it was to press "A" in HD.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Brunellus]

They're like a car company saying to their customers, "You don't want a big SUV - you want our compact car with good fuel economy"

Sounds an awful lot like what VW, and later Toyota and Honda said to their customers-- "You don't want that big lead-sled Buick! You our compact car with good fuel economy!"

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[bartyboy]

Who are the crackheads that moderated this as Interesting? The post is full of mistakes that only somebody with an anti-Nintendo agenda would write:

On the subject of high definition:

Shigeru Miyamoto has said, "The majority of people won't be playing our system with an HDTV, though with the Revolution, 480p resolution will be standard."

While not 720p, it's still a lot better than SD.

On the subject of console prices:

Compare the PSP to the DS. The technical specs of the PSP leave the DS in the dust, but its pricetag leaves a lot to be desired. Parents don't want to buy a PSP for $280 when they can have a DS and three games for the same price. (Sorry, Canadian prices here) This helps explain in part the popularity of the DS.

On the subject of the ON/OFF button on the controller:

Look for yourself.

On the subject of "What will Revolution bring us?"

- Innovative controller and new game genres
- Downloadable games
- Online play

Read more here: http://www.revolutionreport.com/nintendo_revolutio n_faq

You're a troll, and not even a good one.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't the main selling point of the Revolution controller that it'd be good for FPS games?

Big sweeping arm movements (sword swinging) will tire you out after a relatively short while.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Anonymous Coward]

MS is in deep, deep trouble with the 360. They're like a car company saying to their customers, "You want a big SUV - you don't want our compact car with good fuel economy". While it may be true that most people feel uncomfortable with the controllers today, that's going to change in a big way in the next few years as non-gamers becomes prevalent.

I could go on, but that's the essence: 360 has HD, Nintendo has the controller. It's a matter of choice.

Personally, I think that more people will choose the controller.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[demeteloaf]

Shigeru Miyamoto has said, "The majority of people won't be playing our system with an HDTV, though with the Revolution, 480p resolution will be standard."

They also made a big deal how the GCN would play games in 480p, and now advertise that games support progressive scan, yet they force you to buy a used GCN if you want to play in 480p, because the new models of GCN don't even have a digital out anymore...

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should I buy a Revolution when the 360 or PS3 has a better selection of games

Exactly. When will the 360 have a better selection of games?

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm pretty sure everyone who wanted a cube for progressive scan already had one by the time they took the option out.

It was widely underused, so why waste the money keeping it in?

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Xerxus]

You can buy a new Cube and trade it with Nintendo to get an old one.

http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/systems/nintendog amecube/component_faq.jsp

Made a big deal? I haven't noticed. Yeah, there is an extra icon on the back of the games, but that's about all the advertisement I've seen.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[cornface]

The DS has shown it can be about the experience. The PSP has multimedia functions and better technology and has more traditionally successful console style games. Yet the DS is in the lead, I can only assume because it offers an experience that can't be found anywhere else.

I'm sure it doesn't have anything to do with the GBA compatibility and Nintendo's nearly 20 year lock on the handheld market.

To look at it another way, the fact that Sony's portable is selling as close to the DS as it is should probably make Nintendoa a little nervous.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[SilentChris]

Honestly, you come off just as much a fanboy as the OP was a "troll". You honestly seemed blinded by Nintendo's marketing machine, which has not shown a single game for the console, a single screenshot running on Revolution hardware, etc.

"On the subject of high definition:

Shigeru Miyamoto has said, "The majority of people won't be playing our system with an HDTV, though with the Revolution, 480p resolution will be standard."

While not 720p, it's still a lot better than SD."

Well, actually, no it's not. 480p looks extremely jagged on most HDTVs. NTSC looks outright hideous, but that's besides the point.

Also, Shigeru Miyamoto is wrong -- HDTV prices have plummetted alongside Plasma/LCD. It's very reasonable than in the next 3 years (minimum lifespan of the console), most people will be using cheap HDTVs.

"On the subject of console prices:

Compare the PSP to the DS. The technical specs of the PSP leave the DS in the dust, but its pricetag leaves a lot to be desired. Parents don't want to buy a PSP for $280 when they can have a DS and three games for the same price. (Sorry, Canadian prices here) This helps explain in part the popularity of the DS."

Both are very popular. If you go to any schoolyard, you'll see children with both systems.

Also, your opinion that "the pricetag leaves a lot to be desired" is a little off. Those same children are carrying in $100 cell phones and $300 iPods. PSPs are just a drop in the bucket.

"On the subject of "What will Revolution bring us?"

- Innovative controller and new game genres
- Downloadable games
- Online play"

2 of those 3 have existed for over 20 years. Microsoft has pretty much perfected it this time around.

The "new genres" comment is debatable. What "new genres" has the DS brought with its innovative control scheme? A lawyer game? A doctor game? You need multiple games of one type to establish a "genre". I don't see a host of doctor games flooding the market.

The Revolution is going to see experimentation and innovation, but neither is a recipe for success.

"Read more here: http://www.revolutionreport.com/nintendo_revolutio n_faq"

Final word of advice: never trust a gaming rag that only supports one company.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[elhedran]

While not 720p, it's still a lot better than SD."

Well, actually, no it's not. 480p looks extremely jagged on most HDTVs. NTSC looks outright hideous, but that's besides the point.


Doesn't SD look more jagged? then 480p would look better than SD. Although where I am a HD TV and and XBox 360 == completely unreasonable spending so I can't really find out for myself.

Those same children are carrying in $100 cell phones and $300 iPods. PSPs are just a drop in the bucket.

What neighborhood are you in? Most adults I know find it hard to justify a PSP for themselves. I don't know a single human being under the age of 20 who has a PSP, and quite a few under 12s (and over 20s) with one or more of Nintendo's offerings.

For the record I bought a DS. Then a bunch of my friends (20+'s) got PSPs so I got a PSP. I'm thinking of selling the PSP. The games are not any more fun. And I tried the UMD movie thing (got sent Spiderman II for free) but in any kind of light you get bad contrast, and the original speakers can't compete with train/plane/bus noise. That leaves watching the movies at places where I so happen to already have existing devices that can play DVDs.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Toby_Tyke]

Digital TV != high definition.

I'm so sick of pointing that out.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[apoc06]

its deeper than that:

- the ds is noticably cheaper than the psp
- it had a lead on the psp releases. europe only got the psp when? this past summer?
- it has backwards compatibility. an instant backcatalog of thousands of games is not to be downplayed.
- due to the lead on psp release theyve been able to churn out their post launch killer games and capitalize on them. nintendogs, animal crossing, mario kart, advance wars?
- the psp didnt come out with its first true system seller titles until oct/nov. [GTA and socom]
- they rereleased two new versions of their cheaper gameboy line to absorb consumer sales.

yes, it boasts a new experience too, but the popularity of the ds weighs upon more than just that single factor. who knows who will win the handheld race? i think the psp is doing well, all things considered. it may not be beating the ds in sales, but considering nintendos' domination of the handheld arena, the psp is doing a respectable job IMHO. its no secret that ive been on the fence regarding getting a ds too, but i see the psp upcoming lineup and there are games im interested in. personally, i dont get that same feeling from the ds lineup. the experience is one thing, but i cant bring myself to buy a system that only has four games /im/ interested in available in the foreseeable future.

the idea of the revolution is one thing [and im skeptical of the premise], but i havent heard of any games to get me interested yet. the same hold true for a great many consumers.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[justchris]

Now, that is not the main selling point of the Revolution. It's a point Nintendo repeatedly brings up, but that's only because in the past the FPS genre has been seen as one of their weaknesses (although arguably the two best console FPS' ever, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, were released for the n64, before those two games console FPS' sales were always mediocre at best).

The main selling point of the Revolution controller is that it is inherently more intuitive, and therefore a more transparent method of control.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[antifoidulus]

The PSP tries to be the jack of all trades and ends up being master of none. Let's go through its functions and compare:

1. Games: Supposedly the main reason to get a PSP, but the number of "must haves" can be counted on one hand currently. Not to mention the fact the psp, and in general PSP games are more expensive(around $50 for a game compared to $30 or $35 for DS games. Though some psp publishers are finally wising up and lowering prices). For the cost of a psp and 2 games($350) you can get a DS and 7 games: 4 $35 games and 3 $30 games.
Winner: The DS, but it will depend on the type of games you enjoy.

Web browsing: The PSP does have a browser, but unless you are a hardcore gamer who occaisionally needs to check email and you can't already do that on your cell phone, a PDA is a much better bargain.

Multimedia:Theoretically, this is where the PSP should really shine what with that oh so sexy screen. However, there are tons of devices that do it better, not the least of which is the iPod video. How can the iPod video do it better? Simple, unless you are watching UMDs Sony limits you to 320x240 for your movies, the exact same as resolution as an iPod. And if you are watching movies it makes no sense not to buy the giga-pack, priced at $299, the same price as the 40 gigabyte iPod. Now granted the battery life while watching movies is short on the iPod, but for most commuters 2 hours a charge is more than enough. And if you don't want to watch movies, you can still store a ton of music on the iPod.
I would love to watch "Kill Bill" on that sexy psp screen, but I have already paid $50 to watch Kill Bill in other formats: $12.50 to see the first one in Japan, $7.50 for a matinee to see the 2nd one, and about $15 for the DVDs. I refuse to spend another $50($25 a UMD) just so I can watch the same content again. Sony artificially limiting the movie playback on the device killed it for me. I'm willing to buy a movie once, but I refuse to buy it multiple times just so I can watch it in different formats.

PSP: jack of all trades master of none....

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[justchris]

Current penetration of HDTV in the US is less than 10%. Current penetration in markets other than the US is less than 1%. Even assuming you can get an HDTV for less than $200 (which you can, but only up to 480p, for a tv that supports resolutions greater than 480p you're still looking at an average of $400), market penetration is not going to increase to greater than 50% in the US within the next 5 years. I work for a cable company, it's taking us forever to get customers to convert from analog to digital service, HDTV isn't going to be any easier. And this is with the government push behind it. Nitnendo is an international company, they're going to try to provide an equal experience to all markets.

I don't hang out in schoolyards, so I honestly don't know what kids are carrying around. Except for conventions, I have never, in the entire time the two systems have been out, seen anyone I don't know with either a PSP or a DS out in public. Which would lead one to believe no one is buying them. I live in Nashville, TN, a fairly large city, so I know people have them. Visual evidence is not enough to prove a point, that is why people use sales numbers, and the sales numbers indicate that in Japan, the DS is outselling the PSP 3 to 1, in Europe it's outselling the PSP 1.5 to 1, and I don't have any recent numbers for the US, so I will just assume the US sales are equal. That still puts the worldwide sales of the DS far ahead of the PSP. And before you say, "Well that doesn't mean anything," sales numbers are what developers look at when determining what systems to develop for. That and attach ratio, and I've yet to find any reliable numbers for attach ratio on games for either system.

Downloadable games and online play have existed for more than 20 years, but they're fairly new on a dedicated home gaming console. Xbox Live & Arcade are truly wonderful, I'll give you that, but if that's the only selling point for the system, and I can get those two things on a system at 1/2 the price (assuming a $200 pricetag on the Rev, it may be $250, and remember, you can't use Xbox Live Arcade unless you have the harddrive, meaning you have to get the $400 premium 360 system, or the $300 core system plus the harddrive which runs some exorbitant figure of which I'm unaware since I plan to just get the Premium Bundle) then the only determining factor is the games. I have an Xbox, a PS2 and a GC. I have just under 50 PS2 games. I have a little over 40 GC games. I have very nearly 10 Xbox games. that should tell you something about the games I prefer. Whatever else you say about the DS, it does have a large number of fun, interesting titles, and people are buying them in droves. Can Nintendo guarantee that kind of software support for the Revolution? No. Are they going to try? Yes.

And actually, Revolution Report is a very good site. They don't knock what Sony & Microsoft have done right, and even point out the lessons Nintendo should learn from them. And they have no problem lambasting Nintendo when they make a mistake. You should visit a site before disparaging it. Just because it focuses on only one category doesn't mean the content creators of the site are unreasonably biased.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Anonymous Coward]

Thing is, the important things on your list are equally true of the Revolution.

- the ds is noticably cheaper than the psp
the revolution is noticably cheaper than the ps3/xbox360

- it had a lead on the psp releases. europe only got the psp when? this past summer?
the lead was about 3 months in the US, 1 month in Japan, and the DS had a real shortage of quality software until just a few months ago. europe had a longer release lead, but europe is not exactly capable of shaping the gaming industry in any way.

- it has backwards compatibility. an instant backcatalog of thousands of games is not to be downplayed.
yep, revolution has an even larger backcatalog potentially.

- due to the lead on psp release theyve been able to churn out their post launch killer games and capitalize on them. nintendogs, animal crossing, mario kart, advance wars?
again, these games just came out in the last 3-6 months and the system release lead wasn't big.

- the psp didnt come out with its first true system seller titles until oct/nov. [GTA and socom]
and the DS had a horrible first year for software until August with Nintendogs, then nothing big until November with Mario Kart.

- they rereleased two new versions of their cheaper gameboy line to absorb consumer sales.
I'm not sure what this has to do with the DS doing well.

The PSP is doing well in hardware sales, but software sales are a joke. So, while you in particular may be more interested in PSP games than DS games, you do not represent the majority, according to sales.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[jchenx]

Current penetration of HDTV in the US is less than 10%. Current penetration in markets other than the US is less than 1%. Even assuming you can get an HDTV for less than $200 (which you can, but only up to 480p, for a tv that supports resolutions greater than 480p you're still looking at an average of $400), market penetration is not going to increase to greater than 50% in the US within the next 5 years. I work for a cable company, it's taking us forever to get customers to convert from analog to digital service, HDTV isn't going to be any easier. And this is with the government push behind it. Nitnendo is an international company, they're going to try to provide an equal experience to all markets.

I just wanted to point out that in the US, the FCC has mandated changing TV transmissions from analog to digital, starting in 2007. While taxpayers will have the option of getting an adapter that allows them to still watch TV on their SDTV sets, I can imagine that most folks in the next few years will opt to just upgrade. Most people will admit that there is a very noticable difference going from standard TV to HDTV, much the same way users jumped from VHS tapes to DVDs. True, HDTVs are much more expensive than DVD players themselves, but the sets are constantly going down in price. (Then again, the cost of the DVD player and converting your entire movie library from VHS to DVD could probably cost as much as a decent HDTV)

Also, a lot of folks don't realize that HDTVs are available in non-LCD, LCD, or Plasma form. The rear-projection CRTs, while big and bulky, are generally much more affordable. I personally didn't realize this until I started shopping around for an HDTV myself.

Now, I DON'T think there's going to be a migration from DVD to any of the "next gen" DVD formats (HD-DVD or Blu-ray) any time soon (if ever). There's not nearly as obvious a benefit, at least visually. I think the main benefit is just going to be in storage. Instead of 5 LotR DVDs, there may be just 1 HD-DVD or Blu-ray disc. Then again, I can totally see Hollywood churning out even more "special" collectors editions (multiple languages, view angles, cut scenes, etc.), so to get the total package, it still spans multiple discs. They'll know fans will still eat it all up. Anyway, I see Blu-ray and HD-DVD going the way of the Laserdisc. Enthusiasts will pick it up, but the general public will wait for the next revolutionary medium (holo cube anyone?).

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[meringuoid]

Big sweeping arm movements (sword swinging) will tire you out after a relatively short while.

Big sweeping arm movements (sword swinging) will get you killed after a relatively short while. Watch how fencing is actually done next time it's on at the Olympics. There's none of this flashy Errol Flynn slashing and flourishing of the sword. It's all about relatively small, precise, quick movements.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[justchris]

The important thing to remember is that Digital does not mean High Definition. At the very begininning of that article it says, and I quote, "The FCC has notified US television broadcasters that the standard for transmitting TV over-the-air shall change from analog to digital. The three main types of digital TV are Standard Definition ("good", offering the same resolution as the traditional analog system), Enhanced Definition ("better"), and High Definition ("best")."

What this means is, it is cheaper to buy a digital tuner (currently running about $50, prices will lower quickly) or just to get cable and a digital box (averaging about $50 a month) rather than a new tv. Some people will buy HDTVs, most will not. Also, the analog shutdown date was pushed back to 2009, because current adoption rates of digital TVs, as well as the necessary digital broadcast equipment, is too slow to meet the 2007 date. What that means is, the Rev will be a third of the way through it's lifespan before that becomes an issue, and even then, people are more likely to get a EDTV which is less than $200 over an HDTV which, even a CRT, is still between $200-$600.

Also, if customers do get cable tv, the cable companies can, if they choose, convert the digital signals to analog (which is really just silly, but they'll do it if it means more customers) and encourage people to get cable instead of buying a new tv.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[xtracto]

Nice, another comment moded as troll because you expressed your POV and it was different than the general /. crowd.

I just want to note something, Nintendo is going to fail with the revolution and will end the same way Sega ended, we will see the Mario Brothers on the PlayStation 4. Mark my words, it will happen.

It will be nice, whoever (Microsoft vs Sony) gets the Mario/Zelda franchise is going to win the console game wars. I preffer Sony (not because I am pro Sony, I HATE sony for they DRM and Rootkit) but in some way, if Sony wins it will be a force against Microsoft Monopoly. If MS wins, we will have to stand the big MS Monopoly for another 10 years.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[lpangelrob]

Ahem. Let me repost your comment as something you may have agreed with five years ago.

----

Nice, another comment moded as troll because you expressed your POV and it was different than the general /. crowd.

I just want to note something, Nintendo^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Apple is going to fail with the revolution^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H iPod and will end the same way Sega^H^H^H^H Creative/Rio ended, we will see the Mario Brothers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H better MP3 players on the PlayStation 4^W^W^W^W that Sony or Microsoft can come up with (add sarcastic comment about how stupid America is about not accepting the MiniDisc here). Mark my words, it will happen.

It will be nice, whoever (Microsoft vs Sony) gets the Mario/Zelda franchise^W^W^W MP3 player is going to win the console game wars. I preffer Sony (not because I am pro Sony, I HATE sony for they DRM and Rootkit) but in some way, if Sony wins it will be a force against Microsoft Monopoly. If MS wins, we will have to stand the big MS Monopoly for another 10 years.

----

The moral of the story is that anyone and everyone can and will make wild business predictions that can't be backed, but companies like Apple and Nintendo have changed the way technology is used and enjoyed, and will continue to do so as long as they have innovation and an audience with dollars that hasn't been reached.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Delphiki]

God, why do I never have mod points when I see something asinine like this modded up. Geometry Wars looks and plays better in HD. Marble Blast Ultra looks much better in HD. In any game you can see more detail and more clarity in HD (if it's written to play in HD). The Revolution is not going to retail for $133 and might not have anything other than classic nintendo games, so forget the "Xbox Live Arcade for 1/3 the price". They're entirely different products.

And for christ's sake, every time a Nintendo fanboy tries to pretend that Sony, Microsoft, and the PC gaming industry aren't marketing fun, it makes me hope that every single one of Nintendo's offices burn to the ground and they never produce another piece of hardware or software again, just to spite the ignorant fanboys. Nobody is worse than Nintendo fanboys in my opinion. Nobody.

With all that said, I'm looking forward to picking up a new DS in a couple days with my tax refund.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[leland242]

Who modded this troll up?

You do not have to be the market leader to have a successful and profitable company.

Note that Nintendo has lots of money. They have a boatload in the bank and lots of revenue in sales.

They own the handheld market. The psp is barely a competitor.

Mario is not going to be on the PS4 or XB720. Even if the next console fails, and *they decide* not to make a successor - they will continue thier franchises on handheld systems.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Anonymous Coward]

"Mario is not going to be on the PS4 or XB720"

The 360 is the end of the road for Microsoft and the console market. Two multi-billion dollar marketplace failures is more than a company even with Microsoft's large cash reserves can sustain.

And if they don't find a way to get the massive manufacturing defect problems under control, the 360 might not live to see the release of the PS3 and Revolution.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[apoc06]

normally i wouldnt reply to you, but i think you have me wrong. i was simply explaining why the ds has a lead over the psp. i never said that the revolution didnt boast many of the same traits/ qualities.

1. the revolution is noticably cheaper than the ps3/xbox360
  - the revolution is supposed to be cheaper. how much cheaper? we dont know. neither sony nor nintendo have dropped those magic numbers. sony could pull a major coup and drop the ps3 for $150 for all we know and eat the cost tremendously. or nintendo could drop at the same price as the ps3. dont take everything you read literally. nintendo has not made an official announcement; that means they reserve the right to change their minds.

2. the lead was about 3 months in the US, 1 month in Japan, and the DS had a real shortage of quality software until just a few months ago. europe had a longer release lead, but europe is not exactly capable of shaping the gaming industry in any way.
  - yes, but when that release gap gives away a holiday season, its major. the psp wasnt released in the us until feb/march, so that xmas money was prob spent by the time the psp was released. your second statement is outrageously biased. no country can be counted out. particularly in the new nintendo worldview where they are trying to pick up these very same casual gamers.

3. yep, revolution has an even larger backcatalog potentially.
  - i have to stop you for a second here. the revolution will be different. it may play gamecube discs, but any of those old cartridge games will require third party permissions and royalties. i foresee nintendo having all first party titles available, but third party titles will trickle into the system one publisher at a time. on the other hand, the ps3 architecture will most likely [none of us have proof that it will work as seamlessly as the ps2 backwards compatibility] allow for any of the previous playstation games to work so long as you have the original discs.

4. again, these games just came out in the last 3-6 months and the system release lead wasn't big.
  - yes, but dont forget the power of buzz. maybe not you or i, but many people will purchase a system in expectation of a large upcoming title. "oh, im waiting on the next GTA.", "oh, i just want to see what the new socom is going to be like", "im buying a x360 because i know it will eventually have halo3"...

5. and the DS had a horrible first year for software until August with Nintendogs, then nothing big until November with Mario Kart.
  - well like i listed. nintendo is in the midst of its second wave of titles, and out of that "launch" quality crap. animal crossing, mario kart, advance wars, castlevania and not to mention the gameboy advance titles such as the final fantasy re-release have made for solid game experiences. the psp wont see this burst of software until this year when killzone, streetfighter alpha3, metal gear acid2, the upcoming "traditional" metal gear, and other stuff gets released.

6. I'm not sure what this has to do with the DS doing well.
  - well, in the handheld arena you forget that the psp isnt battling the ds alone. the psp has to do battle with nintendos full line of gameboy products as well. sales of the gameboy advance usually mean one less sale for the psp.

i agree, and second place isnt /that/ bad a position for sony to be in. software sales arent where they wish, but as more publishers start releasing their second wave of psp titles, i expect that all to change.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[Jearil]

You really underestimate the vast amounts of resources (eg. money) Microsoft has. Last year they pulled in $10 billion in profits.. and that's after taking into account any losses from the first gen xbox along with the R&D and all that for the 360. They have $64 billion in assets and is worth $273 billion. (http://www.forbes.com/finance/mktguideapps/compin fo/CompanyTearsheet.jhtml?cusip=594918104)

They broke into a market they had no presence in and which is highly competitive and gained second place in their first generation. Money is what does that. They bought second place for a relatively high price, but still not much compaired to what resources they have. It would be asinine to think they would drop an entire market that they're second place on in the beginning of the next generation that they are currently the only company involved in. It would also be silly to assume they wouldn't follow through with trying to reap the benifits of their investment in the first xbox (userbase and infrastructure) along with the R&D of the 360 before this generation ends. I would actually be pretty surprised if MS isn't in the generation that follows the 360, as they will see this current generation as either a profit, or moving themselves further towards greater marketshare and eventual payoff. They're a stubborn company.

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[jchenx]

Ahh, you're right. SDTV isn't totally going away. (Although I can imagine that there'll be lots of marketing and store clerks tricking people into thinking that they DO need to get an HDTV right away)

I still think, though, that we're going to see HDTV adoption really grow over the next few years. No, I doubt we're going to see a majority of HDTVs in 5 years, but I think it's going to continue to be the hot ticket item in consumer electronics. Anecdotally, I've noticed a lot of buzz around the last holiday season and even around the Super Bowl, from guys getting HD sets.

I just know that I've been getting my friends to check out our new HDTV and they can only drool. :)

Re:Nintendo is in trouble with the Revolution

[saboola]

I saw this same FUD before the DS came out. How the unstoppable Sony machine was going to eliminate the DS, and that Nintendo, in a year no doubt, would be out of the market. Fast forward over a year later and while Nintendo is busy trying to keep the DS in stock, Sony is busy trying to convince people that the PSP was designed to watch the movie "Hitch". End game, match Nintendo.

Learn what words mean.

[autopr0n]

"impassionate" means almost the exact opposite of what you mean, in general. It means to make someone impassioned (it's a verb, not an abjective). Actually, there is one definition close to what you meant there, but it's pretty rare, I think. In fact, impassionate only appears in unabridged dictionaries. impassioned is a much more common word, and does mean the opposite of what you meant.

FUD

[maumedia]

This sounds like a solid marketing strategy for Nintendo. If they can't do HD, then their best strategy is instilling enough fear, uncertainty and doubt in potential customers that HD games won't work on their existing televisions that people opt to wait for HD systems until they have an HD television.

And since a) "gaming journalism" consists almost entirely of reprinting or reformating press releases, and b) the internet is such a poor source of definitive information that you can find people backing up or debunking almost every piece of information in existence, they'll probably succeed in scaring enough customers into believing them.

It's a wonder Call of Duty 2 for the 360 made the top 10 in sales last month, considering that the general population is under the impression that the 360 overheats, eats disks and smothers babies.

Re:FUD

[clu76]

I fail to see the FUD in this. If anything, Nintendo is very much correct in their assertions about HD. Anyone that has a non-HD television pays for the HD feature of the 360, but don't experience HD gaming. And right now, that is an overwhelming majority of households. People keep saying that Nintendo is leaving a large portion of the market behind. But in reality, it is Sony and Microsoft that expect the market to catch up to them. By the end of this next gen console, you might have 50%+ HD penetration in homes.

Now I'm the exception to the rule. I have a 360 and a nice 62" HD TV. I'll share with you my take on HD gaming. The first few hours of gaming with my 360 I accidentally played at 480p (forgot to toggle the switch on the AV cable.) Before I realized this, I was still very impressed by next gen graphics. After switching over to HD, the picture did look sharper. But it was only a minor improvement. Especially compared to all the other advances in graphics. There is so much more we should be discussing about next gen graphics besides HD, but Microsoft and Sony have managed to frame the debate around this one narrow minded issue. If anyone is throwing out FUD, it's them.

That being said, I love my 360 (even though it ate my DOA 4 save file.) And I'm sure I'll love the Revo.

Re:FUD

[maumedia]

My comment was not that Nintendo doesn't have a valid product point by excluding HD in exchange for a lower price point. It was that they were insinuating that the HD graphics somehow looked worse than SD graphics on an SD TV. The 360 plays with regular televisions just fine.

I'm with you. I have a Toshiba DLP, and I'm reasonably happy with my 360. Condemned was pretty good, COD2 was great, NFSMW is great, and DOA4 is good (yeah, ate my save file too), but all in all, the starting lineup is a dud. And aside from the lighting effects in NFS and just about everything in Condemned, they haven't made much of a case for HD graphics with most of the games out so far. If Condemned is any indication, though, next gen games are going to look sweet =)

Re:FUD

[packeteer]

I have a unique perspective becuase i work in Redmond, WA testing the xbox 360 for a living. I have played just about every game on the market in HD and non-HD. Let me tell you that you are missing a LOT by not seeing it in HD. Many games such as Project Gotham Racing 3 is very difficult to play ona normal tv screen. The dark races are hard to see if the next turn is a left or a right. This system is made much worse when you must realize that not everyone has their optimal brightness/contrast/color ratios set. Many people turn up the brightness and contrast too high on their tv.

Games like DOA 4 as you mentioned are not as effected. You miss some of the finer tones on the skin btu the gameplay is alrgely uneffected. The game is brightly lit and there are not as many small details as in a dark racing game placed in a city.

Re:FUD

[Sean0michael]

You are a brave soul for admitting you work in Redmond on /. and for that I tip my hat to you.

If it is indeed true that it is hard to play games that are designed for HD on non-HD TVs ("Many games such as Project Gotham Racing 3 is[sic] very difficult to play ona[sic] normal tv screen"), and most people now still have non-HD TVs, doesn't that imply bad sales for the 360? If most of the market will play games that the user has difficulty seeing, then what which is cheaper--buying a new TV to go with the game system, or getting a different system?

Seems like this is a point to Nintendo on this match. Their games will look good with what people have now, boosting sales over those whose games do not look good with what people own.

Re:FUD

[random735]

i think the point is more that games designed to be played in HD look like crap in SD. (you can't see all the details, might be hard to see monsters, etc, because they assume you'll be playing at high-res and you're not)

games designed for SD play well in SD.

So all things being equal, people w/ SD are better off getting a system designed for SD.

Re:FUD

[Jarlsberg]

Seems like this is a point to Nintendo on this match. Their games will look good with what people have now, boosting sales over those whose games do not look good with what people own.

I'd wait until Nintendo actually releases anything before I'd start distributing points... :)

I also started out using a non-HDTV with my Xbox 360. King kong was a bit too dark, I though, but games such as PDZ and Kameo looked all right, if not exactly impressive graphic wise. They looked like ordinary Xbox games, but with a lot more potential (more enemies on screen etc.).

I gew tired of using the 32" TV, though, so in january I bought a HD LCD projector. This projector can display 1080p in any size up to 300 inches. I currently display around 100-110 inches on my wall. The difference is truly astounding, with the above mentioned games now looking sharp and gorgeous. Even the Xbox Live Arcade titles improved a lot (except for Geometry Wars, which doesn't really seem to be hi-res).

Re:FUD

[SetupWeasel]

I'm sorry, but my 20" RCA SD CRT is going to have to make it through this generation. I'd love to throw a grand down the toilet, but I guess I'll wait until congress finally forces me to.

Re:FUD

[kabocox]

I have played just about every game on the market in HD and non-HD. Let me tell you that you are missing a LOT by not seeing it in HD. Many games such as Project Gotham Racing 3 is very difficult to play ona normal tv screen.

Oh, all that tells me is that your system will get poor reviews and those that do play it at a friends house will not like what they see. I'm sorry, I'm not buying an HD TV to play video games. I get my HD gaming from computer games. I'm not going to pay $400+ for a video game system then spend about the same or double that for a new HD TV. For one thing, I don't have that kinda of money. I'd be able to buy a Game Cube, acc, and several games for what any of these new systems will cost and it would work on my existing TV. I'm happy with my none HD experience. My parents have a HD tv. I can't tell the difference so it is just a big waste of money to me.

Re:FUD

[Sijy]

"I'd love to throw a grand down the toilet, but I guess I'll wait until congress finally forces me to."

You mean you don't pay taxes?

Consistency in numbers please....

[Anonymous Coward]

I didin't finish the article.. just got to the part where it's ranting off all these numbers.. and it didn't make much sense to me..

700k xbox360s -- isn't that the US sales numbers?

13 Million DS -- Isn't that global sales?

82% of handheld software sales -- wouldn't that be including the GBA? but then its written in the same sentence that mentions the 13 million DS sales.

WTF is gonig on, where are these numbers coming from,.

Re:Consistency in numbers please....

[WoodieR]

ooooh, lookie, your first lesson in market-speak ... 'press droids, just get wit' the program and move along, nothing to see here ...

Re:Consistency in numbers please....

[brunes69]

700k xbox360s -- isn't that the US sales numbers? 13 Million DS -- Isn't that global sales?

Yes and yes. You seem to be forgetting the fact that the XBox 360 is only popular in the US, whereas the DS is popular everywhere. Pretty much same as it was with the XBox and the GBA...

Blue Ocean

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems like you simply don't understand what the Blue-Ocean strategy is all about.

If you look at the history of the videogame market you will see one pattern emerging; that as time goes on, one of the platforms in each portion of the market eventually represents the majority of the users. Basically, you have one console everyone owns and one or two other consoles which did not even sell in the same league. Usually, the console which ends up being the market leader does not have better technical specifications and does not have more features; it usually is successful because it has the largest selection of interesting games.

Now what Blue-Ocean is all about is that when a market has too much competition you define a new market which you can thrive in; if the Revolution is successful it could define a completely seperate market (much like the Handheld market) where Nintendo can dominate.

Remember, except for DVD playback the Gamecube was a far superior piece of hardware to the PS2 (the XBox was in every way a better piece of hardware) and Nintendo produced several compelling titles for the platform (and Microsoft also had tons of good content on the XBox) and yet it never (for more than a week or so) even matched the sales of the PS2. At this point in time, Nintendo could produce a system that produced pre-rendered movie quality images, at 1080p, with every electronic device included in the system (including a toster) and sell it for $99 and they would still have problems selling more than the PS3.

Pure and Simple, if Nintendo wants to survive they need a new market ... Their plan in the only way they can go.

Re:Blue Ocean

[Anonymous Coward]

"Remember, except for DVD playback the Gamecube was a far superior piece of hardware to the PS2 (the XBox was in every way a better piece of hardware)"

Way to make yourself look like an idiot.

Give the lectures a rest dimwit.

Who cares?

[MikeFM]

I've seen the games for the 360 and was just unimpressed. I haven't even thought of buying one. I'll probably buy a PS3 and the Revolution. The PS3 just because I've always been a fan of the quality of the PlayStation and the huge assortment of games available and the Revolution because it sounds really interesting. For me, XBox is a brand trying to replace PlayStation but not really pulling it off. They'd have to either really have some good titles available exclusively to them or Sony would have to really mess up for me to switch. I just don't need two $500 consoles so why would I switch to an unknown that isn't going to be compatible with what I already have? I'm getting the PS3 to play and the Revolution for the same reason I bought a Virtual Boy which is because I am interested in a company actually trying new things. Hopefully Revolution will be a bit more realistic than the VB. ;)

Re:Who cares?

[Meagermanx]

Depending on the lineup, I'm probably going to get a Revolution. I'm not going to get an XBOX360 or a PS3, because they're really just more of the last generation, but I've been thinking about getting a Revolution ever since I got a DS, and saw how great that was. If they were four hundred, I wouldn't, but for two hundred or two fifty, it's well worth it.
 
Something that I think about when I think about the XBOX360 and the PS3 is that everything there is possible with worse graphics on the XBOX or PS2. With the NES, you could do stuff you couldn't do on the Atari. With the SNES you could have more sprites onscreen, and process more, so you could have cooler games. With the N64 you could get 3D games running, and with this generation you can finally fully enjoy 3D worlds. But this generation that's coming up on us, besides the Revolution, offers nothing we haven't seen before.

Re:Who cares?

[MikeFM]

The only thing about the PS3 that really interests me is it's parallelism. The CPU has a lot of it going on and it's been rumored that it is designed to make plugging one Cell processing computer into another will let them divide tasks amongst them for more processing power. That sounds to good to be true but the PS3 does come with the proper arrangement of network ports to make it plausible.

Re:Who cares?

[cornface]

Something that I think about when I think about the XBOX360 and the PS3 is that everything there is possible with worse graphics on the XBOX or PS2. With the NES, you could do stuff you couldn't do on the Atari. With the SNES you could have more sprites onscreen, and process more, so you could have cooler games. With the N64 you could get 3D games running, and with this generation you can finally fully enjoy 3D worlds. But this generation that's coming up on us, besides the Revolution, offers nothing we haven't seen before.

So for the SNES, having better graphics made the games cooler, but the PS3 and 360 suck because all they have is better...graphics?

Your logic is impeccable.

Re:Who cares?

[dcapel]

The graphics jump was huge in the SNES generation, while the graphics leap in this one is only large. At this point its just photorealism, then it was you wouldn't be able to do stuff because the graphics were so weak.

Re:Who cares?

[MilenCent]

On X-Box 360: Seconded. The only games for it I'm interested in are for X-Box Live Arcade... which, I suppose, is better than nothing.

Re:Who cares?

[MikeFM]

It's not that PlayStation is better, although I feel that it is, it's that PlayStation has a history, so I know what to expect and that my games will still work on the PS3, that XBox has to compete with. What keeps Linux from replacing Windows as the desktop of choice is what keeps XBox from replacing PlayStation as console of choice for most people.

The competition is good though. I expect Sony's effort to be more open source and open standards friendly is largely due to the pressure from both the XBox and the PC. Overall the 360 seems an improvement to the original XBox and I hope Microsoft's tries to make a third generation of XBox in a few years that is again a step forward. They would do well to mimic Sony because the PlayStation people really do 'get it' for the most part. Details like backwards compatibility that Microsoft almost didn't include with the 360 (still didn't - depending who you ask) are things that Sony clearly understands the importance of.

IMO the biggest risk to PlayStation lossing it's throne isn't from the XBox but from the internal management struggles inside Sony. It seems that the PlayStation division is always at odds with the rest of Sony and might be a better match for another company. I'd say that Google might be a likely buyer. They'd have a use for a powerful set top computer (Google PC anyone?) that is already a familiar brand and they respect developers enough to let the PlayStation people really do their stuff. Such a combination could be really powerful.

Re:Who cares?

[cowscows]

True, in theory it sounds kind of neat, but there's two catches. First off, will it really work as advertised, and second, will a PS3 be able to take advantage of it in any meaningful way? I don't know enough to speak intelligently on the first point, but Sony certainly has a reputation of making promises that its hardware can't live up to. As for the second point, I'm willing to guess No, because console games are generally designed to a very specific set of hardware, and I don't anticipate many developers optimizing their games to run best with more power than a stock PS3 gives you. It wouldn't make sense.

From a gaming console perspective, clustering machines doesn't seem particularly useful. I guess further down the line, if Cell processors start showing up in other places, you could plug your PS3 in and have more power for some other task, but if raw processing power is your goal I'd imagine that you'll be able to get a better bang for your buck with a different piece of hardware, one that doesn't have a blu-ray drive, game controllers, and who knows what else included in the price.

Re:Who cares?

[F_Scentura]

"Details like backwards compatibility that Microsoft almost didn't include with the 360 (still didn't - depending who you ask)"

Do you know that the PS3 will support all past games out of the gate? The PS2 doesn't fully support every PS1 game either, you know.

Re:Who cares?

[MilenCent]

It's not that PlayStation is better, although I feel that it is, it's that PlayStation has a history, so I know what to expect and that my games will still work on the PS3, that XBox has to compete with.

Hmm... well, at least Playstation is undergoing less of a drastic platform change than X-Box is this time, which is really what's hurting X-Box backward compatibility at the moment.

What keeps Linux from replacing Windows as the desktop of choice is what keeps XBox from replacing PlayStation as console of choice for most people.

No, I'd say not. What prevents most people from switching to Linux are, in summary, Ignorance ("What the hell is Linux?"), Fear ("My god how do I use this?"), Apathy ("I don't care about the things Linux does better"), Cost ("Dual booting is annoying/difficult to set up and I can't afford/have no room for a dedicated Linux-only machine too"), and Applications ("There's no Linux version of Illustrator/Photoshop/Windows Media Player/my favorite games").

Ignorance: Everyone knows about PS3 and X-Box 360, so not a factor.
Fear: Absolutely not a factor, all the systems will have accessible interfaces *or else*, and the companies know this.
Apathy: More of a factor, but X-Box 360's reputation as an up-and-comer will make a big difference here.
Cost: Considerably important, but It'still relatively a lot easier/cheaper to own one of all the major game systems, even at their inflated prices this time out, for the average user.
Applications: Many games will be available for both PS3 and X-Box 360 (with only Revolution projected to have a major exclusivity aspect this time).

Details like backwards compatibility that Microsoft almost didn't include with the 360 (still didn't - depending who you ask) are things that Sony clearly understands the importance of.

Word is X-Box 360's backward compatibility is so shameful, even for "supported" games, for anything that isn't Halo that it seriously borders on false advertising.

IMO the biggest risk to PlayStation lossing it's throne isn't from the XBox but from the internal management struggles inside Sony. It seems that the PlayStation division is always at odds with the rest of Sony and might be a better match for another company.

This is an issue with many large, diverse companies, actually. Nintendo's all games and pretty monolithic, so they get off almost for free, and Microsoft's mostly software outside of X-Box 360.

But Sony is a behemoth that sells TVs and stereos too. Thing is, they could have used their consumer retail electronics presence to make the PS3 almost ubiquitous by now. Imagine if all Sony-brand TVs or DVD players had, in the apropriate era, an internal PS or PS2? Of course, PS2 is almost ubitiquous anyway.... but PS3 is sufficently expensive that they couldn't just throw in the components at cost without severely raising the price of their hardware.

What I'm saying here is that Sony missed a great chance to have their game system linked with their consumer electronics, driving the sales of both, but instead it's rather of surprising how non-Sony the Playstation seems to be. The only thing that Playstations really get out of their Sony heritage, from where I stand, is their reputation for fragility....

Re:Who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

The 360's backwards compatibility is nowhere even close to the PS2's compatibility with the PS1. I've heard that the PS2 doesn't play all PS1 games, but despite my fairly large collection of PS1 games, I still haven't found one that doesn't play. On the other hand, it's not hard to find a list of Xbox games that aren't compatibile with the X360.

Re:Who cares?

[MikeFM]

With their plan to start putting Cell processors in tvs, dvd players, etc it could pan out but its hard to say yet. I think most game developers wont take full advantage of the Cell but that the ones that make the games that really count will - especially after they've cut their teeth a little bit on it.

Re:Who cares?

[cowscows]

I guess a number of years down the line, it could possibly work out that way, but I'm still not convinced. Even if half of the TV makers out there started producing sets with Cell processors inside tomorrow, how often do you buy new TVs.

All we can do is make some assumptions about what might happen in the future, and try to predict the results if those assumptions hold true. Say every 5 years the average household adds a new set or replaces an old one. And we'll even assume that all new TV's have Cell processors in them. It'll be 5 years before you could count on the average person having at least one other Cell available in their house to be used to help the PS3. 5 years from now, we'll be close to ready for the next generation of consoles. The PS4 hype will probably be in full swing. Maybe then the parallelism will be a factor and you can plug your PS3 into your new PS4 to give it a boost. But wait...when was the last time that a five year old processor was worth anything? I imagine that in 2011, the new cell processors will be so much more powerful that adding a PS3 Cell would just be a tiny drop in a big river of number crunching power.

The point is, even if Cell processors are suddenly available in all your electronics, most people aren't going to rush out and buy all new stuff. The rate of adoption will be varied, but over-all slow. And unless Sony stops development on the Cell and just ships the current chip year after year, the older hardware won't be able to meaningfully contribute enough to be worth hooking up.

There are some good reasons to interconnect all the gadgets in our homes, but sharing process power doesn't seem to be a particularly useful one to me. Now that I think about it, how much processing power will a TV have? How much does it need? Is it comparable to a video game console? Is it enough to really be noticeable, even when stacked up against contemporary hardware? Will they shove extra processing power into their TVs just so it has more to offer the "cell network"? How much extra will that cost? Will anybody find that worth paying for? There's a lot of questions, and I don't think the answers realistically fall in favor of the Cell clustering idea.

Re:Who cares?

[Meagermanx]

With the SNES, you were able to do stuff you couldn't do with the NES. The SNES let you have more sprites, because it could process more (remember the flicker from too many sprites on screen from the NES?), bigger sprites, and it could just plain handle more. Games like Super Mario World, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Starfox, and Super Mario Kart wouldn't have been possible on the NES, but the SNES allowed them the power to be what the game designers wanted them to be.

Besides amazing AI, which I haven't seen utilized yet, what does the XBOX360 bring to the table that we haven't seen before? Its most amazing game is an overhead space shooter.

Blue Ocean, Red Ocean

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

"Inside Nintendo, we call our strategy "Blue Ocean." This is in contrast to a "Red Ocean." Seeing a Blue Ocean is the notion of creating a market where there initially was none--going out where nobody has yet gone"

Looks like people at Nintendo have been reading this:

"Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make Competition Irrelevant" (2005, Harvard Business School Publishing), by W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne.

Ironically, it's also the book Ford cited when it took the knife to its belly a few weeks ago...
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200 6601230398

Re:Blue Ocean, Red Ocean

[wadetemp]

Not only did they read it, but that quote is pretty much verbatim from the preface of the book.

Re:Ivory Tower, Builders Of Ivory Tower.

[sethstorm]

Ironically, it's also the book Ford cited when it took the knife to its belly a few weeks ago...

You misspelled heart.

There's something good about a company that cant be had with doing things haphazardly cheap with slave labored components. It's only recently that "free market" measures have been implemented to green light something that looks nothing that is free trade, let alone being anything you could call "trade" wrt jobs. (Pro-globalization folks, please get out of the East/West coast and see flyover country for a while- and the Waltons dont count. They're exceptions to the "Dont Do Evil" Midwest.)

Knowing Harvard and how they damn well like to exclude(until somebody figures out how to do forcible no-nonsense admission and convince that it's better to keep the choice in the domestic student's hand), I presume the red ocean is the shark tank where every other idea goes against each other with nothing coming out alive.

Another look at Nintendo

[Onuma]

Honestly, I haven't been a solely Nintendo guy since the NES was at it's height. I went the Sega Genesis route when it released and then to the Sony Playstation in the mid 90's. I've been a Sony guy ever since, though I do own a GBA SP.

Right now I'm on the bandwagon for the Playstation 3, but all of these innovations are making me reconsider. I have seen a ton of great games for the N64 and GameCube, and no doubt those franchises and new ones will be made with the Revolution. While I really want to stick with the games on Sony's train like the Armored Core or Castlevania series, Nintendo might put up some serious competition and I might find myself buying both. My wallet could be hurting when I get back from Iraq.

Re:Another look at Nintendo

[Sijy]

Now if only From Software made a kick-ass Armored Core game utilizing Nintendo's new controller...

Re:Another look at Nintendo

[Anonymous Coward]

My wallet could be hurting when I get back from Iraq.

Oh, don't worry: You won't come back.

You're fighting a wrong war, and your family is going to bare the consequences.

Re:Another look at Nintendo

[Anonymous Coward]

Have there been PS* Castlevania games worth playing since SotN? If so, for some reason I haven't heard of them. As far as I know, that particular torch has been passed to GBA games (like the incredible Aria of Sorrow).

I kinda don't want to go back...

[wandazulu]

She mentioned the untapped nostalgia market. Well, with MAME, NES emulators, N64 emulators, etc., the "nostalgia" is already there, a click away. The problem is that it's more for quick amusement...doing the remember when. Sure it's fun to fire up some of these games, but I'm not sure I'd want to play all the way through, especially since I did so several times on the original consoles.

I'm okay Nintendo downplaying the whole graphics war; they're right in saying that the game play is what matters most. Hell, I'll play a game with stick figures if it's fun. The problem is that a lot of ther earier games *were* fun, and while I'll always have fond memories of the first time Mario moved around a 3d world, I'm not sure I need to revisit it again.

Re:I kinda don't want to go back...

[empvirus]

You seem to have forgotten one very important thing: NOSTALGIA WILL ONLY BE ONE ASPECT OF THE REVOLUTION! Okay, rant over.

Re:I kinda don't want to go back...

[cowscows]

You're not sure, so maybe you would like to give those other games the occasional once over again. If Nintendo prices it right(really the biggest question mark in this whole idea, imho), it should only cost a couple bucks, a low enough price to be an impulse buy. So even if you only get an hour or two of entertainment out of it, you're not feeling entirely ripped off. If a hardly-remembered NES game costs me $2 to download, and it takes five of those games to entertain me and my girlfriend for an evening, that's still a hell of a lot cheaper than going to a movie. . These days I sometimes buy Gamecube and Xbox games for significantly higher amounts of money and don't play them all the way through. I might not play Battletoads all the way through after downloading it, but if it's cheap enough, I won't care. Besides, I always wanted to play Kid Icarus, but could never find it in a store when I was a kid. I'm sure if I started browsing through a list of titles, I'd recognize plenty more as games I still want to try.

And since the distribution is all digital, the cost to Nintendo to sell me those five games is negligable, so they're making some profit right from the very beginning.

Oh, and also, there's a huge pile of kids out there who haven't played a lot of that classic stuff. The

Re:I kinda don't want to go back...

[xnderxnder]

She mentioned the untapped nostalgia market. Well, with MAME, NES emulators, N64 emulators, etc., the "nostalgia" is already there, a click away. The problem is that it's more for quick amusement...doing the remember when. Sure it's fun to fire up some of these games, but I'm not sure I'd want to play all the way through, especially since I did so several times on the original consoles.

You, Sir, are not "average," and not part of the untapped nostalgia market.

I'm pretty sure that the number of people using MAME and other emulators are fairly insignificant compared to the number of casual, non-gamer, "what the heck is a MAME?", non-geek sorts that Nintendo is targetting.

um.. blah blah Blue Ocean blah blah ;>

For us, it's all about the experience

[NiceGuyVan]

The display is one of the bigger parts of the experience. And HDTVs will and are becoming more and more common.

good luck...

[Anonymous Coward]

on your deployment. Godspeed.

Re:good luck...

[Ash-Fox]

Godspeed was one of the three ships of the English East India Company led by Captain Christopher Newport on the voyage that resulted in the founding of Jamestown in the new Colony of Virginia in 1607.

overpriced on eBay

[kg4czo]

The reason why they aren't being bid on is because the majority of them are either overpriced "buy it now" or have an overpriced reserve. No way in hell I'm spending $500-$600USD on a gaming system, when I could spend that much and upgrade my existing computer to uber proportions, and get more out of it than just playing a few games and maybe watch some DVDs. That's just fscked up...

As far as the over aboundance in Japan, so what? That's in Japan, not here in the States. We all know that Japan is a finicky console market anyway, and that M$ was nuts for trying to sell there. But hey, no sweat off my brow. I'll just stick with my trusty puter. :)

Re:overpriced on eBay

[couch_potato]

Overpriced? High reserve? What eBay are you looking at? I actually took the time to look at several of the auctions, and probably 70% of them had no reserve.

Broadcast TV?

[Anonymous Coward]

The FCC mandate does not apply to cable. Most cable services will still be available in SD for a long time. That means a big section of the lower middle class, rich enough for cable but not rich enough to easily buy a new TV, will be in SD until HD sets are genuinely cheap.

The people who cannot afford cable at all also cannot afford a whole new TV. They'll buy one only if it costs less than the adapter unit. Realistically, this is not going to be an expensive device. It's just a tuner card. It'll probably end up being about fifty bucks.

There are still people using RF adapters to connect to their televisions. They don't even have video inputs! They could get a better TV for $200, but they buy an RF adapter for $20.

Nice example guys.

[hal2814]

"If you were playing a fishing game, before you would just press buttons on a controller held in both hands in front of you. With this, you can move your arm back and forth and cast your bait. It senses depth. As someone who doesn't spend hours per day gaming, I was thrilled with the experience."

Kind of like what I've been doing for 6 years with Sega Bass Fishing? I bought the controller AND game brand new when it came out for about $60, which is the apparently the new price point for this next generation of games.

Not FUD, common sense

[LKM]

If they can't do HD, then their best strategy is instilling enough fear, uncertainty and doubt in potential customers that HD games won't work on their existing televisions that people opt to wait for HD systems until they have an HD television.

1. That's not what they said.
2. It's not that Nintendo couldn't do HD. They chose not to do it.
3. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems obvious that a game developed for a standard TV would work better on a standard TV than a game developed for a HD TV.

It will be using them, but you won't see them

[LKM]

No, in fact the opposite will occur. The 720p game will look better on 480 than the 480 native game will. Because the 720p game will be using higher res textures and models.

Uh-huh, it will be using them, but you won't be seeing them. That's the whole point.

Details will simply not be visible, small text will not be readable anymore, and so on.

No HD support?

[The Barking Dog]

I bought a HDTV just before Christmas. I have a GameCube now and love it, but the games really don't look that great on the new set (especially considering I have a newer GC without the component output). I was going to hold out for the Revolution, but the lack of HD support may drive me to the PS3. I think Nintendo may really be missing the boat by not supporting HD, unless they're planning on shortening the product lifecycle and launching the Revolution2 before the 2009 switch to all-HD in the US.

Re:No HD support?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an HDTV set as well, and let me tell you, the component out makes a world of difference. If I were you, I'd try to get my hands on one of the older Gamecubes and a component adaptor. You'll be glad you did. If Revolution games look as good as GCN-480p games (and they're supposed to look better), then that's good enough for me.

Re:No HD support?

[Bongo Bill]

Nintendo's strategy relies on a low price point, and the hardware needed for HD video output increases the cost of manufacturing... not to mention the cost of development for high-definition textures and models. I can imagine a future model of Revolution including some sort of HD support for some titles, as the necessary hardware becomes cheaper, however.

And let's not forget that their target market generally doesn't know or doesn't care about screen resolutione, as long as it looks good enough.

What does frajeelay mean?

[tepples]

480p looks extremely jagged on most HDTVs.

Only on sets that have shitty upscalers. A decent CRT will display 480p natively or upsample it to 960p, or a decent LCD or plasma will upsample the signal using an appropriate band-limiting (that is, blurring) filter. But a lot of the downloadable games will actually run in 240p, as that's what all NES games and the vast majority of Super NES and N64 games ran in.

If you go to any schoolyard, you'll see children with both systems.

By "schoolyard" do you mean a college campus, or do you actually mean K-12? I've read about parents not letting their minor children have a PSP even apart from the pricetag because 1. it's so fragile and 2. there aren't a lot of good E or E10+ rated games or G or PG rated movies. The only compelling title that isn't a PS2 port or a Tetris clone is an M-rated gangster sim.

2 of those 3 have existed for over 20 years.

Until Xbox Live Arcade, downloadable games hadn't shown up in games designed to be played on 27" TVs instead of 17" computer monitors, in genres designed for gamepads instead of keyboard/mouse, or in genres designed for same-screen play instead of online play (e.g. Smash Bros.).

never trust a gaming rag that only supports one company.

Because it'd be like trusting an IT rag that supports the power company over the local Amish leadership.